Legislative Assembly
Wednesday, 14 May 2008
THE SPEAKER (Mr F. Riebeling) took the chair at 12 noon, and read prayers. PAPER TABLED A paper was tabled and ordered to lie upon the table of the house. EDUCATION AND TRAINING LEGISLATION AMENDMENT AND REPEAL BILL 2008 Notice of Motion to Introduce Notice of motion given by Mr M. McGowan (Minister for Education and Training). NICKEL REFINERY (BHP BILLITON NICKEL WEST PTY LTD) (TERMINATION OF AGREEMENTS) AGREEMENT BILL 2008 Notice of Motion to Introduce Notice of motion given by Mr F.M. Logan (Minister for Resources). CARERS ADVISORY COUNCIL — COMPLIANCE REPORT Statement by Minister for the Environment MR D.A. TEMPLEMAN (Mandurah — Minister for the Environment) [12.03 pm]: On behalf of the Minister for Communities, I present to members of the Legislative Assembly the 2007 compliance report of the Carers Advisory Council. The Carers Advisory Council must report on the performance of WA Health and the Disability Services Commission in meeting the obligations set out in the Carers Recognition Act 2004. This legislation was enacted to effect a cultural change among the service providers that operate within Western Australia’s public health and disability sectors by ensuring that carers are included and considered in the decision-making processes that affect service provision where it impacts on the caring role. In this its second year of reporting to the minister, the council reports that this third year of the act’s implementation has seen development and improvement in strategies and approaches that recognise and involve carers. The council reports that strategically, both WA Health and the Disability Services Commission are complying with the intent of the legislation and its first objective of recognising carers. With respect to compliance with the Carers Charter, the council reports that the Disability Services Commission has complied, while WA Health is working towards compliance. Although these two reporting organisations complied with the requirements of the act in 2007, it is clear that substantial work still remains to be done in this area. Among service provider staff, there is still a need for stronger knowledge and understanding of why and how the legislation is applied. We must also work to ensure that carers themselves have knowledge of the Carers Recognition Act and the Carers Charter, and the implications of both in supporting the valuable contribution carers make to our society. Importantly, the council recommends that service providers be encouraged to consider the benefits of engaging with carers so that best practice measures based on the experiences of carers themselves can be developed and implemented. The findings of this report are relevant, timely and crucial to both improving the quality of service provision by the Disability Services Commission and WA Health, and gradually improving the lives of the 248 000 people in Western Australia who are selflessly and tirelessly committed to the caring role. I table the report. [See paper No 3885.] INDUSTRY TRAINING ARRANGEMENTS Statement by Minister for Education and Training MR M. McGOWAN (Rockingham — Minister for Education and Training) [12.04 pm]: The State Training Board recently conducted a review of the state’s industry training advisory arrangements. I have agreed to the board’s recommendations for implementing a new industry training advisory model. Under the new arrangements, industry will take a leadership role in developing workforce plans and strategies to assist industry and government to address current and future skills shortages. The reforms will also bring Western Australia’s training advice arrangements into line with the national system of skills advice. The new advisory arrangements will result in the consolidation of the current 14 industry training advisory bodies into 10 new training councils. The new training councils will be given a substantial increase in resources and will comprise high-level industry representatives from both employer and employee groups who will be enlisted to drive reforms and solutions to the skills shortages. The 10 new industry groupings include education, health care and social assistance; retail trade and other services; building and construction; manufacturing and automotive; arts, information, media and
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2967 telecommunications, hospitality and tourism; financial, administrative and professional services; transport, postal and wholesale trade; agriculture, forestry, fishing, food manufacturing and scientific; public administration, electricity, gas, water and waste services; and resources. An amount of $2.2 million on top of the existing $1.83 million has been allocated to support the new advisory bodies. The new arrangements are scheduled to be implemented as of October 2008. REVENUE LAWS AMENDMENT BILL 2008 Introduction and First Reading Bill introduced, on motion by Mr E.S. Ripper (Treasurer), and read a first time. Explanatory memorandum presented by the Treasurer. Second Reading MR E.S. RIPPER (Belmont — Treasurer) [12.07 pm]: I move — That the bill be now read a second time. This bill implements the taxation measures announced in the 2008-09 budget that relate to the land tax, metropolitan region improvement tax, duties and rates and charges legislation. Complementary amendments necessary to implement the taxation administration measures that were announced in the 2008-09 budget are contained in the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2008. The amendments arising from the major multilateral project with other states and territories to make eight areas of payroll administration more consistent, as also announced in the budget, are included in the Pay-roll Tax Assessment Amendment Bill 2008. The measures in this bill focus on lowering the transfer duty barrier to housing purchases and ameliorating the impact of higher land values on land tax on rental and business properties. Families and businesses planning to purchase mid-priced motor vehicles in the near term will also benefit. In addition, the bill includes amendments to implement two recommendations of the state tax review. The first involves the introduction of land tax and rates and charges relief measures that assist disabled persons to live in independent accommodation. The second implements a land tax exemption for property owned by an executor or administrator when a will gives a beneficiary a future right to live in a property that is used as the beneficiary’s principal place of residence. Further amendments are included to address recent judicial decisions and to make a number of minor changes to improve the administrative efficiency of the taxation legislation. The total value of the tax relief to be provided by the measures in this bill is $236 million in 2008-09 and $1.1 billion over four years. I will now outline each of the proposed measures in greater detail. Part 7 of the bill provides for the introduction of a new concessional transfer duty scale for residential property purchases from 1 July 2008. This concessional scale will apply to principal places of residence, rental homes and land on which the building of a residence is subsequently commenced within a specified time limit. It will incorporate increases in thresholds of up to 50 per cent, and accommodate the average five per cent reduction in transfer duty rates for all property transactions that also commences on 1 July 2008 under the new Duties Act. As a result of these measures, the duty payable on a median priced home in Perth of $457 000 will fall by 15.2 per cent—or $2 827.50—from $18 550 to $15 722.50. The increase in thresholds will cost around $104 million in 2008-09 and $487 million over the four years to 2001-12. Although some other states already have concessional scales for principal places of residence, Western Australia’s will be unique in also extending to rental housing. The transfer duty reductions will coincide with the abolition of mortgage duty, including on home loans, which was an early decision arising from the state tax review. The existing first homeowner transfer duty concession in Western Australia, including the full exemption for homes valued at up to $500 000, will remain in place and will continue to be the most generous in Australia. The bill also provides for the existing concession for principal places of residence and small businesses to continue until its scheduled abolition on 1 July 2010. A specific provision has been added to ensure that when a taxpayer may be better off under the residential scale or the principal place of residence scale, the application can be treated as being made under the most beneficial arrangement, provided that the taxpayer’s consent has been obtained. This part of the bill also includes two minor amendments to the Duties Act. The first is to rectify an incorrect section reference that would otherwise result in a taxpayer paying more duty on the vesting of a discretionary trust than if the corresponding transaction had occurred under the Stamp Act. The second clarifies that the trustee of a unit trust scheme or discretionary trust cannot use the exemption that applies to a transfer to or from a trustee under section 118 of the Duties Act. This section was always intended to apply only to bare trusts, and this amendment confirms the original policy intent. Part 2 of the bill includes amendments to the 2007-08 budget initiative to increase motor vehicle duty thresholds by $10 000 in two tranches. These were an initial $5 000 increase on 1 July 2007 and a second $5 000 increase on 1 January 2009. As announced in the 2008-09 budget, the second of the $5 000 increases will be brought
2968 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] forward by six months to 1 July 2008, costing an estimated additional $12 million in 2008-09. The duty saving on the licensing of a $30 000 car will be $225, or 18 per cent. After also taking into account the threshold increase on 1 July 2007, the total saving will be $450, or 30 per cent. Parts 3 and 5 of the bill contain the proposed new land tax and metropolitan region improvement tax scales for 2008-09. The Valuer-General has provided preliminary advice that unimproved land values for the 2008-09 land tax assessment year will increase by an average of around 30 per cent on 2007-08 values for properties above the current land tax exemption threshold of $250 000. With no change to the scales, the resulting estimated increase in land tax and metropolitan region improvement tax revenues in 2008-09 would be over 50 per cent. The 2008- 09 land tax and metropolitan region improvement tax scales will, on average, offset the incidence of this bracket creep through a combination of an increase in the land value thresholds of up to 20 per cent, a 33 per cent reduction in the two lowest marginal land tax rates and a reduction in the metropolitan region improvement tax rate from 0.18 per cent to 0.15 per cent. As a result, the increase in total land tax and metropolitan region improvement tax revenue in 2008-09 will be broadly the same as the average increase in land values. The proposed 20 per cent increase in the land value exemption threshold to $300 000 will reduce the number of taxpayers by about 26 600, compared with the number if the threshold remained unchanged at $250 000. The new threshold compares with the median price of a residential lot in Perth of $280 000. The beneficiaries of these scale changes will include many low-value rental property owners and small businesses. The cost of the land tax and metropolitan region improvement tax scale changes will be around $120 million in 2008-09 and $558 million over the four years to 2011-12. Parts 4 and 6 of the bill include amendments to implement state tax review recommendations, to take account of recent judicial decisions, and to make a number of minor changes to improve the administrative efficiency of the taxation legislation. These include amendments to implement recommendation 2.4.5 of the state tax review, which will assist disabled persons to live independently. The amendments remove the requirement for no rent or other income to be derived from a property in order to access the land tax exemption and rates rebates for a property that is independently occupied by a disabled person but is owned by a relative. Providing for rent to be charged by the relative will enable the disabled person to continue to receive rent assistance from the commonwealth. The definition of a disabled person for the purposes of the land tax exemption and for the local government rates and charges concession has also been linked to the commonwealth’s criteria, which is based on eligibility for a disability support pension. This will remove the current inconsistency whereby applicants are required to meet different criteria for a disability support pension from the commonwealth and for the land tax and local government rates and charges concession from the state government. The other state tax review recommendation to be implemented as part of this bill is recommendation 2.4.4, which enables property owned by an executor or administrator of a will to receive an exemption if an individual beneficiary who has received a future right to property resides in that property as his or her principal place of residence. Part 4 also includes amendments to the land tax legislation, where recent judicial decisions have highlighted that the law is not achieving the government’s desired policy intent. The first of these amendments clarifies the operation of section 36 of the Land Tax Assessment Act, which applies to land that is used for the purposes of a zoo, an agricultural, pastoral or horticultural show, a historical society, a public museum or for other public purposes. The amendment clarifies that the use of the words “other public purposes” is limited to other similar public purposes to those already specified in the section. The second amendment deals with the land tax exemption that applies to two or more lots of land that are treated as a single private residence. A land tax exemption is provided for private residential property owned by an individual who uses it as his or her primary residence. However, for the purpose of determining the use of a lot or parcel of private residential property, two or more lots of land are not to be treated as a single private residential property unless the Commissioner of State Revenue is satisfied that the lot or lots on which the private residence is constructed and each other lot are established and used by the individual who resides there as one integrated area that constitutes the place of residence. A recent decision of the Western Australian Court of Appeal identified possible deficiencies in the legislation where two lots were physically separated but the taxpayer received a land tax exemption for both lots. The intention of the legislation is that an exemption is provided for private residential property only where the residence is constructed upon each lot, or if the residence is constructed solely on one lot, the second or other lots have been established so that they form an integral part of the private residential property. It is considered that if the exemption is not governed by appropriate controls, it will become far too easy for taxpayers to avoid the payment of land tax on what may effectively be an investment property that happens to be in close proximity to their principal place of residence. As a result of these concerns, the land tax legislation is to be amended to make it clear that the intent of the taxpayer in relation to the use of the lots that does not include the residence is irrelevant for the purposes of determining whether the exemption applies. In addition, guiding factors have been inserted into the legislation for the Commissioner of State Revenue to have regard to when determining whether two or more lots of land are
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2969 used as a single private residential property. The government recognises that situations genuinely exist when a private residence is established over two or more lots of land, and considers that these amendments should clarify the law to ensure that the exemption is not exploited. The third amendment updates the definition of “lot” to include strata survey plans that are approved by the Western Australian Planning Commission; or in the case of strata plans exempt from approval by the Western Australian Planning Commission, strata plans approved by the local government. The fourth amendment adjusts the 50 per cent land tax concession that was introduced from 1 July 2005 for land used for caravan park, park home park or camping ground purposes. The concession applies to an owner of the land when that person makes an application to the commissioner for a determination that the land is, or was, used as dwelling park land. When the commissioner, as a result of an application made by an owner of land, has made a determination that land is dwelling park land, for the purposes of a concessional assessment that determination remains valid for future assessment years unless the land or part of it is no longer dwelling park land or is no longer owned by the same person. However, the legislation operates to prevent a concession being granted for a previous year if the owner of the land is otherwise eligible for a concession but did not apply for it in that year. It is proposed to amend the Land Tax Assessment Act to clarify that the reassessment provisions of the Taxation Administration Act apply to grant this concession for up to five previous years in which the owner of the land was eligible. The reassessment arrangements would not be available for periods prior to the introduction of the concession on 1 July 2005. Part 8 of the bill amends the Stamp Act 1921 to make changes as a result of a stamp duty decision in the State Administrative Tribunal. These amendments are proposed to apply retrospectively from 6 February 2008, the date of an announcement made by the Acting Treasurer, Hon John Kobelke. The proposed amendments clarify the treatment of fixtures for the purposes of the land-rich provisions of the Stamp Act. Amendments have already been incorporated into the Duties Act 2008, which applies from 1 July 2008; however, corresponding changes must be made to the Stamp Act to ensure that any transactions that occur between 6 February 2008 and 30 June 2008 are included in the duty base. This amendment ensures that it will not be possible to structure a transaction involving the transfer of an interest in a fixture in a manner that would avoid the payment of duty. A detailed explanation of the measures in the bill is contained in the associated explanatory memorandum. I commend the bill to the house. Debate adjourned, on motion by Dr S.C. Thomas. REVENUE LAWS AMENDMENT BILL (NO. 2) 2008 Introduction and First Reading Bill introduced, on motion by Mr E.S. Ripper (Treasurer), and read a first time. Explanatory memorandum presented by the Treasurer. Second Reading MR E.S. RIPPER (Belmont — Treasurer) [12.23 pm]: I move — That the bill be now read a second time. This bill includes the amendments necessary to implement the taxation administration measures that were announced on 8 May 2008 as part of the 2008-09 budget. Complementary amendments to effect changes to the land tax, metropolitan region improvement tax, duties and rates and charges legislation are contained in the Revenue Laws Amendment Bill 2008. The amendments arising from the major multilateral project with other states and territories to make eight areas of payroll administration more consistent, announced in the budget, are included in the Pay-roll Tax Assessment Amendment Bill 2008. The amendments proposed in this bill are principally to the Taxation Administration Act 2003 and seek the legislative changes necessary to implement four recommendations of the state tax review. An explanatory memorandum accompanies the bill and provides a detailed guide to the operation of the new provisions. The amendments in part 2 of the bill deal with recommendation 2.8.4 of the state tax review report and will enable the Commissioner of State Revenue to place a memorial on mining tenements to secure an amount of unpaid stamp duty. Consequential amendments to the Mining Act 1978 are also proposed. The bill also seeks to ensure that the existing Taxation Administration Act memorial provisions that apply in relation to outstanding land tax can be applied to secure land tax liabilities that arise and remain unpaid for assessment years subsequent to that in which the memorial was lodged. Part 3 of the bill seeks to implement three state tax review recommendations. The bill seeks to give effect to recommendation 2.8.2 of the state tax review report, which proposed that the Commissioner of State Revenue be
2970 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] provided with a power to make a compromise assessment in certain circumstances. This power is supported by amendments that ensure the commissioner has the general administration of the taxation acts and the First Home Owner Grant Act. Recommendation 2.8.5 of the State Tax Review seeks to ensure that verbal approval for extensions of time of one month or less to pay land tax are supported. Recommendation 2.8.6 of the State Tax Review concerns the introduction of a mechanism to improve the administration of small tax credits. Part 3 of the bill also includes an amendment to the Taxation Administration Act to introduce a power that will allow the Commissioner of State Revenue to administer legislative changes that are advantageous to taxpayers in the period between announcement of an initiative and the passage of amending legislation by Parliament, where it is intended that the relief be provided from the date of the announcement. Amendments to taxation statutes to give tax relief often commence from 1 July, to coincide with the commencement of a financial year. However, in recent years adjustments to increase first home owner stamp duty thresholds and to reduce conveyance duty rates have commenced from either the date of the budget announcement or another specified date. Commencing relief from a date of announcement is beneficial to taxpayers, as they do not have to delay entering into transactions until a future date to obtain the benefit of lower rates, higher thresholds or simple exemptions. However, many taxpayers do not realise that despite the relief being backdated to the announcement date, the Commissioner of State Revenue is not empowered to administer the state’s laws on the basis of a government announcement, and as a result must charge tax at the higher amount until amending legislation is passed. In the past few years stamp duty budget announcements have translated into a belief by the majority of taxpayers that as long as they enter into a transaction after the specified date, the requirement to pay a lesser amount, or in some cases nothing, is immediately effective. As many members are aware from representations made to them by their own constituents, taxpayers became upset because they have to seek short-term finance to pay their stamp duty, only to have the amount refunded to them once the legislation has been passed by Parliament. This situation can be overcome by the introduction of appropriate legislation, thereby ensuring that taxpayers do not shoulder the cost of an inefficient government process. The proposed amendments to the Taxation Administration Act seek to provide the minister with the power to determine, by notice published in the Government Gazette, that certain specified provisions in a bill are operative as if they were enacted at the date of the notice. In introducing these provisions, I appreciate that such a power needs to be subject to restrictions to ensure that it is appropriately used. These restrictions include that the notice would cease to have effect from the earlier of when the bill receives royal assent; the notice is revoked by the minister by notice published in the Government Gazette; six months expires from the date the notice came into force; the amending bill is defeated in either house of Parliament; or the Legislative Assembly expires or is dissolved before the amending bill has been passed by both houses of Parliament. It is also recognised that during the time a notice is in operation, the amended rates or thresholds of tax may be difficult to locate and require notices to be searched in the Government Gazette to determine the correct tax rates or thresholds. To provide for these circumstances, the Office of State Revenue will do everything possible to ensure the rates and thresholds are clearly published on the departmental website, incorporated into tax calculators and online systems, and otherwise disseminated as widely as possible. The bill also includes powers that set out what occurs in the event that the provisions specified as pre-enactment provisions are amended in this place. This process is designed on the basis that the pre-enactment provisions are, by their very nature, likely to be in a bill that section 46 of the Constitution Acts Amendment Act 1899 applies to, which cannot be amended by the other place. These powers, if enacted, will ensure that taxpayers in this state receive the full benefit of reduced taxes intended as soon as possible. Part 4 of the bill contains a number of amendments to other acts. The Duties Act 2008 and the Petroleum and Geothermal Energy Resources Act 1967 have been updated to correct references to superseded or updated legislation. The final amendment is to the Rates and Charges (Rebates and Deferments) Act 1992. This act authorises local governments and other administrative authorities, such as the Water Corporation, to provide rebates to eligible customers. Such authorities then claim the relevant amounts from the government as part of the community services obligation arrangements. Under the act, administrative authorities are required to pay compensation to a person who has suffered damage, loss or injustice in certain circumstances. The act sets out processes to be followed in these certain situations by an administrative authority that is a local government or accountable authority as defined in the Financial Management Act 2006. However, as the Water Corporation is neither a local government nor an accountable authority as defined, it is not clear what processes it should follow. A minor amendment is proposed to ensure that provision is made for any other type of administrative authority—which would include the Water Corporation—to make the necessary adjustment by way of payment, waiver or deferral. I commend the bill to the house. Debate adjourned, on motion by Dr S.C. Thomas.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2971
PAY-ROLL TAX ASSESSMENT AMENDMENT BILL 2008 Introduction and First Reading Bill introduced, on motion by Mr E.S. Ripper (Treasurer), and read a first time. Explanatory memorandum presented by the Treasurer. Second Reading MR E.S. RIPPER (Belmont — Treasurer) [12.30 pm]: I move — That the bill be now read a second time. The Pay-roll Tax Assessment Amendment Bill 2008 seeks to implement a package of measures aimed at achieving a greater level of consistency in eight specific areas of the payroll tax regime between Western Australia and the other states and territories. The differences in payroll tax arrangements that currently exist between states and territories have been raised regularly by business as increasing compliance costs, particularly for businesses that operate in more than one jurisdiction. In March 2006, state and territory Treasurers endorsed Western Australia leading a major project with other states and territories to examine the feasibility of achieving greater levels of consistency in eight areas of payroll tax administration. These eight areas are the timing of the lodgement of returns; the motor vehicle allowances exemption; the accommodation allowances exemption; the treatment of fringe benefits; the treatment of employee share acquisition schemes; the treatment of services performed outside a jurisdiction; the treatment of superannuation contributions; and grouping. The final recommendations to adopt consistent provisions and definitions in the eight key areas were endorsed by state and territory Treasurers in March 2007 and were included in the new business regulation reform agenda of the Council of Australian Governments. Over the next 12 months, the government will be considering further consistency measures as part of this reform program. In addition, the state tax review’s final report included a recommendation for the continued involvement of Western Australia in the process to implement increased interstate consistency in the area of payroll tax. These changes are focused on reducing compliance costs and red tape for Western Australian businesses operating in more than one state. It should be noted that the consistency initiative specifically excludes tax rates and thresholds. All jurisdictions have recognised a need for policy autonomy in these areas to allow a jurisdiction to maintain flexibility to respond to its state-specific budgetary needs. Nonetheless, in Western Australia, the adoption of the recommendations had to be considered in the context of the 2008-09 budget, as alignment with the position of other jurisdictions was not a cost-neutral exercise. The estimated cost to revenue of the measures included in this bill is $164 million over four years to 2011-12, $156 million of which is attributable to changes being adopted in the grouping provisions. The cost of the remaining measures is around $2 million per annum. The bill seeks to make a number of changes to the grouping provisions. The grouping provisions ensure that employers do not avoid payroll tax by splitting payroll tax liability over several entities, each of which might otherwise claim the benefit of the $750 000 threshold. Employers are grouped under a number of tests that are based on the relationship, control and connection between the businesses. The changes include the extension of the commissioner’s discretion to exclude all commonly controlled businesses from a group, except for related bodies corporate under the Corporations Act; the removal of grouping of employers when a parent or head business exercises managerial control over a branch, agency or subsidiary business; adopting tracing rules that take account of direct and indirect interests to address complex business structures that avoid grouping; and amendments to the matters that the commissioner is to consider when determining whether businesses should be excluded from the grouping provisions. It is estimated that approximately 2 900 of the businesses that are currently grouped under the existing common control provisions may benefit from harmonisation of these arrangements with other states. The current grouping provisions, including those that operate to group parent or head businesses with branch businesses, will continue to apply to affected Western Australian businesses until 30 June 2009. Any businesses currently grouped under the existing provisions will continue to be liable for payroll tax on the basis of the grouping until the amendments become effective on 1 July 2009. This delayed introduction of the amended grouping provisions will assist in ensuring that processes are in place to achieve maximum administrative consistency with other states. It should be noted that a number of other states and territories have adopted template legislation. This was not the preferred implementation approach in Western Australia, primarily because a number of jurisdictionally specific aspects of the Western Australian payroll tax regime have been maintained. These include the retention of quarterly and annual return provisions, which provide consistent lodgement requirements with the commonwealth and which have only recently been completed and provide a unique benefit in Western Australia; provisions facilitating electronic lodgement processes that support the revenue online system operated by the Office of State Revenue; specific superannuation provisions that outline the treatment of defined benefit schemes, which have been praised by practitioners and business in the past for their clarity and ease of operation;
2972 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] and the exemption of payments made for remote area housing benefits, which recognise Western Australia’s extensive and unique regional industries. However, while template provisions have not been adopted, the objectives of achieving greater levels of consistency with other jurisdictions have been met as a result of the amendments being proposed in this bill. The benefits of greater consistency will not be limited to businesses operating in multiple states. Those businesses operating in Western Australia will share the benefits of streamlined compliance processes and potentially reduced payroll tax liabilities. As the amendments to the Pay-roll Tax Assessment Act 2002 made by this bill introduce provisions that are consistent with those of other jurisdictions across Australia, it is considered that the bill may be referred to the Standing Committee on Uniform Legislation and Statutes Review of the other house under standing order 230A. With the exception of the amendments relating to the grouping provisions that commence from 1 July 2009, the amendments commence with effect from 1 July 2008. Given the likely referral of the bill to the Standing Committee on Uniform Legislation and Statutes Review, it is unlikely that the passage of this bill will have occurred by 1 July 2008. As a consequence, payroll tax will continue to be collected under the existing provisions, with any adjustments being made after the bill receives the royal assent using the reassessment processes set out in the Taxation Administration Act 2003 or the annual reconciliation processes at the end of the 2008-09 financial year. A comprehensive explanatory memorandum has been prepared to accompany this bill. I commend the bill to the house. Debate adjourned, on motion by Dr S.C. Thomas. MAJOR EVENTS (AERIAL ADVERTISING) BILL 2008 Introduction and First Reading Bill introduced, on motion by Mr J.C. Kobelke (Minister for Sport and Recreation), and read a first time. Explanatory memorandum presented by the minister. Second Reading MR J.C. KOBELKE (Balcatta — Minister for Sport and Recreation) [12.36 pm]: I move — That the bill be now read a second time. Major sporting and entertainment events are increasingly subject to the practice of ambush or parasite marketing through aerial advertising. This practice is essentially the act of innovative marketers displaying their products unofficially through airborne devices. The products are often in direct competition with those of an official sponsor of an event. It includes sky-writing and advertising, other than normal markings, attached to aircraft such as blimps, planes, hang gliders and hot air balloons. No mechanism is currently available to event organisers to provide surety and comfort to their sponsors that their product has some exclusivity. The potential impact of ambush marketing through aerial advertising on event organisers is significant. Many events are highly dependent on sponsorship for their viability. Major codes, particularly Cricket Australia, have been proactively seeking legislative protection across Australia. This state, as an organiser itself of events such as the very successful Red Bull Air Race, is also open to abuse of the commercial sponsorship arrangements it enters into owing to the current lack of protection. Legislation has previously been enacted in Australia to protect singular events such as the Sydney Olympic Games in 2000 and the Melbourne Commonwealth Games in 2006. Since that time, various jurisdictions have provided either further strengthening of current legislation or introduced new protection. This bill will provide for the regulation, management and control of aerial advertising at major events in Western Australia. It will ensure that the rights and privileges of the sponsors of major events in Western Australia will be protected at law, and provide a further incentive to a sponsor to continue to invest in major events and associated activities in this state. Matters that are covered in the bill include an application process to have an event or series of events to be covered by the legislation approved by the responsible minister; the criteria upon which an event can be declared, including considerations such as size, media coverage and economic benefit; and remedies available to event organisers and government before, during and after significant events for breaches of the act, including financial penalties and civil remedies. This bill will add to the attractiveness for sponsors of major sporting, arts and other entertainment events to either continue or consider conducting their activities in Western Australia. It will also enhance our position to host major events in Perth for multi-venue events such as the 2015 Cricket World Cup. I commend the bill to the house. Debate adjourned, on motion by Dr S.C. Thomas.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2973
ELECTORAL AMENDMENT BILL (NO. 2) 2008 Introduction and First Reading Bill introduced, on motion by Mr J.A. McGinty (Minister for Electoral Affairs), and read a first time. Explanatory memorandum presented by the minister. Second Reading MR J.A. McGINTY (Fremantle — Minister for Electoral Affairs) [12.40 pm]: I move — That the bill be now read a second time. The Electoral Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2008 seeks to amend the Electoral Act 1907 and the Electoral (Political Finance) Regulations 1996. I will now outline the major features of the bill. Prisoners’ voting rights: On 30 August 2007 the High Court ruled in Roach v Australian Electoral Commissioner and the Commonwealth that the provisions of section 93(8AA) of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 were invalid. This section disqualified all sentenced prisoners from voting in commonwealth elections. However, the High Court found that the former provisions of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 that allowed prisoners serving sentences of less than three years to vote were valid. The commonwealth government has not yet amended its legislation. Given the High Court ruling, the former provisions continued in force, and prisoners serving sentences of less than three years were allowed to vote in the recent federal election. In March 2007 the Western Australian Electoral Act 1907 was amended to replicate the commonwealth’s legislation prior to the Roach decision. Section 18(1)(c), which disqualified all sentenced prisoners from voting in Western Australian state elections, was inserted into the Electoral Act 1907. Prior to March 2007, persons serving sentences of less than one year could vote in a state election. The State Solicitor’s Office is of the view that if section 18(1)(c) of the Electoral Act 1907 were challenged in the courts, such a challenge would be likely to succeed. Therefore, to comply with the High Court ruling and to be consistent with commonwealth electoral legislation, it is proposed to amend the Electoral Act 1907 so that prisoners serving sentences of less than three years will be allowed to vote in state elections. I stress that prisoners will remain eligible to enrol and remain enrolled while serving their sentences. Voting rights for citizens with no fixed address: Currently, people who have no fixed address cannot vote in a Western Australian state election. Section 17(1)(c) of the Electoral Act 1907 requires a person to have lived at an address for one month before that person is eligible to claim enrolment for state elections. Public concern has been raised with both the Western Australian Electoral Commission and the Attorney General’s office by citizens who, having sold their family home and no longer having a fixed address and deciding to travel around Australia, find that they are excluded from voting in Western Australian state elections. These concerns are compounded when they discover that people with no fixed address can vote in a commonwealth election and that people who have been living overseas for up to six years can now vote in both commonwealth and Western Australian elections. Section 96 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 provides for itinerant electors to be enrolled. These electors can nominate to be enrolled in an electorate even though they do not live there. The electorate in which they are determined to reside is in the following descending order: the electorate in which the elector was last enrolled; or, if not previously enrolled, the electorate in which the elector’s next of kin is enrolled; or, if there are no next of kin, the electorate in which the elector was born; or, if the elector was not born in Australia, the electorate with which the elector has the closest connection. Therefore, it is proposed to amend the Electoral Act 1907 to replicate the commonwealth provisions so that Western Australian citizens who have no fixed address can vote in a state election. The Electoral Commission will use commonwealth electoral administrative procedures in providing this service to Western Australian electors who have no fixed address. Lowering the political donation disclosure threshold: It is proposed to amend section 175 of the Electoral Act 1907 so that the specified amount is lowered from the current $1 800 to $1 000. The specified amount is the term used to describe the political donation disclosure threshold. This is consistent with the commonwealth’s stated intention to reduce its threshold from $10 000 to $1 000. Political finance disclosure provisions were first introduced in Western Australia in 1996. Under the disclosure provisions, all political parties, associated entities, individual candidates, groups and other persons are required to provide the Electoral Commissioner with details of gifts and/or income received for electoral or political purposes. When the political finance disclosure provisions were first introduced, the threshold for disclosure was $1 500, linked to consumer price index increases. Currently, the threshold for disclosure of political donations is $1 800. Under section 175 of the Electoral Act 1907, the specified amount is determined within 30 days after each state general election. Given that the electoral cycle and associated disclosure reporting are drawing to a close, it is more appropriate for political party agents and auditors to change to the $1 000 threshold after the next state general election. Changing the specified amount to $1 000 has implications for other parts of the Electoral Act 1907 that deal with annual reporting requirements for political parties and other entities. Political parties and their associated entities
2974 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] are required under the legislation to lodge an annual return with the Electoral Commissioner by 30 November each year, disclosing all gifts and income received for the previous financial year. The most practical approach to this annual reporting requirement is to start the new $1 000 threshold amount on 1 July 2009. This will mean that party agents and auditors will not have to report on two threshold amounts; namely, the current $1 800 amount and the proposed $1 000 amount. The formula that indexes the specified amount to CPI is set out in regulation 3 of the Electoral (Political Finance) Regulations 1996. Regulation 3 will have to be amended to delete all references to $1 500 and replace it with $1 000. Overseas electors and prisoners to be registered as general early voters: Currently, under section 17A of the Electoral Act 1907, overseas voters who are enrolled to vote can vote in Western Australian state elections for up to six years after leaving Australia. Overseas enrolled electors can also vote in commonwealth elections up to six years after leaving Australia. Under commonwealth legislation, overseas electors can apply to be general early voters. The term “general early voter” describes certain categories of registered electors who automatically receive a postal ballot once an election is called. Therefore, once a federal election is called, registered overseas voters are automatically sent postal ballots by the Australian Electoral Commission. However, section 93 of the Electoral Act 1907 does not list overseas electors as general early voters for state elections. This means that an overseas Western Australian elector cannot receive a postal ballot automatically from the Electoral Commission. Once a state election is called, the elector has to either apply personally for a postal vote or vote in person at a registered overseas early voting centre. This can prove difficult in many places around the world, given poor communications, distance and postal service schedules. Also, prisoners are currently not registered as general early voters. It is proposed to amend the Electoral Act 1907 so that prisoners can apply to be registered as general early voters. This proposed amendment will make the state’s electoral legislation consistent with commonwealth legislation and will make the process of voting significantly easier for those prisoners serving sentences of less than three years. Candidates distributing how-to-vote-cards: It is proposed to repeal section 183(6) of the Electoral Act 1907. This section states that if a candidate personally solicits the vote of an elector on polling day, the candidate is guilty of undue influence. This has proved to be a contentious section in relation to candidates handing out how-to-vote- cards on polling day. There is a legal view that if a candidate distributes a how-to-vote-card on polling day, coupled with a request or appeal or other approach to an elector, this would be construed as personally soliciting the vote of an elector and therefore a breach of section 183(6) of the Electoral Act 1907. Repealing section 183(6) of the Electoral Act 1907 would make commonwealth and state electoral legislation consistent on this issue. Under commonwealth legislation, candidates can distribute how-to-vote-cards on polling day, provided that they are six metres from the entrance to a polling place. Currently, section 192(1) of the Electoral Act 1907 in its application prevents candidates distributing how-to-vote-cards in a polling place or within six metres from the entrance to a polling place. Political party agents: All political parties in Western Australia must appoint an agent for disclosure purposes. Party agents must register with the Electoral Commission and assume responsibility for lodging disclosure returns on an ongoing basis. Currently, under political finance legislation, the appointed agent for a political party is not automatically deemed to be the default agent for endorsed candidates of the party. Under section 175C of the Electoral Act 1907, candidates must separately appoint an agent by 6.00 pm on the day before polling day at each election, otherwise they are deemed to be their own agent. The commission’s experience on this issue is that many candidates for the major political parties are not aware that they need to nominate a party agent for this to take effect. This leads to confusion and time lost in following up on these matters, leading to significant delays in compliance with disclosure requirements for all involved. Therefore, it is intended to amend section 175C so that the party agent is, by default, the agent for candidates from that party. If candidates do not want the party agent to be their agent, they would complete the appropriate prescribed form to nominate a different agent or themselves. Lastly, there are some minor and consequential changes to the Electoral Act1907. I commend the bill to the house. Debate adjourned, on motion by Dr S.C. Thomas. ELECTORAL AMENDMENT BILL 2008 Introduction and First Reading Bill introduced, on motion by Mr J.A. McGinty (Minister for Electoral Affairs), and read a first time. Explanatory memorandum presented by the minister. Second Reading MR J.A. McGINTY (Fremantle — Minister for Electoral Affairs) [12.51 pm]: I move — That the bill be now read a second time.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2975
The Electoral Amendment Bill 2008 amends the Electoral Act 1907 to remove the requirement for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Western Australia to be the chairman of the Electoral Distribution Commissioners. The function of the Electoral Distribution Commissioners is to divide the state into districts and regions in accordance with the requirements of the Electoral Act. Section 16B of the Electoral Act 1907 currently provides for the Chief Justice to be ex officio chairman of the Electoral Distribution Commissioners. The Chief Justice has raised concerns regarding his role in the electoral distribution process. He has referred to academic writings that express the view that the conferral of such a role upon judicial officers is inconsistent with the independence and neutrality of the judiciary, perhaps even to the point at which a question might arise as to constitutional invalidity. The Chief Justice has also noted that given the importance of the electoral process, it would be preferable if the Chief Justice were in a position to sit in any litigation relating to that process, without being precluded from doing so by any perceived conflict of interest. Furthermore, the Chief Justice has pointed out that questions were raised in the Marquet case by some members of the High Court about the propriety of the Chief Justice participating in litigation relating to electoral distribution when he was himself part of the process. In no other Australian jurisdiction is the Chief Justice required to be a member of the equivalent of our Electoral Distribution Commission, let alone be its chairman. In every other jurisdiction, apart from South Australia, there is no requirement that a serving judge be a member of the equivalent of the Electoral Distribution Commission. Rather, the relevant legislation in most other state and territory jurisdictions provides for a serving judge or a retired judge to be either a member of or to chair the equivalent of the Electoral Distribution Commission. Although it is accepted that the Chief Justice should not be required to serve on and chair the Electoral Distribution Commission, there are obvious advantages in terms of public confidence in the electoral distribution process in having a judge or retired judge fulfilling that role. In order to address the concerns raised by the Chief Justice and in line with the practice adopted in other states and territories, this bill amends the Electoral Act to provide for the chairman of the Electoral Distribution Commissioners to be a judge or a retired judge of the Supreme Court, the District Court or the Family Court of Western Australia, or a retired judge of the Supreme Court of another state or territory or of a commonwealth court. Prior to making an appointment of a judge to the position of chairman of the Electoral Distribution Commissioners, the Premier is required to consult with the relevant head of jurisdiction before making the appointment. The tenure of appointment for the position of chairman of Electoral Distribution Commissioners is for a term not exceeding five years, with the opportunity for reappointment on one occasion. It is envisaged that a retired judge may be appointed to fill the position. However, if no retired judge is available or willing to take the appointment, it will be possible to appoint a current member of the judiciary to fulfil the role. The proposed amendments are acceptable to the Chief Justice. I commend this bill to the house. Debate adjourned, on motion by Dr S.C. Thomas. PUBLIC TRANSPORT AUTHORITY AMENDMENT BILL 2008 Introduction and First Reading Bill introduced, on motion by Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan (Minister for Planning and Infrastructure), and read a first time. Explanatory memorandum presented by the minister. Second Reading MS A.J.G. MacTIERNAN (Armadale — Minister for Planning and Infrastructure) [12.55 pm]: I move — That the bill be now read a second time. The purpose of the Public Transport Authority Amendment Bill 2008 is to provide strong penalties to support the public transport banning orders we introduced by way of regulation in February this year. Those regulations and this legislation are part of our ongoing program to combat violent behaviour and criminal damage to our public transport system and to target repeat offenders. Western Australians have every right to use their world-class public transport system without being assaulted, threatened or subjected to offensive behaviour. People who repeatedly deny them this right or wilfully damage an important community asset should not expect to be able to use it. Although repeat offenders are in the very small minority, we recognise that their actions are regarded as serious issues by the community. Banning repeat offenders from using public transport is an extra deterrent and could contribute to changing that type of behaviour and accepting responsibility for it. Although the number of such offences is small when compared
2976 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] with the more than 35 million public transport journeys taken each year, the impact these very few offenders have on the perceptions and the actual experience of other customers is significant. The chief executive officer of the Public Transport Authority is empowered by these changes to issue a banning notice—called a “prohibition order”—in the following circumstances: firstly, if an offender has been found guilty of or has pleaded guilty to two relevant offences relating to separate incidents that were committed within a 12-month period, the offender will be banned from using public transport for up to one month; and, secondly, if an offender is found guilty of or has pleaded guilty to three relevant offences relating to separate incidents committed within an 18-month period, the offender will be banned from using public transport for up to three months. Relevant offences: Under sections 313, 317 and 318(1)(d) of the Criminal Code, offences include an assault committed on PTA property, conveyance or facility, whether common assault, assault occasioning bodily harm and serious assaults, including assaults on public officers and drivers. Under section 444 of the Criminal Code, offences include wilful and unlawful damage to PTA property, such as graffiti. Under section 43(5) of the Government Railways Act 1904, an offence includes violent or offensive behaviour on a PTA railway to the annoyance of others. Under regulation 40 of the Public Transport Authority Regulations 2003, an offence includes obstructing a PTA authorised person or security officer in the course of their duties in relation to any PTA function on a bus, train or ferry. Under regulation 42, together with regulation 41(g) of the PTA regulations, an offence includes failing to comply with a refusal to travel direction by a PTA authorised officer in circumstances when the refusal is based on the reasonable belief that a person poses a threat to the safety of the driver or master of, or a passenger on, a PTA bus, train or ferry. Penalties: The amended regulations, by their nature, were only able to impose a monetary penalty. This bill currently before Parliament mirrors the prohibition order regime contained in the amended regulations except that it changes the penalties for breaches of a prohibition order without reasonable excuse. The new penalties are a term of imprisonment of up to nine months as a maximum penalty instead of a monetary penalty of up to $2 000 as currently provided in the amended PTA regulations; a minimum penalty of a community-based order, except that a further option is available in the case of juveniles; notwithstanding the Sentencing Act and the Young Offenders Act, the penalty of a fine would not be available; and, in the case of juveniles, referral to a juvenile justice team will be an option provided that the PTA is accorded the status of “victim” for the purposes of the proceedings. The government is aware that imposing a fine on offenders found guilty of or who plead guilty to offences is not always a sufficient deterrent. The courts predominantly impose monetary penalties, which may lead to loss of a driver’s licence or vehicle licence through the Fines Enforcement Registry process. However, the Public Transport Authority’s data shows that the majority of repeat offenders for offences involving violence or damage do not have a driver’s licence and do not have a vehicle registered in their name. There are safeguards in the bill to provide natural justice to the offender. Before a decision is made on a prohibition order, the PTA’s chief executive officer must send a repeat offender a notice to show cause for why a prohibition order should not be issued to the offender or, if it is to be issued, any exceptions to that prohibition order that the PTA’s chief executive officer should consider before issuing a prohibition order. Mr Acting Speaker, I am having trouble concentrating with the conversation being carried on immediately adjacent to me. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr G. Woodhams): Members, I hope you heard the minister’s comments and will respect her opportunity to continue. Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN: The PTA’s chief executive officer has discretion to take account of the person’s personal circumstances before issuing a prohibition order and, if required, may issue the prohibition order subject to conditions; for example, allowing travel in restricted circumstances during the ban period. If the bill is passed, the amended regulations dealing with the prohibition order regime will be repealed. This initiative has not, to our knowledge, been implemented in any other state public transport system. However, it should be noted that people in the position of, or similar to, the chief executive officer of the PTA have been granted the power to issue banning orders under other Western Australian legislation, notably under the Casino Control Act 1984 to the Commissioner of Police and authorised persons of the casino licensee, and under the Alcohol and Drug Authority Regulations 1990 to the chief executive officer of that authority. Our rail and bus facilities have extensive closed-circuit television coverage, much of which is monitored in real time at the CCTV control centre. The CCTV control centre has proved very effective in identifying specific individuals and alerting security officers and police to their location. On our rail system transit officers are allocated to the same lines each day, rather than working throughout the system, so that they are familiar with the patrons on their lines. Together, these capabilities will enable us to effectively enforce the prohibition orders, particularly on the rail system. I commend the bill to the house. Debate adjourned, on motion by Dr S.C. Thomas.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2977
ACTS AMENDMENT (WESTERN AUSTRALIA DAY) BILL 2008 Introduction and First Reading Bill introduced, on motion by Mr R.F. Johnson on behalf of Mr C.J. Barnett and read a first time. Explanatory memorandum presented by the member.
APPROPRIATION (CONSOLIDATED ACCOUNT) BILL (NO. 1) 2008 APPROPRIATION (CONSOLIDATED ACCOUNT) BILL (NO. 2) 2008 Second Reading — Cognate Debate Resumed from 13 May. DR S.C. THOMAS (Capel) [1.04 pm]: I note that I will be the lead speaker for the opposition on the Appropriation (Consolidated Account) Bill (No. 1) 2008 and the Appropriation (Consolidated Account) Bill (No. 2) 2008. There is no doubt that the Carpenter Labor government is blowing the boom. There is no doubt that the people of Western Australia are missing out on the opportunities that they should be presented with. There is absolutely no doubt that a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to build Western Australia is being squandered. I will build a case to demonstrate to the house that Western Australia is missing out on what should be the greatest period of growth and development it has ever experienced. The government loves charts, and I have brought to the house a number of charts that demonstrate the bits of information I would like to put forward. It is important that we recognise many of the serious issues with which we are confronted. I will start with a chart that comes from the budget papers. It demonstrates forecasts for the general economy over the past decade and into the forward estimates over the next few years. It is an interesting graph. It is the first point for building the argument that Western Australia is blowing the boom. As members can see, there has been significant growth in the operating revenue of the general government sector of Western Australia, rising from $7 billion for 1993-94 to around $20 billion for 2011-12. However, there are a couple of significant trends. As we move from 2008-09 into the forward estimate years, revenue is expected to remain static. In fact, growth of revenue is expected to decline to almost zero. The first point I make is that Western Australia has experienced a boom that occurs once in a generation, and we are in the middle of the process of blowing that boom. Our revenue will level out. Interestingly, there is a second piece of information we can glean from this Treasury document, the budget. When one examines the proportion of growth in various sectors of the economy, one can see that the bottom section of the chart, in light blue, refers to commonwealth grants. Commonwealth grants grew significantly during the 1990s and the first few years of the 2000s. I am not particularly fond of the expression “the noughties”, and it is difficult to come up with a better one, so let us call it the years running into the 2000s! Commonwealth government grants rose significantly in the decade leading up to 2006-07 and 2007-08. Those commonwealth grants are beginning to level off significantly. As I will explain later, one of the great threats to the Western Australian economy is that goods and services tax revenue will begin to decline, not only in real terms and in terms of the amount that Western Australia receives in proportion to its population and the size of its economy, but in overall actual dollar amounts. That will cause significant stress. What will save the state of Western Australia and the current Carpenter Labor government from immediate pain? The second line on the chart reveals—as has occurred throughout the Labor years—continuing increases in taxation. Although the community of Western Australia will receive less from the commonwealth government, the state government will continue to draw significant amounts in taxation. I will return to that point because it is important to recognise the way in which growth in the fiscal economy—that is, the expenditure of the government of Western Australia—will be funded by taxation revenue, despite claims by the Treasurer that the government will hand back or remove taxes. There is evidence in the government’s own documents that it will continue to increase its taxation revenue at a significant rate. The third point about this particular chart is that we can see that although mining royalties were relatively stable in the lead-up to the early 1990s, there was significant growth in the early 2000s. Mining royalties are also predicted to contract at the end of the forward estimates, largely due to the significant price increase in iron ore royalties, in both this and the previous year, as they relate to the price of iron ore. Although it is true that negotiations are ongoing, we expect that market to settle down, which may mean a massive decline in iron ore royalties. Western Australia’s production of iron ore will continue and that iron ore will continue to sell and make good dollars for the state’s economy and the gross state product. However, the government of Western Australia will not continue to enjoy additional gains in mining royalties. What problem does the state government face? Its income will start to stagnate. Under those circumstances, taxation revenue will continue to decline, but it cannot make up for the reduction in goods and services tax revenue and commonwealth grants and the slowing of the boom growth in terms of mining royalties—not the mining sector, but mining royalties, which are completely related to price. It would be nice if Western Australia received mining royalties from some of the boom industries whose prices will continue to climb over the next few years. The best example is the natural gas market. The world’s energy market will explode—almost literally. There will be a huge requirement to keep the
2978 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] price of energy at a minimum level. If the state of Western Australia received significant royalties from the petroleum resources that can be found off the coast of Western Australia, there would be a continuation of the expansion of its mining royalties. That will not be the case, however, because the commonwealth government receives the bulk of those funds. Western Australia will miss out on receiving royalties from industries in the Pilbara, the Kimberley and the north west. The commonwealth will be on the receiving end of the significant growth in mining and resources revenue into the future. That is a significant issue for the state of Western Australia. Those are the key points about the general growth of the economy—growth in taxation, a shrinking of commonwealth GST payments and a stagnation of the mining royalties that Western Australia will receive. That paints a very difficult picture for a number of reasons. First, if there is likely to be stagnation, there must be a response in expenditure. If a small businessman or a farmer realises that his revenue will not continue to expand at the same rate, he has to decide what to do. What is the Carpenter Labor government doing about the impending problem of a lack in revenue growth? It is continuing to spend. Any small or large business person—I refer to the chief executive officer of a large company or a farmer in the Western Australian wheatbelt—knows that one of the first things that needs to be done when facing a revenue issue is to address expenditure. There are only two options—either address expenditure or start to move heavily into debt. Debt in Western Australia is an issue that I will return to later. I will refer in more detail to the issue of taxation in a form that most members will be able to understand. The chart that I am now holding refers to the taxation revenue of the states of Australia as put forward in their 2007- 08 budgets. I would like members to examine the taxation revenue and budget 2007-08 chart, which is a very colourful chart. As members can see, Western Australia leads the way with each Western Australian being taxed a bit over $2 500. Western Australia is the most taxed state in the commonwealth as is demonstrated by taxation revenue in the states’ 2007-08 budgets. This graph is something of an embarrassment to the Treasurer and the government because it demonstrates that Western Australia is the highest taxing state in the nation. The Treasurer would have wanted to keep that a secret. The Treasurer has told us that he has changed the way that he measures taxation per state, despite the fact that when the Labor Party came to power in 2001 it came in on the back of an election promise that it would maintain or increase WA’s tax competitiveness as measured by taxation revenue per capita. In the final year of the previous coalition government, Western Australia was the third-lowest taxing state behind Tasmania and Queensland. The Treasurer has failed to live up to yet another election promise because, as was demonstrated in the 2007-08 budget, Western Australia is the highest taxing state in Australia. People might argue about what is the most appropriate measure of taxation. Is taxation per capita a more accurate measure than taxation as it relates to the gross state product? What would happen if WA went through a boom period and its population could not keep up with the boom? That might occur. Has that been the experience of Western Australia? Absolutely. Western Australia cannot keep up with the current boom; its population is falling behind. What measurement makes a state look its best? Naturally, the Treasurer has converted from a taxation revenue per capita measurement to a taxation revenue per gross state product measurement because the latter hides the level of taxation that is being applied. This is a smokes-and-mirrors budget. Every state budget that has been handed down since I have been a member of Parliament has been a smokes-and-mirrors budget. Now that the Treasurer has transferred the measure of taxation competitiveness from taxation per capita to taxation per gross state product, what will happen at the end of the boom when the population is at its peak and when the gross state product is struggling to keep up with expenditure and debt levels? The advantage of measuring taxation competitiveness per gross state product is that it makes a government look really good when the state is experiencing a boom period. As the Carpenter Labor government presides over the boom and carries the state beyond the boom and into stagnation—that will eventually occur— the measure applied by the Treasurer will start to be a significant embarrassment. Mr P. Papalia: Are you conceding the next election? Dr S.C. THOMAS: I am not saying that the government will still be in office; rather, I am saying that the figures will be the same. That is a completely different argument. The chart that I am holding represents taxation revenue in the 2007-08 budget. Of course, compared with the other states Western Australia is out there. I will make a quick comparison, because things move fast in financial circles. Everyone thinks that is a dull argument, but things are exciting. Not long after the 2007-08 state budget was brought down, the government released the 2008 midyear review. Given that the graph shows Western Australia’s red line sitting significantly beyond the other states in the 2007-08 state budget, what is the outcome in the 2007-08 midyear review? Let us have a look, because I have another chart! The chart I am now holding represents the 2008 midyear review as described by every state’s midyear review. As members can see, one state grows significantly from the chart at the top, which represents the budget, to the chart at the bottom, which represents the midyear review. There is some growth in the other states as the blue lines in the top chart are longer than those in the bottom chart. The line representing New South Wales has increased by half a centimetre or a centimetre in that graph. Western Australia is making a killing. That is the midyear review and it is a significant change. Not only is Western Australia minting it in relation to taxes in the budget, because also it moves so quickly, it gets worse.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2979
Unfortunately, I did not make this part of the graph on the chart red, but if we take the February 2008 figures and apply the same measure, Western Australia continues to mint it further. I did not make it red, Mr Acting Speaker, because everybody will recognise that it stands out. Western Australia, in its taxation revenue, stands out significantly. Western Australia continues to be the most highly taxed state in Australia. The Treasurer, in his budget pronouncements of last week, announced some taxation relief. I will indulge the house by explaining what the taxation relief would be on this chart were we to take off the taxation relief that Western Australia is experiencing under the Carpenter Labor government and the current Treasurer. Let me put a mark on the graph so that everybody can see. Welcome to the tax relief for the state of Western Australia under the Carpenter Labor government and the current Treasurer! Mr T. Buswell: It is minuscule! Dr S.C. THOMAS: I will move the chart closer to the Acting Speaker. Members are struggling to see the tax relief provided by the current government. On an annual basis, the tax relief for Western Australia, under this government, shows as a fingernail size change on this chart. Does this house think that the tax relief provided for Western Australian taxpayers will bring them back to being on a competitive basis with anybody else in Australia? Does this house think that we might actually push the red line back somewhere? We are not even in the ballpark! This is the tax relief proposed by the Carpenter Labor government. While we are grateful for any taxation relief—since we are the highest taxed people in Australia—it is something of a token effort. I do not think that government members should be standing up and claiming a lot of credit for the work they have been doing, because that relief is relatively insignificant. Dr K.D. Hames: I reckon that graph would be good for an advertisement at election time! Dr S.C. THOMAS: I have some more, though; the Deputy Leader of the Opposition would have to pick the best graphs! How do we sum up the changes that the Gallop and Carpenter Labor governments have enacted through their taxation policies over the past seven to eight years of their terms of government? This particular graph highlights one of the most important factors, and that is the change of taxation in the period 2000-01. I have only gone up to 2006-07 on this graph because I could not fit the extra taxation on this chart. I will demonstrate the growth in taxation in this state. The growth in taxation, from the beginning of the Carpenter government to not quite the end of the Carpenter government, has been extreme; again, its growth has been significant. What is the tax relief that the Treasurer has offered under the 2008-09 budget and how will it impact on this particular graph? Let me show the house the additional savings that the community will make, from taxes people will not be paying to the Labor government. I refer to the Western Australian government’s tax-saving measures in the 2008-09 budget. These are the grandiose plans of the Carpenter Labor government. The government is telling the people of Western Australia that it is handing money back to them. I doubt that the Acting Speaker can see this from where he is sitting. The graph is a demonstration of the insignificant tax relief that Western Australians have received under the Carpenter Labor government. I do not begrudge anybody some tax relief in this budget. A couple of months ago in this house the opposition proposed stamp duty relief in the Duties Bill. We put forward a couple of proposals because we thought we would offer the government a bit of bipartisan support for some stamp duty relief. We offered the government increases in thresholds of 10 per cent, 15 per cent and 20 per cent. We said at the time that we were happy for the government to come forward and provide a bit more than that; we offered it some bipartisan support. The government’s proposal to move stamp duty tax thresholds out—in some areas by close to 50 per cent—is again a very welcome measure, but let us put it in perspective. When the Labor Party came to power, the average stamp duty paid on the purchase of an average house in Western Australia was something like $5 700. The average stamp duty that those same householders are paying under the current regime is nearly $20 000. Whilst it is good to see that figure of nearly $20 000 going down to a bit over $17 000, that figure is still a far cry from the $5 700 that this government previously collected from the average house sale in Western Australia. Although we welcome relief, this chart demonstrates that there is almost no relief in the budget, and therefore we do not applaud the government too much. In fact, I am surprised that business has not made a bit more of the fact that the stamp duty relief applies only to householders. We welcome the fact that householders have been rewarded, but the government might have looked at providing some business incentive in this budget. It obviously feels that it can milk business in Western Australia to the maximum and it does not matter. It might be suggested that the government’s proposal to reduce stamp duty was particularly generous. If conveyance duty were removed from this process, conveyance duty would drop significantly and that would be a good thing for the government. While we welcome the conveyance duty relief for householders—and it is good to see some relief in the budget—conveyance duty per capita in Western Australia is still a significant expense; and here is a chart! I point out to members the 2007-08 conveyance duty as put forward by the midyear reviews of all the states of Australia. As can be seen, Western Australia per capita makes significantly more income in
2980 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] the form of conveyance duty than any other state in Australia. It is an embarrassing chart to show the people of Western Australia, because it shows that the government makes significantly more than other governments. What is the impact on the midyear review? The figure will probably still be higher if we look at the February review, but what is the impact of the budget and conveyance duty announcements under the current budget? In case there was any doubt, here it is on this chart; this is the change. Can the member for Bassendean see it from over there? It is a very small thing. It is hard to see. That is the change in conveyance duty when we factor in the announcements made last week by the Carpenter Labor government. Guess what? Even if we narrow this down to conveyance duty, Western Australians are still the highest taxed people in Australia, even with the tax cuts announced in the budget. As evidenced, we remain the highest taxed people in Australia despite whatever the government has proposed in its 2008 budget. Those charts are an embarrassment to the government and an indictment on its tax-raising abilities. That demonstrates that Western Australia has been taxed to the hilt. Despite all these processes and despite the fact that, even with the budget tax cuts, Western Australians are the highest taxed people in Australia, there is a long-term problem with revenue, as we saw before, in that revenue starts to flatline. This starts to define the problems faced by the Carpenter Labor government. I would like members to examine this chart because it defines the problems faced by the Carpenter Labor government. The chart defines the blowing of the boom, for which this government should rightly stand condemned. This chart shows changes in revenue and changes in expenditure over the life of the Carpenter government and into forward estimates. The blue line at the top represents the growth in revenue. As members can see, revenue between 2002 and 2006-07 exploded. Even during that period, the Gallop Labor government could not keep up with expenditure—it could not expend as much as it was earning. The Labor government chopped it around a bit, had a fair go and had a try at it, but expenditure could not keep up. Around 2007 things suddenly changed. Growth in expenditure for the first time in well over a decade started to switch and outstrip the growth in revenue. The trend is very disturbing, because although expenditure continues to grow—I will deal with that in a minute—growth in revenue goes down to virtually zero. Despite the fact that this government continues to tax the people of Western Australia at a level that has never been seen before, because it is the highest taxing state in the country and has highest taxes in the history of Western Australia, revenue growth will be significantly outstripped by expenditure growth. This chart, in a way that so few pieces of information can, defines the boom in Western Australia and the lost opportunities that have been wasted by the Carpenter Labor government. Mr M.P. Whitely interjected. Dr S.C. THOMAS: I will come back to the member for Bassendean. This is not the boom for the mining sector and not the boom for the private sector. It is not to say that the state will not still make money out of iron ore, natural gas, petroleum, nickel or any other metal, because the mining boom will continue. The individuals involved in those industries will still do very well and they will still invest well. My advice to people is to invest in natural gas because I think its value will continue to skyrocket. The private sector will continue to do extremely well in the state of Western Australia. However, what will change is the fiscal economy; that is, the economy as defined by the expenditure and revenue of the state government of Western Australia. That is about to change because the boom that is being blown is not the private boom that companies like BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto and Woodside are experiencing, but the boom that should have come for government services and government capital works that would define Western Australia and set it up for a generation to come. That is the boom that has been wasted, and what I have in my hand is the graphical representation of the Labor government’s wasting of the boom. Mr M.P. Whitely: It is reflecting an implementation lag. Dr S.C. THOMAS: An implementation lag! The implementation lag has nothing to do with the actions of the Carpenter Labor government. That is the problem. The implementation lag, at that stage, was probably the implementation of the Carpenter Labor government because there were no policies. Mr M.P. Whitely: It is the nature of revenue and the nature of expenditure. Dr S.C. THOMAS: It is not the nature of them; it is the nature of the Labor government’s inability to control its expenditure, which I will come to later because I have yet to get to that. Mr M.P. Whitely: Revenue response is automatic; expenditure response is discretionary — Dr S.C. THOMAS: Revenue in this state has come from taxation and mining royalties, which have grown, and commonwealth grants, which to some degree have grown. However, the opportunity has been squandered. Expenses are not related to that activity but the government’s inability to control them. This chart shows the definition of the boom, as wasted by the Carpenter government. This section is of concern, because we start to see revenue shrink. That is probably one of the major concerns. While on the subject of the chart, I remind members of the question that I asked the government yesterday, which was: how much can we
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2981 trust the Carpenter government to be able to continue to put downward pressure on expenses? It becomes a critical part of the argument. How much can we trust the Carpenter government, because it knows it will have a reduction in revenue growth to virtually a standstill because of the pay-off? Again, there are two ways in which to deal with this. Can the government put downward pressure on expenditure? Of course, the forward projections are that the Carpenter government will put downward pressure on the expenditure at least until 2011, when it might start to creep back slightly. The Carpenter government’s version is that, yes, revenue will start to dry up for the government and certainly there will be no additional growth, but the government will deal with that by driving down expenditure. The question I asked yesterday related to the previous budget of 2005-06. The then Gallop government predictions were that expenditure growth would be 4.1 per cent for 2005-06, and over the following three years, 2.8 per cent, 4.1 per cent and 2.1 per cent. The government said that it could restrict its expenditure growth at the end of the boom to 2.8 per cent, 4.1 per cent, and 2.1 per cent. It follows a trend. The government said that it could put downward pressure on expenses so that they would be as reflected in this chart. In reality, what is it? In reality it is the red line at the top of the chart. The reality is that in that year growth was 8.9 per cent, and the forward estimates were 9.2 per cent and for 2008-09, 7.2 per cent. Although the Labor government said it could drive expenses growth to that level, in fact it was unable to make serious impacts on it and it grew to the level shown on the chart. Here we sit in the year 2007-08. The Carpenter government has said that it would be able to drive expenditure growth down from eight per cent to four per cent, and that it would halve expenditure growth and that we should trust it because it is the Labor Party. The Labor Party said that it has not been able to do it previously but we should trust it because it will drive down expenditure growth. What an absolute furphy! What will be the outcome of this process of declining revenues and expenses, which the government says that it controls but which we know in reality it has absolutely no control over? Naturally, we will see a decline in surpluses. The chart I have here is drawn directly from the budget papers. This other chart accurately and truly reflects the boom, the fiscal economy in Western Australia and the fact that the Carpenter Labor government is in the process of blowing the boom. These two charts go extremely well together—the boom period, as reflected in massive revenue growth, and, sitting on this side, expenditure growth, which was unable to keep up during that period, starts to reflect in the massive increases in budget surpluses sitting in that same period. With the decline in revenue growth and the halving of expenditure growth—which is optimistically low—we can see that start to disappear at the other end of the chart I am holding; that is, it disappears at the end, which defines the fiscal boom for the government of Western Australia, thus defining the end of the fiscal boom in Western Australia. Once again this is graphic demonstration that the Carpenter Labor government is blowing the boom. A good question to ask is: why is the Carpenter Labor government blowing the boom? What would be the expectation if, for example, we wanted to extend revenues and therefore the boom? The issue we all face is how we drag the state of Western Australia into an extended boom? Where are the investment priorities that will extend the fiscal boom—not the mining boom, because that is a separate argument—for the state of Western Australia? Where is the investment in people and infrastructure that will extend the fiscal boom and result in increased production and royalties; an expansion that in turn will allow us to invest and reinvest? One place that investment should occur is in the regions of Western Australia, because most regions drive not only the mining and economic boom that Western Australia enjoys, but also the fiscal boom. To extend the boom, the government will have to invest in those things that will extend and expand the regions; something it has failed to do. I suspect that it will continue to get worse rather than get better, because this is not only the last of the budgets that demonstrates that the Carpenter Labor government is blowing the boom, but also one of the first budgets to demonstrate the one vote, one value priorities of Labor. The Carpenter government and the Treasurer have presented us with the last of the boom-blowing budgets and the first of the one vote, one value budgets! One of the reasons Western Australia’s fiscal boom is under threat is insufficient investment in the infrastructure needed to drive the economy of Western Australia far into the future. That is the shameful legacy that this house will leave the future leaders of Western Australia. This government is literally squandering a once-in-a-generation opportunity. It is squandering a once-in-a-generation fiscal boom. Before we move from taxation and general revenue to the general expenditure side of the books, I show a chart that is a good indication of the various areas of growth in taxation under the Carpenter Labor government. In this term of government, stamp duty on conveyances has increased a massive 270 per cent—we can take off a few per cent for the latest round of budget cuts—and stamp duty on licensed vehicles has increased a modest 140 per cent. Payroll tax has increased a quite stingy 90-odd per cent over that seven to eight-year period, and land tax is down. Taxation on insurance went up only about 50 per cent. The government’s own chart clearly demonstrates that the government continues to get its money from the only area in which revenue has significantly increased— taxation revenue. I raise a couple more issues about the revenue component of the budget. The loss of the GST revenue stream is a significant issue that faces the state of Western Australia. For many years—probably the majority of its history— Western Australia has been known as a mendicant state and a net recipient of commonwealth government largesse on the basis that it was difficult to provide services in the struggling colony. There has been long history
2982 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] of that; however, there have been a few times in our history when Western Australia, because of its vast areas and natural resources, has managed to outstrip the rest of the Australian states and when wise governments invested in the regions that I mentioned are drivers of the state economy and the future wealth and growth of Western Australia. There have been two major periods of such growth; first, the 1960s, born on the back of the work of Sir Charles Court, and, second, the early 2000s. I suspect that the then Gallop and now Carpenter Labor governments would like to take credit for the latter, but that growth was probably as much to do with the population explosion in China as with anything else. However, it was supported by the work of the previous Richard Court government, to the benefit of the Gallop government that succeeded it. They are the two major periods when Western Australia has boomed fiscally. I suspect that we will look back at the 1960s boom, very much led and enhanced by the work of Sir Charles Court and — Mr M.P. Whitely: Sorry; I know that you were not here at the time, but the member for Cottesloe, who was your leader at the time, was not predicting great things coming out of the era of Richard Court; actually, he was telling us that it was all doom and gloom! He was telling us that there was an economic crisis. Now, eight years after the event, you are describing a success to which your own leader did not subscribe to at the time. He thought we were all headed towards doom and gloom. He said that we would struggle to produce budget surpluses. Dr S.C. THOMAS: Did Richard Court go to Japan and sell natural gas? Did Richard Court lead the way selling natural gas to Japan and China? Richard Court did a significant amount of work and — Mr M.P. Whitely: Was the member for Cottesloe wrong? Dr S.C. THOMAS: Member for Bassendean, the point is that although the fiscal rewards for the work done by Premier Richard Court had not yet come to fulfilment, the groundwork was done by his government, and the Gallop Labor government managed to reap some of the rewards of that groundwork. Obviously, Richard Court was not entirely responsible; he did not make the boom in China happen. As much as some people might like Richard, nobody is capable of managing that! However, the previous Liberal government contributed to some of the regional wealth-building that has set up the state of Western Australia. Was the member for Bassendean not sitting in the correct seat before? Mr M.P. Whitely: No, I was. Mr P. Papalia: He was, but he has moved. He is not interjecting now. Dr S.C. THOMAS: Which is the member’s correct seat? Is the member for Bassendean in his correct seat now? Mr M.P. Whitely: If I go back to the seat to answer, it will be a different answer from the one I gave before! I can understand the member’s confusion. Mr J.H.D. Day: Member for Capel, don’t overlook the period of economic growth that occurred in the 1890s. Dr S.C. THOMAS: The member is correct about the 1890 gold rushes. However, I am afraid I will have to overlook that period, member for Darling Range, because I do not have a graph detailing the gold rush! My apologies, Mr Acting Speaker, I have been neglectful and missed a period of economic boom. To demonstrate a future problem facing Western Australia, I again refer to the budget papers, which recognise that Western Australia’s GST share will continue to decline. The Treasurer talks fairly frequently about that decline. He often says that Western Australia has a problem with declining levels in both grants and GST revenues. It is written repeatedly in the budget papers. I agree with the Treasurer. Western Australia does and will continue the GST grant struggle. Again, this is merely a reflection of our booming economy—that is, the general economy and not necessarily the fiscal economy. The general economy continues to do well. A member interjected. Dr S.C. THOMAS: I am glad the member raised the negotiations, because I am coming to them. Several members interjected. Dr S.C. THOMAS: I am getting to that. Members are engaging in debate, which is good; however, they are pre- empting me and I ask that they let me get to my point at the appropriate time. I agree with the Treasurer that the reduction in GST grants is a significant problem for the state of Western Australia. This problem reflects the fact that the Carpenter Labor government is blowing the government fiscal boom in Western Australia. While the economy of Western Australia, which relates to the mining sector, domestic consumption and all those areas, will continue to do well, the fiscal economy, the economy of the state government, will struggle with declining revenues in relation to expenditure. The GST situation will get worse because when the commonwealth government starts to apportion GST revenues, the Commonwealth Grants Commission process does not take into account the mismanagement of the fiscal economy by a state
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2983 government. The Commonwealth Grants Commission will start to make assumptions that because the economy of Western Australia continues to boom—which means the Western Australian government should be able to manage that economy for the good of the people—the GST revenue for the state of Western Australia will continue to decline far beyond the emergence of the financial problems inflicted upon this state by the Carpenter Labor government. Therefore, the general economy will drive down the GST payments for years to come at a time when the Carpenter Labor government’s expenditure will mean that we are in significant strife. It will drive up debt levels, start to increase repayments and start to have an impact upon all sorts of levels and potentially threaten our AAA credit rating. I will return to the AAA credit rating later because it is an interesting component. The decline of GST revenue is a significant problem. I was a little disappointed, but this is second-hand information from somebody else. However, I think we need to look at some sort of renegotiation of the GST sharing arrangements between the state and the commonwealth. The Treasurer and I agree that maybe some other form of GST arrangement is required or, at the very least, the commonwealth needs to recognise that the drivers of the GST revenue that it receives is not the fiscal economy of the government of Western Australia, but the general economy as it relates to the mining boom in Western Australia. If the commonwealth government were to recognise that, it could start to look at things that will drive the economy forward without impinging upon the fiscal economy of the state. One way in which we could do that is to invest in infrastructure, which would drive those major resource centres forward. I note with interest that the Rudd Labor government federally has announced an infrastructure fund of, I think, $22 billion. The numbers vary depending on which report we read. I presume the $22 billion will be set aside and invested, and the money generated from that revenue will actually be spent on infrastructure, rather than the $22 billion. It is quite a clever move on the federal government’s part; it is a move that John Howard has used and one that Kevin Rudd has now used. If that is the case, it is very much along the lines of the proposal for a futures fund that the member for Darling Range has promoted around the state of Western Australia. Therefore, this infrastructure fund does not represent a new agenda. If the commonwealth government wants to drive its revenues forward, it needs to look at the GST component and decide whether to change the way GST is calculated. However, the commonwealth government might want to retain control—nearly every level of government wants to retain control—despite the fact that we are supposed to have new federalism. New federalism means we are really chummy until we need to make the government look bad for an electoral gain and then we will kick it off, so people never trust that as far as they can carry it for the most part. There are two ways the commonwealth can increase its revenue; it can rejig the GST arrangement or it can invest in infrastructure. I was a bit disappointed when I looked at the Commonwealth Grants Commission’s “2010 Review of State Revenue Sharing Relativities: Progress report to the Ministerial Council for Commonwealth-State Financial Relations, 2007”. Paragraph 30 on page 10 of the report stated, in part — Because of the recent criticisms, we also asked States if there was interest in implementing any change in this area — That is, the commonwealth grants funding model — before the 2010 Review. There was unanimous support for maintaining the current methods including the process of basing relativities on five-year averages, at least until 2010. Now, 2010 really is not a long way away, but I would have thought that the state of Western Australia would have taken any opportunity it had to push for changes in the method by which the GST is calculated, even if it is only a pressure point, so that we could put some pressure on and start to put forward other proposals that might relate to spending on infrastructure. Any opportunity the state of Western Australia had to put pressure on that, I think, should have been taken and I am a bit sad that that opportunity has generally been lost. I hope that we will re-examine that. Mr P. Papalia: What year was that—2002? Dr S.C. THOMAS: No, it is the 2010 review; basically, in 2007 the Commonwealth Grants Commission asked whether everybody was happy with the current arrangement until 2010 and apparently every state said yes. I think we lost an opportunity to make an impact on the GST arrangements. Returning to the two steps, we have examined in some detail the revenue received by the state of Western Australia and the growth of taxation—the embarrassing level of taxation that this government has enjoyed and the people of Western Australia have endured. Let us look at fiscal expenditure. The government of Western Australia continues to spend at a level that shows no sign of abating. The growth of expenditure in Western Australia continues at a level, which shows no sign of dropping off, particularly when we consider the Carpenter government’s expectation to drop expenditure growth. Three years ago the government said it would drop expenditure to 4.1 per cent, 2.8 per cent and 4.1 per cent and realised 8.9 per cent, 9.2 per cent and 7.7 per cent.
2984 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
We cannot take the government’s figures too seriously when it says it will restrict expenditure. Therefore, this chart that I am holding of expenditure growth under the current Labor government will probably get worse rather than better. Again, this demonstrates the same problem that, despite high taxation levels, overall revenue starts to flatten out for a number of reasons and expenditure continues to climb. That is, again, the definition of “the blowing of the boom”. The result of that will naturally be an increase in public debt. The red line on the chart I am holding is the government’s self-imposed cap of 47 per cent net debt to revenue ratio. Of course, the government starts to move into the forward years because of its inability to control its own expenditure and its flattening revenue component. Naturally, the government has only two options when it starts to have a flattening of or no growth in revenue. One is to reduce expenditure, which the Carpenter Labor government seems incapable of doing, and the other is to go further into debt. That is what this government will do. It will increase the debt on all Western Australians from $3 billion to $4.7 billion in the coming year and out into the forward projected years, 2011-12, to more than $11 billion. That raises a number of levels — A government member interjected. Dr S.C. THOMAS: I will take the member’s question in a minute but we will keep going for a bit. The increase in debt raises a number of significant issues. The first issue is: how much does the capital works budget need to blow out by for the government to do one of two things? The first option is that the government will have to spend more money on its capital works program, which we know can only come through debt, and blow its self-appointed cap of 47 per cent on the net debt to revenue ratio. That will happen if the government continues to blow out major, or even minor, public works. The second option, and it is probably the far more likely option, is that this proposed capital works program, which is a 10-year long $26 billion program, will be extended over time. I think we will discover at some point that because the government cannot control its expenditure—but I do not think this government plans to move over its 47 per cent net debt to revenue ratio cap—projects that needed to come online will start to be extended out. That is the most likely outcome of this process because what is the average blow-out of a major project in the state of Western Australia under the Labor government? I will give a few examples. The cost of the Perth-Mandurah railway blew out by 40 per cent, I think. I will not use the Office of Shared Services as an example because I think that cost has blown out by 400 per cent, and it is climbing. Mr J.N. Hyde interjected. Dr S.C. THOMAS: I will speak to the member about that afterwards. I cannot even hear the member’s question. I am happy to take it after question time, member for Perth. Debate interrupted, pursuant to standing orders. [Continued on page 2994.] QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE FEDERAL-STATE RELATIONS — GST PAYMENTS, AND OIL AND GAS TAXES 244. Mr T. BUSWELL to the Premier: Premier — Mr M.P. Murray interjected. The SPEAKER: It is disorderly to stop a question being asked. I call the member for Collie-Wellington to order for the first time. Mr T. BUSWELL: My question is to the Premier. (1) Does the Premier recall, back in the heady days after the last federal election, talking about a brave new era of federal-state cooperation and the positive results that this would deliver for Western Australia? (2) Is the Premier aware that, according to the federal budget delivered last night, goods and services tax payments from the commonwealth to Western Australia will actually fall by $68 million over the coming year and that, as a result of this, South Australia will receive more GST payments than will Western Australia next year, despite the fact that there are half a million more people living in Western Australia? (3) Is the Premier aware that the federal budget imposes a new tax on oil and gas that will have potentially damaging consequences for one of the most important industries in Western Australia? (4) Is it not the case that, rather than delivering a better deal for Western Australia, wall-to-wall Labor effectively means that the Premier has given up standing up for the interests of this state at a federal level?
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2985
Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: I thank the member for the question. I acknowledge the presence in the gallery of the year 12 Carmel Adventist College students. I welcome them to Parliament House and give them my best wishes for the year. (1)-(4) As I recall—and my recollection is not too bad—the original GST deal was signed up by a federal Liberal government and a state Liberal government. A federal Liberal government and a state Liberal government delivered the model that has brought about this potentially unfortunate outcome, which we are working assiduously to try to — Mr T. Buswell: You’ve gone very quiet on it, haven’t you, Premier? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The Leader of the Opposition would be well advised to remain quiet himself, quite frankly. Mr J.E. McGrath interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Any time the member for South Perth wants to pursue that matter, he should let me know. I heard what he said. Mr C.J. Barnett: Threats across the chamber? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: No. I am quite happy to have a conversation with the member for South Perth. The member for Cottesloe should not sink. It was a federal Liberal government and a state Liberal government that delivered the current model for the GST. Richard Court signed up to it against the protestations, as I recall, of the state Labor Party at the time. What we are trying to do now is have the model changed, so that the Commonwealth Grants Commission can change the distribution model for GST payments in order that Western Australia is not disadvantaged. That is our objective. The last time the grants commission completed the review of the GST arrangements, it increased Western Australia’s base by $250 million as a result of pressure by the WA government. The grants commission is visiting WA in June as part of the next review to be completed by 2010, and we will be putting further pressure on it then to reassess the distribution model that potentially disadvantaged Western Australia to an extent that is unacceptable. To go to the broader point, does anybody seriously put the position that last night’s budget was not good for Western Australia? Does anybody seriously put that position? Mr B.J. Grylls interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: The regional partnership fund was something like $250 million over five years, was it not? It was used in a most disgraceful pork-barrelling way by the former federal government. That is a fact. Everybody acknowledges that. Even members of the former government acknowledge that. Here we go. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: What both sides of politics have been doing is trying to make sure that the federal government, no matter which political party is in power federally, gives some recognition to the fact that Western Australia needs assistance from the federal government for the provision of strategic economic infrastructure. This is the first time in a very long time, if not ever, that there has been any serious recognition of that fact. We have a federal government that has heard our pleas about assistance for the provision of economic infrastructure and has acknowledged that the provision of strategic economic infrastructure in Western Australia is in the national interest. Not only do we now have a situation in which last night an $80 million allocation was made to Western Australia for economic infrastructure—a one-off allocation of $80 million—in advance of the $100 million-plus potentially a year from the Pluto and Gorgon royalties, but also we have the opportunity to put our case for access to the $21 billion fund for economic infrastructure. Bearing in mind that Western Australia plays a disproportionately large role in the nation’s economic fortunes, I would have thought that we have a very good case to put in attempting to access moneys from that fund. Last night’s federal budget was a breath of fresh air. What we have, to the surprise of many of the critics of the observers of politics, is a federal political party that has pulled its head out of the pork barrel and made decisions in the long-term national interest. It is a federal budget that builds the nation. It is a federal budget that has its eye on the long-term benefit of the Australian nation and its people. It has been a long time since we have had a federal budget that we could categorise in that way. We have had a series of federal budgets, particularly the last few delivered by Peter Costello and John Howard, that were nothing more than giveaways to buy votes, and any serious observer of Australian economics and politics knows that that is the case. They let the country down badly in the pursuit of prolonged time in office. What we had last night was a completely different approach. We had a federal government that said it is going to invest in the long-term interests of the nation. It is going to have a $21 billion economic infrastructure fund, an $11 billion higher education and training fund and a $10 billion, I
2986 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] think it was—I might have the $11 billion and the $10 billion around the wrong way—health infrastructure fund, from which I have absolutely no doubt we will benefit. Therefore, does anybody seriously support the proposition that last night’s federal budget was not good for Western Australia? I will deal with the tax on condensate—condensate is effectively, in Western Australia anyway, something of a by-product of the liquefied natural gas industry. The tax on condensate, which most Western Australians would have no idea even existed, was put in place about 21 years ago as an incentive for the industry, if we take the time line back to that period. It is basically high-quality light crude. It burns cleanly. It attracts a premium price in the international market. The price of oil in the intervening 21 years has been as low as $8 a barrel, I think. What is the price of oil today? I think it is something like $120 a barrel, is it not? Therefore, an incentive was put in place 21 years ago to encourage people into the oil and gas industry in this state. In the intervening period, the price of light crude has been as low as $8 to $10 a barrel. Today it is in excess of $120 a barrel. Does anybody seriously believe that anywhere in the world oil companies require those sorts of tax exemptions to encourage them into the industry? The door is being knocked down by companies wanting to invest in the WA oil and gas industry. There we go. As far as the impact on the state budget goes, we have been given an assurance that we will be fully compensated for any impact that may occur as a result of the removal of the exemption on the condensate. I congratulate Wayne Swan and Kevin Rudd on delivering a budget that is about building the nation of Australia. What a turnaround to finally get some investment into higher education and training. The investment in the long- term productivity of the nation was absolutely ignored by the previous federal government. Members should look at the trend lines on spending on higher education and training under the previous government. It is an international disgrace that effectively the federal government of Australia withdrew from investing in higher education and training and scientific research. There has been a turnaround in this nation. It was brought about because of the anticipation that such a turnaround was possible. We had a change of government, in the first place, and it is off to a very good start. GOODS AND SERVICES TAX — WESTERN AUSTRALIA’S SHARE 245. Mrs C.A. MARTIN to the Treasurer: Would the brilliant Treasurer explain the reduction in Western Australia’s share of goods and services tax and what is being done to help alleviate this problem? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: It is interesting to see that opposition members, after seven long years, have at last discovered that there is an issue with Western Australia’s share of the goods and services tax. Have they not been listening to the speeches that are given in this place, have they not been paying attention in question time, have they not read the press releases and have they not read the budget speeches? We have been raising this issue year after year and making proper submissions nationally to get this issue addressed. It is amazing that right now the Leader of the Opposition, after seven years of being mute on this issue, would at last — Mr G. Snook: He’s not been here that long. Mr E.S. RIPPER: His colleagues were here seven years ago and they include people who were in the cabinet that signed up to this deal. It was Richard Court, as Premier, who signed up to this deal, and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, the member for Warren-Blackwood and the member for Darling Range were members of the cabinet that signed that deal. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the members for Warren-Blackwood and Darling Range to order. Mr E.S. RIPPER: They have to bear responsibility for the consequences. Although the Leader of the Opposition, I am reminded, has been in this place for only a very short time—and does it not show—his organisation has remained mute on this issue for the past seven years. As I have said in this house in the past, the figures are quite disturbing. If our economy continues to outperform the economies of the other states, by 2011-12 we can expect, with 10.3 per cent of the nation’s population, to receive 6.2 per cent of the GST. What are we doing about it? An amount of $6 billion is being taken out of our finances and given to other states. It has to be recognised that $6 billion given to other states is a powerful barrier to reform. Nevertheless, there are avenues for us to secure a better deal for Western Australia. For example, the Commonwealth Grants Commission is reviewing its methodology. From our point of view, there is an error in its methodology because it does not take sufficient account of the infrastructure costs of securing the development that we are currently enjoying. If the Commonwealth Grants Commission took more account of our infrastructure needs, there would be a better deal for Western Australia. We are in there vigorously pursuing that issue. The last time that we vigorously pursued that issue was at the time of the last review, out of which we got an additional $250 million for Western Australia in annual GST share.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2987
The second way in which we can benefit is by direct commonwealth investment in our infrastructure. Unlike the Howard government, the Rudd federal Labor government has listened to our arguments on this issue. It has already said that there will be a Western Australian infrastructure fund, using the more than one-third rule, and an amount of $80 million was allocated to WA infrastructure in this financial year’s federal budget. Several members interjected. Mr E.S. RIPPER: I think the Deputy Leader of the Opposition mentioned the Perth-Bunbury highway. Commonwealth funding of $160 million has been brought forward in the federal budget for the Perth-Bunbury highway and $35 million for the Harvey Water pipe project. We could not get that money out of the Howard government. It had billions of dollars set aside for water, and it would not give anything to Western Australia. However, the new federal government has responded to that issue. The important thing about last night’s federal budget is that $40 billion has been set aside in infrastructure funds—for economic, health and education infrastructure. I expect that Western Australia will get much more than its population share of those infrastructure funds because of this state’s importance to the national economy. It makes sense from a national perspective to invest significantly in Western Australia because it is the fastest growing state, the powerhouse of the nation in export terms, and if the nation invests in Western Australia, there will be a better return to the nation as a whole than from investment in slower growing states. When a federal government sets aside $40 billion for infrastructure and one of the state’s infrastructure investment will return a huge benefit to the nation and that state has a need for a huge investment in infrastructure, that state government can be more confident about its share of those funds. Mr T. Buswell: How confident are you? Mr E.S. RIPPER: I am very confident that we will get more than our population share of those funds. On the question of infrastructure, I listened to the shadow Treasurer who said that there should be more investment in infrastructure. I would like to know how he proposes to fund it. The Leader of the Opposition objected to increases in debt to fund the infrastructure program. If the infrastructure program is not funded from debt, the surplus must be used. However, last year the Leader of the Opposition described the surplus as obscene. Members opposite speak with forked tongue on these issues. ROYAL FLYING DOCTOR SERVICE — COMMENTS BY MINISTER FOR HEALTH 246. Dr K.D. HAMES to the Minister for Health: I refer to the denials by the minister and the Premier yesterday that the minister had called the Royal Flying Doctor Service an interest group. I refer to the minister’s interview with ABC News on 13 May. After he suggested the RFDS was an interest group, the interviewer said — “Is it fair to call the flying doctor service an interest group?” The minister responded — “Well, that’s what they are.” I refer also to the minister’s disgraceful comments that $68 million over five years was an ambit claim when he, as the minister, should know that this amount was not put forward by the RFDS, but was developed independently, paid for and signed off jointly by the country health department and the RFDS. Would the minister apologise to the RFDS and to this house for yesterday’s untruthful and misleading comments? Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: As members are aware from the debate that took place yesterday, I was asked a question by a journalist in Albany and I made a general comment about the nature of the budget process. That comment is something that is common to anyone who has been through a budget and the opportunities that are taken to comment on the allocations that are made. In respect of the second point raised by the member for Dawesville, we are in the middle of negotiations with the Royal Flying Doctor Service to determine an appropriate level of funding to enable it to meet its needs. I do not intend to conduct those negotiations in the public arena. Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Withdrawal of Remark The SPEAKER: I am sure I heard the member for Dawesville utter an unparliamentary statement. I direct him to withdraw the statement that he made against the Minister for Health. Dr K.D. HAMES: I do not recall what I said. The SPEAKER: You indicated that he was untruthful. Dr K.D. HAMES: I withdraw.
2988 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
Questions without Notice Resumed FEDERAL BUDGET — CLIMATE CHANGE 247. Mrs J. HUGHES to the Minister for the Environment: Would the minister explain to the house how the Rudd government budget announcement yesterday will help Western Australian communities respond to climate change and protect the Western Australian environment for future generations? Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN replied: I thank the member for Kingsley for the question. I congratulate the member for Kingsley for her organisation of the Kingsley Energy and Sustainability Expo, which was held last weekend. It was a very successful community event that focused on what this government, and now the federal Rudd government, is very keen to do in engaging community with information and real practical measures to address the climate change challenge. Congratulations to the member for Kingsley. It is an exercise that many members could undertake in the future. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN: Is it not very sad that we start hearing wailing from members opposite, because last night’s federal budget clearly showed that at last this nation has federal leadership that is challenging climate change head-on. The state government can now work hand in hand with the federal government to ensure that the challenge of climate change is addressed into the future. During the 11 years that the federal Liberal Party was in power it was dragged screaming to understand that climate change was a challenge that Australia faced. It was only in the dying months of government that former Prime Minister Howard decided that it was an issue. Quite clearly, the federal budget will complement a range of measures that the state government has already introduced, particularly the $100 million Premier’s climate change action statement. Last night’s announcement means that we will have complementary measures with those of the states and territories to address climate change at the community and individual levels. Green loans of up to $10 000 will be available to families to pay for energy and water-saving measures in the home; there will be $500 rebates — Dr G.G. Jacobs interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Roe to order for the first time. Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN: — for landlords to install insulation in rental properties. Other measures include the One Stop Green Shop environmental resource for schools, businesses and families and an extension of the 10- star energy efficiency rating scheme to assist consumers in making energy-efficient choices when buying household goods and electronic equipment. There will also be $25 million in increased funding for solar power rebates, which will reduce the cost of installing solar panels on homes, and a commitment to make every Australian school a solar school. That commitment builds on the Premier’s climate change action statement, which expands the number of schools involved in the Solar Schools program. These measures, as well as others, were announced last evening. Now that Australia has the national leadership that we have begged for over the last 11 years, it is being delivered a national framework to address climate change, a framework that is focused on working with the states and territories to deliver on a whole range of programs. This means that Australia can now regard itself as an international leader on addressing the threat that climate change brings to all communities. Several members interjected. Mr D.A. TEMPLEMAN: These measures are in contrast to what was invested in public transport when the Liberal Party was in power for eight years—zip! It did not build one centimetre of rail for the public transport system, which shows that it had very little innovation. The partnership between state and federal leadership is very strong. I look forward—as this state government does—to working with Penny Wong, Peter Garrett and the Rudd government to continue to deliver quality programs that reduce energy costs, reduce the reliance on fossil fuels, and reduce the carbon footprint of families and individuals. It was a great announcement by the federal government last night, and the state government will work hand in hand with that government to make a real difference in addressing climate change into the future. Dr G.G. Jacobs interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the member for Roe to order for the second time. BHP TAKEOVER BID OF RIO TINTO — STAMP DUTY 248. Mr B.J. GRYLLS to the Treasurer: Given that many Western Australians are watching with interest BHP Billiton’s takeover bid for Rio Tinto, a deal currently pitched at more than $180 million, I ask —
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2989
(1) Will the Treasurer confirm that he has sought to clarify the state’s position on stamp duty that might be applicable to this deal; and, if not, why not? (2) Has the Treasurer asked the appropriate agency to examine the deal to ascertain the amount of stamp duty that might be applicable; and, if not, why not? Mr E.S. RIPPER replied: (1)-(2) The first point I make is that I do not investigate the individual circumstances of particular taxpayers. It would be contrary to the law of this state for me to inquire into BHP Billiton’s tax circumstances—or indeed Rio Tinto’s tax circumstances—without the written consent of those taxpayers. I make it very clear that I do not break the law. I respect the independence of the Commissioner of State Revenue, and I respect the confidentiality of particular taxpayers’ circumstances. Regarding those commercial matters that the member referred to: when and if the takeover bid happens, if it is at all subject to state tax law, the Office of State Revenue and the Commissioner of State Revenue will act independently in making any assessment. WATER PROJECTS — FEDERAL FUNDING 249. Mr A.D. McRAE to the Minister for Water Resources: My question is to the record-setting Minister for Water Resources — Several members interjected. Mr A.D. McRAE: April was a record; we have never had so much rain. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr A.D. McRAE: Minister, since the election of the Rudd Labor government has there been a change in Canberra’s attitude to funding water projects in Western Australia? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: I thank the member very much for his question. The answer is yes, we have seen a very welcome change in the federal government’s attitude to Western Australia’s water funding. When the Howard government was in power, it handed out hundreds of millions of dollars all around Australia. Western Australia got a few crumbs for its water projects. What really irked was that former Prime Minister Howard and former federal water minister Turnbull mentioned Harvey Water as an example of what Western Australia was doing about water resources in speeches in other parts of Australia, yet the federal government did not give us a single dollar towards it—not a single dollar! When Kevin Rudd was Leader of the Opposition, he promised WA $49 million, and last night’s federal budget included a first payment of $35 million towards the Harvey water trade, with a clear commitment to continue with that full funding to help deliver Harvey water into the integrated water supply scheme. There has been a very clear and marked difference with the change of federal government. The federal Labor government recognises Western Australia and, based on last night’s budget, I am very confident that the other commitments for funding made to water projects in Western Australia will be delivered. It certainly makes a fantastic change to have a government in Canberra, the Rudd government, recognise the Harvey water trade as not only significant to Western Australia, but also as a hallmark project for the whole of Australia, and for it to be willing to put the money up and work with the Carpenter state government to deliver real benefits to the people of Western Australia. STATE BUDGET — AGRICULTURE AND FOOD 250. Mr G. SNOOK to the Premier: Like all members in this chamber, the Premier listened to the Treasurer’s budget speech last Thursday when, for the second consecutive year, the Treasurer failed to recognise the agricultural industry; in fact, he never mentioned the word “agriculture” once. (1) Is it not a fact that the government, as evidenced by the Treasurer’s speech, views agriculture and food production in Western Australia as being of scant consequence? (2) Does the government see far more importance in building museums and stadiums than ensuring WA farmers stay in business? (3) Why was there no real percentage increase allocated for agriculture in the budget? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(2) No.
2990 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: To continue — (3) Has there ever been in Western Australia a more knowledgeable and/or better Minister for Agriculture and Food than the current one? Several members interjected. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Has there? Mr A.D. McRae: No chance! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Exactly! As far as I am aware, there has not been a better or more competent Minister for Agriculture and Food in the state’s history. To buttress my view on that, when I meet with representative bodies and the minister is with me, the recognition he is afforded is quite apparent. He knows more about agriculture than most people in agriculture are ever likely to know. That is a fact. There we go! Far from agriculture being an area for which we do not have a high regard, it is quite the contrary; we have produced the best Minister for Agriculture and Food in years. Actually — Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Never mind. The answers to the first two parts of the question are no and no. What was the third part of the question? Mr G. Snook: Why won’t you allocate a real increase? There’s no real increase, Premier. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I would have thought that spending on vital state infrastructure and once-in-a-century projects, such as the Museum, would be in the interests of all Western Australian people, including those who live in agricultural areas, or perhaps the member thinks differently, does he? Mr G. Snook: You would agree, Premier, wouldn’t you, that food plays a fairly important role in people’s lives? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I would find it hard to disagree with that comment. Perhaps the member who asked the question is of the view that people in agricultural areas are not interested in the state having a world-class museum. Mr G. Snook: I didn’t say that. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Perhaps he is of the view that they do not want one built. Mr G. Snook: I’m asking you, Premier, where your priorities lie. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: My priorities lie with the best interests of the Western Australian people. Mr G. Snook: Including people in rural areas who produce your food? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Certainly; no matter where they are. Our track record on that speaks for itself. Mr G. Snook: It certainly does in view of the lack of money you’re prepared to put in. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I have done my best to try to categorise the question as being ill-informed. I have responded directly to the first two parts of the question. In answer to the third part of the question, we are investing heavily in all our regional areas and, as part of that investment, on the infrastructure that supports agriculture, including all the ports up and down the coast and the rail network. Speaking of the rail network, let me lift the lid off this one once again. What happened to the grain freight rail network when the Liberal and National Parties were in power? What happened to the grain freight rail network that was so important to supporting our agriculture industry? Mr G. Snook: Is that the same sort of thing that happened in the split-up of Western Power? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: No; it is nothing like it in fact. Mr G. Snook: Whom does the infrastructure belong to, Premier? Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Mr Speaker, it is very hard to have a rational, logical debate in this Parliament. It is impossible with the sort of logic that sits behind this question. Yes, we are vitally interested in the state’s agricultural success. It has been successful. There have been ups and downs because of weather factors, of course. We have generally had good recognition from the agricultural sector. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: I call to order the member for Roe for the third and final time and the member for Murray.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2991
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I have not finished yet! In agriculture there are good seasons and bad seasons. In politics members opposite are having a very bad season. NEW SCHOOLS — CAPITAL WORKS 251. Ms D.J. GUISE to the Minister for Education and Training: I refer to today’s official opening of Hocking Primary School. How does this new school fit into the overall capital works plan for giving Western Australian students state-of-the-art facilities in which to learn? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: I thank the member for Wanneroo for the question. Indeed, the member for Wanneroo and I opened Hocking Primary School in her electorate of Wanneroo. This new $10.1 million primary school will service the burgeoning population of the member for Wanneroo’s electorate. She has been very successful in securing new school facilities for her constituents. There has been a massive capital works program in schools all over Western Australia. It is a $1.41 billion program whereby more schools than ever before will be built all over the state. Currently, 26 new schools are underway. I have attended the opening of a number of schools in recent days, including the school in Wiluna, Cape Naturaliste College in the Leader of the Opposition’s electorate, and the school in Two Rocks in the member for Wanneroo’s electorate. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr M. McGOWAN: I would have thought it would be good news for everyone to hear about the improvements to the school in Karratha. We are in the process of building in Karratha the most expensive high school in the history of the state, with the two stages of Karratha high school, plus a new primary school in Karratha, at a total cost of $107 million. We are taking the benefits of the success of the Pilbara and its economy and giving them back to the people of the Pilbara to ensure that they have great education facilities. In addition, we are building in the member for Midland’s electorate the most expensive school in the history of the metropolitan area. The $63 million new Governor Stirling Senior High School — Mr T. Buswell: When will that be opened? Mr M.P. Murray: Member for Vasse, are you hopping from one issue to another? Mr M. McGOWAN: A $63 million new school will be built in Midland. That shows the extent of the government’s commitment. To conclude, I was a little surprised to see a report in the Bunbury Herald in which the member for Bunbury criticised the funding for schools in the Bunbury area. I thought I might provide a slight comparison. In the last year of the previous Liberal government — Mr T. Buswell interjected. The SPEAKER: I call the Leader of the Opposition to order for the first time. Mr M. McGOWAN: I was surprised by the member for Bunbury. In the last budget of the previous Liberal government, $4.63 million was allocated to education facilities in the south west. In the budget that was released last week, $29 million has been allocated for capital works. In Bunbury there is the new Manea college, the new Dalyellup secondary school, and the new Kingston primary school. Eaton Community College will cater for years 11 and 12, Newton Moore Senior High School will be upgraded, the Dalyellup Primary School has been built and there will be $5 million worth of TAFE upgrades, yet the member is complaining. DIRECTOR OF LIQUOR LICENSING 252. Mr J.E. McGRATH to the Premier: (1) Did the Premier or any of his staff provide an indication to the Sunday Times newspaper that he would be contacting or speaking with the Director of Liquor Licensing to seek his support for the proposal to implement midnight lockouts at pubs and bars? (2) If so, and that contact was made, can he explain what was specifically discussed? (3) Will he give an undertaking that neither he nor any of his staff or cabinet will attempt to unduly influence the Director of Liquor Licensing in relation to any liquor licensing matter? Mr A.J. CARPENTER replied: (1)-(3) In answer to the first part of the question, I certainly have not spoken to the Director of Liquor Licensing about this issue, although I might. Is it the case that the government must not have an opinion on licensing? Mr J.E. McGrath: Yes, but you can’t influence the director.
2992 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
Mr A.J. CARPENTER: No. In the third part of the question, the member asked whether I could give an undertaking that we will not unduly influence the director. Of course I can give that undertaking. What a preposterous suggestion! Mr J.E. McGrath: We’re just asking the question. Mr C.J. Barnett: You did a raid on the Sunday Times. It’s a fair call. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Who did—the Director of Liquor Licensing? Mr C.J. Barnett: No, you. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I did? There I was, baton in hand and sirens wailing, charging into the office of the Sunday Times and saying, “Hand over the documents, whatever they are, whoever you are, whatever this is about.” Does anybody honestly think that I cared about the story that the Sunday Times ran? I will tell members where I was. I think that at that time I was visiting the studio of the great Siberian wood sculptor Leontiy Usov, who, I must say, has a particular genius for which he is held in great regard in Russia, New York, Paris and London, although, apparently, he is not held in high regard here. I had never heard of him either. Not only is he a great wood carver, but also his bronze sculpture of Chekhov on the promenade on the Tom River in Tomsk is something of a national opinion provoker because it is a characterisation that does not sit well with some elements of Russian society. I was with Leontiy Usov when, as members opposite are asserting, I was supposed to have been leading the charge in the raid on the offices of the Sunday Times in Perth. I had absolutely no idea that anybody would be conducting such a raid. I recall when I was a reporter on The 7.30 Report that the police raided—if that is the word members want to use—my office and seized the documents that I was working on at the time. It had something to do with some scandal involving the government. Not for one moment did it cross my mind that Richard Court was in disguise and leading the charge in there, seeking to obtain all of the secret information that I had on various members of the then government. It is a ludicrous proposition. I accept that these sorts of silly assertions are made in politics. All sorts of ridiculous, defamatory rubbish is asserted in politics, but I was surprised when some of the most senior journalists in Australia took up this case and seemed to assert that somehow or other the Western Australian government had directed the police to raid the Sunday Times. Any person in a senior role in political journalism will know that it is completely and utterly unthinkable for the Premier or a senior minister of a government to pick up the phone, call the police commissioner and tell him to get going. Those days ended with the fall of the National Party government in Queensland, although I cannot speak for every other government. To return to this matter, yes—perhaps with my Salvation Army background I am tempted towards the thinking of the temperance movement and would like to see a crackdown on binge drinking, after-hours drinking and violence on the streets of Perth. However, I have absolutely no intention whatsoever of trying to unduly influence the Director of Liquor Licensing. This is a position that has been put to the Northbridge group accord. I cannot remember the exact name of the group; the licence holders of Northbridge. It is a position that has been put to them as one that might be worth considering and that the government would support in an effort to reduce the level of violence on the streets of Northbridge after midnight. I have a daughter who is now of an age at which she goes into Northbridge after midnight and goes to nightclubs. She loves it; she says it is amazing and exciting. If I can play a small role in making the streets of Northbridge safer for people of her generation and people of older generations, it should be part of my responsibility. It is preposterous, ridiculous, ill thought-out, ignorant and stupid to suggest that I would seek to unduly influence the Director of Liquor Licensing in this matter. Mr J.E. McGrath: Just checking up on you, Premier. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: Have we reached a point in politics at which members can make any sort of ridiculous, stupid suggestions and when they get a response say, “Oh, just checking to see if you were doing that or not”? Is that where we are at? Let me respond with this question: would the member for South Perth support the model for a lock-out in Northbridge? Mr J.E. McGrath: I support lock-outs, but not at midnight. Mr A.J. CARPENTER: I thank the member.
FEDERAL BUDGET — COMPARISON WITH FIRST HOWARD GOVERNMENT BUDGET 253. Mr P.W. ANDREWS to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure: Can the minister please inform the house whether Western Australia has received a better deal from the federal Labor government’s first budget than it received under the Howard government?
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2993
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for this question. Unsurprisingly, we have received a better deal. The total allocation for Western Australia in last night’s federal budget was $402 million. This is certainly the largest amount Western Australia has ever received. It compares very favourably with the amounts we have received over the past 11 years. Indeed, the average amount received over the past 11 years is about $250 million. Dr K.D. Hames: How much was it last year? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN: Last year it was $350 million, and that was a pre-election year. We have actually done $50 million better than that from the federal Labor government’s first budget. Western Australians can be very pleased that we have the attention of the federal government, and that it is prepared to invest in road infrastructure. The state government particularly notes the extra $170 million that the federal government has put into that very significant road, the Perth-Bunbury highway. The government also notes the federal government’s contribution of $14.7 million to another very important project, the Daddow Road rail grade separation project. This is a strategically very important piece of infrastructure that will allow the Kewdale freight terminal to work much better, and it will be a great outcome for both the trucking and rail industries. A further $3 million was allocated to allow the state government to carry out strategic road planning for the Perth airport in recognition of the fact that there will be a major shift of airport facilities. The domestic, regional and international airports will be co-located. This will bring with it a big transport challenge. The federal government has stopped treating airports as if they were some sort of UFO that it controls without thinking about the way in which they impact on the communities around them. The federal government has given the state government $3 million to start work on a strategic framework for the transport networks in and out of this new facility. It is all good, and the state and federal governments are continuing with the dialogues, particularly to get more roads into your area, Mr Speaker.
NATIONAL LITERACY AND NUMERACY TESTING 254. Mr J.H.D. DAY to the Minister for Education and Training: I refer to the national literacy and numeracy testing that is being held this week and I ask — (1) Will the minister dock payment to teachers who do not make alternative arrangements for students to sit the tests; and, if so, what is his explanation for this? (2) Will the government make some aspects of the results of the testing available publicly? Mr M. McGOWAN replied: I thank the member for Darling Range for the question. (1)-(2) I am pleased to inform the house that NAPLAN—National Assessment Program Literacy and Numeracy—is being carried out today, this week and next week in Western Australian schools, both public and private. This is an agreement reached between state governments and the commonwealth government to make sure we have uniform testing, particularly in the areas of literacy and numeracy, across all states so that we can have a national approach for dealing with these issues. The Western Australian government is pleased to sign up to this initiative. It will replace the existing Western Australian literacy and numeracy assessment and the Monitoring Standards in Education Year 9 testing that was put in place in Western Australian schools in previous years. To give members an idea of what this testing is about, the first point is to make sure that parents have an idea of where their children are placed vis-à-vis other students in the full cohort of schools around Western Australia and, indeed, around Australia, so that they know how well their child is doing on a national basis. The government thinks parents have the right to know that. The second point is that it is a diagnostic tool for teachers so that they will know where their students are at and whether they have students who need additional support and assistance. I refer to my trip last week to schools at Warakurna, Kiwikurra and Wingellina, and some of the teachers there told us that these tests provided assistance in working out where their students were at and which students needed additional help in the classroom. I think that is a good thing. The State School Teachers’ Union has had a 10-year objection to these tests. We took the State School Teachers’ Union to the Industrial Relations Commission last week over its position. It had put out a directive to the teaching workforce to not carry out these tests. I thought that position unfairly penalised students in public schools around Western Australia. It means that schools will have to struggle to cope with these tests. The government took the union to the Industrial Relations Commission, and the Industrial Relations Commission fortunately took the side of parents and students and the vast majority of teachers around Western Australia and agreed with the government. Most teachers are very sensible, reasonable people who want to have the right processes in place. That is the
2994 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
background to this issue. The government has come up with an arrangement through the Industrial Relations Commission that will allow schools to manage these issues in such a way that if teachers wish to swap classes at particular times so that tests can be conducted, they can be accommodated. That seems a reasonable arrangement. These are the nuts and bolts of this issue. It has been a huge victory for students and for the majority of reasonable teachers and parents around this state. BILLS Returned 1. Medical Practitioners Bill 2006. Bill returned from the Council with amendments. 2. Mining Legislation Amendment and Validation Bill 2007. Bill returned from the Council without amendment. APPROPRIATION (CONSOLIDATED ACCOUNT) BILL (NO. 1) 2008 APPROPRIATION (CONSOLIDATED ACCOUNT) BILL (NO. 2) 2008 Second Reading — Cognate Debate Resumed from an earlier stage of the sitting. DR S.C. THOMAS (Capel) [2.50 pm]: While all government members are present, I will review the chart that refers to taxation revenue as identified in the midyear review of all the government sectors. I will revisit the taxation relief offered by the Carpenter Labor government, because a few members missed it and I would hate them to again miss the opportunity to hear about it. Maybe I should start my entire address again! Mr R.F. Johnson: I would like you to go over a few things! A member interjected. Dr S.C. THOMAS: Maybe we should recap the tax relief of the Carpenter Labor government in 2008! As much as the minister for Riverton would like to think otherwise, this is an untimed address. Those members would have missed hearing about the growth in revenue and expenditure that defines the fiscal government boom in Western Australia, and about the demonstration that the Carpenter Labor government is blowing the boom. Under standing order 86(1) material such as charts and graphs may be included in Hansard, and I wonder whether the Speaker might allow me to have two charts incorporated into Hansard. I have about 16 charts all up, but I just want two to be incorporated into Hansard. Leave granted. The following material was incorporated —
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2995
Dr S.C. THOMAS: Mr Speaker, I thank you for your indulgence. Just for that, I will not go back and start all over again! Before we were rudely interrupted by question time pursuant to standing orders, we were discussing the capital works budget and the potential for it to raise the debt level in Western Australia to a level that threatens the government’s self-imposed 47 per cent net-debt-to-revenue ratio and potentially threatens, over time, the state’s AAA credit rating. I will sum up that section quickly. It has to be noted that the 47 per cent net-debt-to-revenue ratio is not a figure that will automatically tip Western Australia’s debt to a point at which our AAA credit rating is at risk. A number of factors impinge upon that, but 47 per cent is the government’s self-imposed limit, which suggests that after that we should be concerned. We were discussing the level of growth in, or blow-out of, the capital works budget that would drive the debt of the state to a point at which the 47 per cent net-debt-to-revenue ratio cap would be exceeded and the state’s AAA credit rating would be at risk. Interestingly, the Department of Treasury and Finance has given an indication of what that figure might be. When we look ahead to 2010-11, that figure works out to be just over $900 million. An increase in the net-debt-to-revenue ratio of $900 million—a bit less than $1 billion—over a total debt of $11 billion would threaten the self-imposed cap of the Carpenter Labor government and start to put at risk all those things we are concerned about. In a $26 billion budget, $900 million equates to a four to five per cent blow-out in the capital works process. A blow-out of that magnitude in the capital works plan for this state by 2011-12 could threaten the AAA credit rating if it exceeded the 47 per cent cap. That is the kind of concern that the state of Western Australia will have to face. What is the blow-out level of all works, major and minor, across a $26 billion capital works program? Mr E.S. Ripper: It is an assumption you are making. Dr S.C. THOMAS: The Treasurer is right; and I will come to that in a minute. There are two options. The assumption is, of course, that if we start to threaten the 47 per cent net-debt-to-revenue ratio, we will continue on that path—which I think is where the government was going—rather than change or alter some of the dynamics. There are two ways that that can be done: first, in effect exceed the cap or, second, extend major, or even minor, projects and the capital works budget process so that, with proper government control, that cap is not exceeded. The government may be faced with a couple of options. Will it extend the process to maintain that 47 per cent cap if capital works projects continue to blow out at the level that has occurred under this government to date? Mr E.S. Ripper: The assumption you are making is if revenue does not grow at all. Revenue might grow because the economy might perform better, or revenue might grow because other states’ economies might perform better; therefore, their take of our GST share is reduced. There are many moveable parts to this. Dr S.C. THOMAS: I agree with the Treasurer; I think he is right. However, he was not in the house earlier when we spent some time discussing the expectations for revenue growth as well as for taxation and taxation growth. I have to find the right chart to discuss revenue growth; I think I have had it tabled for it to be
2996 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] incorporated into Hansard. The Treasurer himself said that the expectation is that growth in revenue would start to flatline. In fact, the chart, which is now incorporated, shows the Treasurer’s predictions of growth in revenue — Mr E.S. Ripper: The member is saying that if these things happen, the state’s AAA credit rating might be at risk. It is not at risk on the current projections. Just as you are assuming that some bad things might happen, there is what Treasury would call upside risk. Dr S.C. THOMAS: I agree. The problem is that neither the Treasurer nor his department is predicting upside risk. Mr E.S. Ripper: We are not predicting the downside risk that you are predicting either! Dr S.C. THOMAS: That is the problem; the Treasurer is not predicting the upside risk. It can be expressed in a number of ways, and I found an example within the budget. The budget papers are very good, and it would be good if the Treasurer could convey to the Department of Treasury and Finance that they have improved this year. I think the department is on the up in the way it presents its budget papers. Mr E.S. Ripper: The department is rated very highly across the country for the quality of the budget papers. Dr S.C. THOMAS: I do not argue with the Treasurer. This is an example of the threat at the end of this process. Page 30 of budget paper No 3 refers to capital investment and states — The forward estimates include $334 million for the recently announced new major stadium at Kitchener Park (worth a total of $1.07 billion). This development will replace Subiaco Oval as Western Australia’s premier sporting venue, with a capacity of 60,000 seats and the potential for expansion to 70,000 seats. The new major arena is an example of the potential blow-out threat facing major projects. Although sold to the public as a $1.07 billion, 17 000-seat expansion over and above the current seating capacity at Subiaco Oval, the expenditure is not guaranteed to stay at that level. The budget does not state that the government will expand the new arena’s seating capacity from 60 000 to 70 000 seats. If one reads the budget papers verbatim, an expansion to 70 000 seats is not necessarily promised nor is it guaranteed. The opposition is concerned about the government’s capacity to deliver not just on the expanded arena project, but on a number of projects, all of which are put at risk by increasing levels of debt— levels which have to increase—because the government is unable to restrain its current general expenditure. Mr E.S. Ripper: Member, are you arguing that if you were the Treasurer you would cut spending and run a bigger surplus to fund the infrastructure program? Is that what you would do? Dr S.C. THOMAS: No, I am saying that a Liberal government would plan better and better manage the budget by controlling expenditure. Mr E.S. Ripper: Sure. However, if you want to maintain the same infrastructure program with less debt, it is necessary to run a bigger surplus. Is it your objective to run a bigger surplus? Dr S.C. THOMAS: The question is what will happen if the Treasurer starts to threaten his 47 per cent cap because the debt level has had to increase to $900 million to deliver these projects. I am the first to acknowledge that major projects will continue to blow out and that many, if not most, are not under government control but that the longer the projects are left, the more likely it will be that they blow out. Which of the projects in the Treasurer’s $26 billion capital works program will be delayed if the Treasurer’s self- imposed 47 per cent cap is threatened? Will it be the additional 10 000 seats for the stadium at Kitchener Park or are those seats guaranteed? That is the issue. Mr E.S. Ripper: Member, I think you are allowing yourself the flexibility to predict that some things not projected in the budget, but negative, will happen while at the same time you will not concede that your assumption is that nothing positive will happen. An example of something positive that could happen is a higher rate of growth than is currently expected in New South Wales or Victoria, resulting in less of a reduction in Western Australia’s share of the GST. Dr S.C. THOMAS: I agree that that is possible. However, if it does not happen the Treasurer is asking us to accept that his long-term financial policy—and the leeway he is allowing in his budget—is based on good news in the upcoming financials of other states. Mr E.S. Ripper: No. I am saying that on our projections, the AAA credit rating is easily retained. The member for Capel is arguing that some bad things might happen. I am saying, yes, they might happen, but that some positive things might happen. There is an upside and a downside to this argument.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2997
Dr S.C. THOMAS: I agree with the Treasurer. However, the most likely outcome—if one looks to history—is that major projects will blow out. History says it will be a blow-out. History does not support the Treasurer’s upsides; namely the sudden recovery of the New South Wales economy. New South Wales, a state with significant issues, is trying to flog off state assets at the moment, and that is an issue that I will come back to in just a little while. New South Wales faces more than just a significant problem with its rugby league state of origin result, and it is unlikely the state will turn those problems around in a big hurry. Although the Treasurer says yes, there is an upside and a downside, the most likely outcome, working on probabilities, is that the downside of a budget blow-out is more likely. The Treasurer must admit that budget blow-outs in major infrastructure projects are a near certainty. The question is to what extent those blow-outs will be. If they are small, I would applaud the Treasurer. I would say, “Well done, Treasurer. You have actually brought it in close to on budget. Well done!” In this state it is possible to bring a project in on budget. I understand that the Water Corporation’s first desalination plant in Kwinana came in on time and on budget. It is possible to do it—well done to the Water Corporation. Most government projects cannot manage to come in on budget. It is a different set of parameters. The most likely outcome does not involve rose-coloured glasses that will save the Treasurer if there is a downturn; the state needs to be prepared for the more likely negative outcome. The member for Perth and the member for Bassendean wanted to interject before, but they are no longer in the house. They may return later. Mr Acting Speaker (Mr P.B. Watson) will be pleased to know that we have got through the first two or three points of the plan. I now turn to the issue that I think the government has failed to explain adequately either to the Parliament or to the people of Western Australia. I have pursued this issue through this Parliament on a number of occasions; that is, to lay bare the government’s smoke and mirrors approach to budgeting and fiscal management. I refer to the government’s proposal to increase the price of electricity through Synergy at 10 per cent a year for a suspected eight years as well as its proposal to inject $780 million or $800 million—depending on which part of the budget one reads—into the process as part of the government’s community service obligation. In addition, the government seeks to reap the benefits of the good contracts for fuel sources negotiated in the state of Western Australia. The Verve Energy story needs to be exposed and I intend to take a little time to discuss what is happening in the Verve Energy arena. Frontier Economics was asked to review the electricity market and look at electricity tariffs, by which the Carpenter Labor government will set electricity tariffs through Synergy and back to Verve Energy into the future. Mr Acting Speaker — The ACTING SPEAKER: Members! I would like to hear what the shadow Treasurer wants to say. If members have something that they would like to look at, would they please take it outside. Dr S.C. THOMAS: Thank you for your protection, Mr Acting Speaker. The Frontier Economics’ “Electricity Retail Market Review — Electricity Tariffs” report was an interesting document. I presume that at the request of the government, Frontier Economics set out to determine a unit price of electricity that would supply a reasonable to strong rate of return for a private sector electricity generator entering into the market. That is a big statement. However, the Frontier Economics report—for what it is, it is an accurate report—set out to determine the economic rate of return required and the electricity price settings required to provide sufficient return to a private supplier that has to build a power station to enter the electricity market. Frontier Economics took forward a number of base assumptions on which it delivered the outcome by which the Carpenter Labor government will effectively double the price of electricity to the uncontestable market—that is, the mum and dad householders and small business—over an eight-year period. To justify its work, Frontier Economics based its work on three major assumptions, which can be found in the report’s executive summary. Frontier Economics stated in its assumptions that, first, gas prices have increased in recent years; second, coal prices are likely to increase to reflect the increases in gas prices, also increasing the cost of fuel for electricity generation; and, third, the price of infrastructure for the construction of power stations will significantly increase. Those were the three basic assumptions that Frontier Economics took on board in order to set an electricity price for Synergy. Effectively, that is what the government did. The third assumption is that capital costs associated with building a new generation plant in Western Australia are high, reflecting the broader economic conditions. That is right; all those things apply to a new power generation entity from the private sector starting from scratch. This is the hoodwinking of the public of Western Australia by the Carpenter Labor government once again because Verve Energy, the generator of the state of Western Australia, is not starting from scratch and the parameters applied in the executive summary of the Frontier Economics report do not apply. Gas prices in Western Australia have increased significantly in recent years increasing the cost of fuel generation. Coal prices are likely to increase to reflect increases in gas prices
2998 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] and will also increase the cost of fuel for electricity generation. Also, capital costs are high. Let us examine those points one at a time because this is a billion-dollar swindle enacted on the people of Western Australia by the Carpenter Labor government. We know that in 2005 long-term coal contracts were signed between Verve Energy—Western Power at the time—and a private coal supply company. In fact, a member on the government side said the same thing last night in his budget debate contribution. We know the 2010 to 2030 contract for coal was signed in 2005 and we know the price of that coal. The Premier said on 1 April 2008 — The new coal contracts came in at $30 a tonne compared with the old price of $65 a tonne. That is more than halving the fuel input price for Verve Energy. Western Australia produces about six million tonnes of coal a year. Basically, it is all used to produce energy; there is a bit of export—a few small ships, but they are on a trial basis and I will get to those later when I talk about my electorate—but, effectively, six million tonnes is used for energy generation of which about four million tonnes is used by Verve Energy. Verve’s last quarter report stated that 69 per cent of its fuel load was coal and 30 per cent was gas, leaving a bit more than one per cent for everything else, so, effectively, those are the two fuels used. What does that mean for Verve Energy? It means that on the current price of contracted coal, the four million tonnes cost $260 million a year. Under the new contract from 2010 the coal will cost $120 million a year. From 2010 the government will save $140 million a year on coal; it will save $2.8 billion over the life of the contract. During estimates next week I will ask how that figure has been factored into the expected return from Verve Energy and Synergy. I would like to know whether that net saving—a net income positive—of $140 million a year goes to Verve Energy. That will be very interesting because if Verve Energy is losing $1 million to $2 million a week—$100 million a year—by this one act, Verve Energy slips into profit. That is on an accrual accounting system, which, as everybody knows, includes things such as depreciation and the preparation for new plant—it is not on a cash basis. Therefore, where is the $140 million a year? Let us now look at the second assumption—gas pricing. The statement was that gas prices have increased significantly, again, for the private sector. The Frontier Economics report basically stated that it selected a price of $8 a gigajoule delivered based on media reports. Media reports suggest that in 2007 Santos signed gas supply contracts with Barrick Gold Corporation at $7.53 a gigajoule, with Jabiru Metals at $4.71 a gigajoule and Newmont Mining at $5.50 a gigajoule. Frontier Economics stated that it expected gas prices to go up, so it would use a figure of $8. Gas prices for the private sector are on the increase but what is happening for Verve Energy? On 24 May 2007, the Treasurer said — Historically, the coal contracts and the gas supply contracts that were negotiated in 2004-05 were very good contracts for Western Power. He probably took that from Verve Energy’s 2005-06 annual report, which stated — The other issue that is confronting the electricity system is the global increase in the price of gas. While it is fortunate that Western Power negotiated a long-term gas supply contract before the recent price spike in gas, other participants in the electricity market who will be using new gas are facing higher gas prices. The Frontier Economics report is based on a new private sector entity entering the market and being able to make a decent profit. The gas prices signed off by Verve Energy—Western Power at the time—in its 10-year plus contracts, which will extend well out past the introduction of price rises, will limit the price rise impact on Verve Energy. Where is the fire? If we look at the third part of that impact, we know that energy will increase in price. We can make a couple of assumptions: firstly, the 10 per cent increase in price in Synergy will result in a 10 per cent increase in the price Synergy will pay to Verve Energy for its power; and secondly, the uncontestable market in which the price rises will increase is somewhere between 30 per cent and 40 per cent. The Office of Energy statement says it is 40 per cent; Verve Energy seems to think that it is closer to 30 per cent, so let us pick somewhere in the middle. If we look at 30 per cent to 40 per cent of the power coming from the uncontestable market for Verve Energy, we are looking at a $1.2 billion to $1.6 billion increase in Verve Energy’s revenue over that eight-year period of price rises, if those price rises occur from 2009-10 for eight years at 10 per cent. I will come back to that because the budget states it is at least 10 per cent but it does not define it as 10 per cent. We have a report from Frontier Economics that states that we should set a price for electricity for Western Australians—and mums and dads will pay—based on the cost of a private sector operator entering the market, building everything from scratch and being able to make what is called an “adequate profit”. That is how Verve Energy came up with a 47 per cent increase in one year, which the government rejected, and then said it would increase the price by 10 per cent a year over eight years, effectively doubling the price. Therefore, Verve gets its pound of flesh whichever way—it is merely spacing it out. I do not know whether the government has the opportunity to do that. However, what is this government’s response? What is the net impact on Verve Energy? Let us take a quick look at it.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 2999
The income that Verve Energy can expect is somewhere from $1.2 billion to $1.6 billion over the eight years of the price rises. The Carpenter Labor government will also put in $780 million for what is called the community service obligation. Verve Energy will save $140 million a year over seven years—I have used seven years for my calculation because I do not know exactly when the contract kicks in—a total of $980 million; a net increase in revenue for Verve Energy of $3 billion over that eight-year period. What impact is that likely to have and how does the government justify its actions in relation to electricity prices, a community service obligation of $780 million and savings of $140 million a year on a power contract? An important question must be asked. It is a very genuine question because the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Western Australia said that we must drive the electricity market into a competitive market and we must let the private sector in—those price rises are essential. Throughout the 1990s the chamber of commerce came out constantly saying that we must drive down electricity prices; otherwise, we would lose industry and businesses to the eastern states because our electricity prices were too high. I find it amazing that 10 years later the major industry group has turned around and said we must drive up electricity prices! The other interesting component of this is that the government has set as its requirements the need to set a market competitive price for electricity looking after the profit margins of private companies—or did it? Did the government realise that if it took this path and set the price of electricity based on new international contracts for either coal or gas—which is astounding—it would make an absolute fortune? This government is in the process of doing that. It is salting away probably $2 billion of the $3 billion of additional revenue to Verve Energy over eight years to use as a future income stream. It is a hedge fund. What is being perpetrated on the people of Western Australia is the development of a hedge fund. Electricity consumers in Western Australia will be paying higher prices to develop the hedge fund for the Carpenter Labor government. Why? Obviously, because the Carpenter Labor government cannot control its expenditure. Moving forward from 2011-12, it will start to feel the pressure. Its revenue will be declining, and it will need a hedge fund to insulate itself from the increase in expenditure and the flattening of revenues, thereby getting itself into a fiscally embarrassing position. It is intriguing that the government is doing it in this way. It is a very clever move on behalf of the government. It has set this money aside, and it will build itself a hedge fund. It might be argued that the fuel prices that I have quoted are not accurate because more private sector companies might come into the regeneration industry. That is true; there will be more private sector involvement in the electricity market in Western Australia. The government has set a 3 000-megawatt cap on Verve Energy’s capacity, so growth in the market will come from the private sector. The problem that the government has is that the growth that it has announced so far in the uncontestable market is all coming from a private company that wants to generate electricity because it is a coal-producing company. Will that company be paying the international market price for coal, as suggested by Frontier Economics? Of course it will not. Will Verve Energy be paying the market price for coal? Of course it will not. The government’s argument that it needs to set the price so high is an absolute nonsense. This government is setting up a hedge fund. Mr J.J.M. Bowler: Are you saying that it is going to set up a hedge fund in the year before an election? Dr S.C. THOMAS: Yes. It is astounding. However, it is setting up a hedge fund. Mr J.J.M. Bowler interjected. Dr S.C. THOMAS: That is right. The government is setting up a hedge fund for itself. The evidence for it is sitting in the budget, but I will get to that in a minute. I would like to refer to a couple of other interesting bits in the report on which this is based. The first one is that Frontier Economics went into the marketplace to ask people for information about their contracts and the price of energy so that it could justify or guarantee the data that it was putting forward. The amazing thing is that no private company provided any data on contracts, pricing or any of those things that might impact on the information that would be needed to set a price. Therefore, it did not get any. The other thing that I will mention is that that report deals with actual cost versus efficient cost. Basically, the report says that the study sets out the price that was set based on the construction of new power stations, not the current cost of generation to Verve. That is written in the report. Therefore, this is not an exercise dealing with the generation costs of Verve; this is, as I said before, an exercise in setting a price that allows a sufficient profit margin for a new company building a new power station in the state of Western Australia. If it is the government’s intention—it is interesting, coming from a Labor government—to ensure profits for the private sector, well done. That is an interesting diversion from the Labor Party, rather than it concentrating on minimising the price impacts on local consumers—householders and pensioners—around the state. That is okay. However, what does it do for the fiscal balance books of the Carpenter Labor government? I draw the attention of the house to the budget papers. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr P.B. Watson): Order, members! It is very hard for me to hear, and I am sure it is very hard for Hansard to hear. Therefore, if members want to have conversations, would they please have them outside. Dr S.C. THOMAS: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. Members will be pleased to know that this is the last chart. What is the net fiscal impact on the budget and the balance books for the government of Western Australia? It is
3000 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] on page 33 of the Economic and Fiscal Outlook. In case members have not read it, I have a blown-up copy so that they can see it. The member for Murchison-Eyre was wondering about the turnaround in the fiscal policy and the hedge fund, and he said that the government would not set up a hedge fund in the year before an election. I have to say to the member that the government is in the process of doing it. Mr J.J.M. Bowler interjected. Dr S.C. THOMAS: Yes, that is what it is doing. Mr J.J.M. Bowler: Come on, please. You don’t mean that. Come on. There may be other reasons, but not that. Dr S.C. THOMAS: The proof is sitting in the budget. Probably the greatest proof is that the member for Murchison-Eyre is doing the defence. Mr J.J.M. Bowler: No, you haven’t got me. You can’t get me on that. Dr S.C. THOMAS: Public non-financial corporations generally made a slight profit for the government in the decade up to 2005-06. In 2007-08 and 2008-09, they start to make a significant loss, as evidenced in the budget papers. The figure goes down to about a $200 million loss. In the next year, 2009-10, it is back up to about a $400 million profit. These are not my figures; these are the figures in the budget papers. Why did the public non- financial corporations sector jump in one year from a $200 million loss to a $400 million profit—a net turnaround of some $600 million? Why has that occurred now, do members think? This goes to the nub of the issue. It actually says that in this budget paper. I will quote from page 33 of the Economic and Fiscal Outlook. Directly under the chart on that page, it states — Reaching a projected surplus of $581 million by 2011-12, the medium-term outlook for the PNFC sector represents a substantial improvement from the mid-year review. This is due largely to changes in electricity pricing assumptions from 2009-10 onwards, and the provision of Community Service Obligation support (for below-cost electricity prices) totalling $779 million over the three years to 2011-12. The budget papers themselves say that the greatest turnaround in the public non-financial corporations sector from 2009-10 onwards is the price of electricity and this community service obligation. It is a $600 million turnaround. The question from the member for Murchison-Eyre was: can members believe that the state government would have the arrogance to do this in a pre-election year? The answer is yes, because the government has done it, and the evidence is sitting in the budget papers. The question is not whether it has done it; the question is whether it deliberately meant to do it. Alternatively, is this increase in revenue just a sheer happenstance? Is it sheerly by luck that the forecast revenue for public non-financial corporations will grow by a net figure of $600 million in a year, based largely, as the budget papers say, on those two factors: the cost of electricity and the community service obligation? It is a significant issue that the Western Australian public has to face. It will pay significantly higher electricity prices. Before I am asked, let me say that I agree that there will have to be an increase in electricity prices. The taxpayers of Western Australia will be paying higher electricity prices in the uncontestable market. They will be paying out $780 million of taxpayers’ money in the form of a community service obligation. On top of that, they will gain nothing from the benefits of cheaper fuel prices compared with the contracts that the government has signed up. It is a $600 million turnaround, which the government, in its budget papers, acknowledges will result in additional revenue for the state of Western Australia. It is a hedge fund. I have referred to the uncontestable market, which is 30 to 40 per cent depending on whose figures are used, and it provides significant additional revenue for the state of Western Australia. At page 291 of the 2008-08 Economic and Fiscal Outlook is the following — contestable tariffs will move to cost reflective levels more quickly from 2008-09. The other part of the market will rise faster than the uncontestable market. How much additional revenue will the government make through Verve Energy? The government will have a significantly increased level of income. It has built itself, either accidentally or on purpose, a very nice hedge fund. Mr E.S. Ripper: Are you arguing that before the forthcoming election we have gone out and announced increases in electricity prices to establish a slush fund for the 2013 election? Dr S.C. THOMAS: Yes. Mr E.S. Ripper: It is an extraordinary argument. Why would a government do that? Mr J.J.M. Bowler: He is obviously conceding this election. Mr E.S. Ripper: He is obviously conceding the next election and he is worried that we are setting ourselves up to win the 2013 election. Dr S.C. THOMAS: I am worried that the government is hoodwinking the Western Australian community. Mr E.S. Ripper: Why?
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3001
Dr S.C. THOMAS: If it involved just the increases on their own, reflecting the fuel savings that will be garnered with the use of coal, would the member for Murchison-Eyre disagree that the government would save money on the coal contracts? Mr E.S. Ripper: Do you think it was politically good news for the government when we were advised that we needed to put up electricity prices? Do you think that we welcomed that? Dr S.C. THOMAS: It works in very well. As the government starts to hit expenditure problems in a few years, it will have this buffer. Mr J.J.M. Bowler: Your theory indicates that you are conceding the next election and worrying about the one after. You are accurate. Dr S.C. THOMAS: I do not care what the member for Murchison-Eyre’s election predictions are; this is all about this government’s plan to build itself a hedge fund. That is what it has done. I suggest to the member that he read page 33 of the Economic and Fiscal Outlook, because there is nothing he can say to disprove my argument. On three occasions last week I asked the Premier to give me some justification for the government’s actions. He could not do it. I would ask the Minister for Energy, but he does not know what is going on. There is no point asking him because he does not understand his portfolio. I think the Treasurer and the Premier know. I congratulate the Treasurer on a very clever piece of planning. Mr E.S. Ripper: It is unusual for a government to announce before an election massive increases in electricity prices. Dr S.C. THOMAS: For all the bluff and bluster from members opposite, they cannot disprove it. The proof is in the budget papers. The evidence is there. Mr J.J.M. Bowler: Think about it logically. Why would they do it? Dr S.C. THOMAS: The evidence is in the budget papers. The member for Murchison-Eyre will have the opportunity to make his contribution to this debate. In it he can give the house the evidence to prove that what I have said is not true. He can provide the proof that Verve Energy will not suddenly start making a profit in a year and a half. Will the government be better off by making more money out of Verve Energy? The proof is sitting in the budget. Mr J.J.M. Bowler: To describe it as a slush fund is illogical. Dr S.C. THOMAS: The proof is in the budget papers. We are still waiting for the Treasurer or the Premier—as I said, there is no point asking the Minister for Energy—to come out with the real figures. I hope that they will manage to do that in the estimates committee hearings next week. It would be nice to be given some justification. A question one should ask is: how big a profit from Verve Energy or Synergy is appropriate for the government of Western Australia? Exactly how much money does it need to make? Ultimately, with a $600 million turnaround on profitability based largely, as the budget papers indicate, on electricity price increases and the community service obligation, the questions the government should answer are: how are they factored into the coal price changes; and does it need to include $780 million of CSO? Can the Treasurer tell me that after three years of the CSO—2009-10, $273 million; 2010-11, about $250 million; and less in 2011-12—he will take it away if Verve Energy makes a profit in the second and third years? Mr E.S. Ripper: Do you think that ultimately people should pay the market price or a subsidised price for electricity in a world sensitive to climate change? Dr S.C. THOMAS: My personal opinion is that people should pay the market price for electricity. Mr J.J.M. Bowler: Surely that is also the policy of the Liberal Party. Dr S.C. THOMAS: It probably is. I have not at any point suggested that price rises should not occur. Mr E.S. Ripper: Are you arguing that the government has miscalculated what the market price for electricity is? Dr S.C. THOMAS: No. I am saying that the government stands to make a couple of extra billion dollars by using the market price to determine electricity prices when it knows—and it is palpably provable—that it does not have to pay the market price for inputs by which it sets the market price of electricity when it is sold. Mr E.S. Ripper: Are you aware that part of Verve’s cost structure is the necessity to run on diesel fuel because it has to meet peak load requirements? Diesel fuel at an oil price of $120 per barrel is extremely expensive. Dr S.C. THOMAS: I agree. Diesel and other fuels that are burned when they are needed comprise 1.7 per cent of the fuel load. Mr E.S. Ripper: What per cent of the cost load?
3002 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
Dr S.C. THOMAS: It is a bit higher than 1.7 per cent, but it is not an additional $2 billion worth of additional fuel over the next eight years. The proof is in the budget papers. Mr E.S. Ripper: Are you saying that Verve should be undercutting the rest of the market? Dr S.C. THOMAS: No, I am not. I am saying that this government will make an additional $2 billion of revenue, which will be beautifully squirreled away to be used at a time when the government is struggling with revenue versus expenses. It will be shoved back into the general economy at that stage. I am not saying that the price of energy should not increase. What I am saying is that if the price of energy increases, this government or the government that follows it will be salting away $780 million in a CSO, based on the fact that it will get back that money in revenues in the out years. That is the net effect of what the Treasurer is doing. I do not know whether he planned it. If he did, it is almost a stroke of genius. I am not sure that I should go that far. I suspect that he planned it. If he did not, he might have stumbled on it by accident. Perhaps somebody in Verve Energy planned it and said that it was the best way to go because an absolute fortune could be made. Mr E.S. Ripper: The fact that your argument leaves you, in the end, having to describe me as having had a stroke of genius shows the problem you have with this argument. Dr S.C. THOMAS: It is the only weak point in the argument so far. We are working on that. The evidence is sitting in the budget papers. Western Australia’s non-financial corporate sector will go from a $200 million to a $400 million-plus profit in one year, based largely, as it says in the budget papers, on a CSO of $273 million gained from increased power prices. That is largely the result. Suddenly it is a profit-making venture. That is the outcome the government has planned. That is okay, but the question then is: does the government need $780 million of taxpayers’ money? What is the government’s long-term plan? The hedge fund will not last forever. It will be a good income earner for a period, but then suddenly the government will be faced with the long-term problems of having to replace plant, and contracts will start to run out. If the gas price contracts for 2004-05 were 10-plus years, somewhere from 16 years or 17 years onwards—about the end of the price rise cycle—contracts will have to have been renegotiated and the prices will significantly rise — Mr E.S. Ripper: The member must think about his party’s lines. For a while the opposition was running “Verve Energy in financial crisis; disgraceful bailout” as the line. Now it is running the line, “Verve is a profit-making scam for the government; a way of hiding the money and bringing the money back into the system at a later stage.” Dr S.C. THOMAS: Yes. Mr E.S. Ripper: Those two lines are contradictory. Dr S.C. THOMAS: That is the stroke of genius, as I said before. Ultimately I suspect that if the government planned this process—which has been evidenced enough—the stroke of genius was exactly that; the government says that Verve Energy has a problem and it has to put some money into it, and the opposition’s natural instinct is to leap up and say, “You have messed up Verve; you’ve destroyed it,” so we reinforce its argument. The government wanted an excuse to put $780 million into Verve that it did not need to, and whether by accident or by design the opposition gave it one, or reinforced the one that it seeded into the minds of the opposition, the media and the public. That was the stroke of genius; the government got everybody else jumping to give it the opportunity to build the hedge fund and salt away a few dollars for the future when times are a bit tougher. I am amazed that — Mr J.J.M. Bowler: Who is to say the Labor Party will be in government when the money is there to spend? Dr S.C. THOMAS: Look, Treasurer — Mr J.J.M. Bowler: Are you assuming the Liberal Party will lose the next election? Dr S.C. THOMAS: If I am sitting in the Treasurer’s place and he in mine, I will say thanks very much. I am sure the Liberal Party will appreciate the additional revenue coming in at the appropriate time — Mr J.J.M. Bowler: What are you complaining about then? Dr S.C. THOMAS: We might have to be a bit honest about the process. The problem, member for Murchison- Eyre, is that in my opinion the process is dishonest. As the Treasurer, I would be making more money for the then Liberal state government, which would be very nice, but the money would have been generated in a dishonest manner. The honesty component has been lost in all the debates and amid everything that has gone on in Parliament. This is about honesty — Mr J.J.M. Bowler: Honesty? You are saying they are setting up a slush fund for three to four years’ time? Come on, you are kidding yourself! Dr S.C. THOMAS: The evidence is there, as much as the member for Murchison-Eyre might not like to believe it. The only question is whether it was intended or accidental. If members read the budget papers properly, the truth is inescapable.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3003
I am up to point four of 13—I have a bit to go! It can now be recognised that the Western Australian government has not been honest with the people of Western Australia about the bailout, and it cannot answer the questions of the opposition. Opposition members in this place asked questions last week, and the sitting week before that, and still they cannot get an answer out of this government. I hope the Treasurer is prepared to answer some questions at budget estimates, because we need answers. That was the story of Verve Energy. I will move to some more generalised comments. I have dealt with the government’s revenue problems and the problem of its inability to control expenditure, and I have dealt with the risks associated with the capital works program and the hedge fund it built itself with Verve Energy. I have some comments on specific areas of interest; the first is on the environment. What has been said about the provision made for the environment in this budget is generally true: the state budget does not recognise the importance of the environment or climate change in any significant form. The argument is that the federal government has responsibility for the environment, and particularly climate change. To some degree I agree with that. I would like to have seen more activity—not necessarily dollars—from the government on climate change. I will make a couple of comments about the federal government’s attitude to climate change in Western Australia. The Rudd Labor government announced a $500 million clean coal fund in the lead-up to the 2007 election, which was reiterated in the federal budget and which I was glad to see. So far, about $275 million of that has been allocated. In true commonwealth government fashion, $50 million will go to Queensland, $50 million dollars to New South Wales, $50 million to Victoria, and $5 million to the state of Western Australia, which is a significant problem for Western Australia. It will receive 1.7 per cent of the clean coal funds announced so far for carbon capture and storage, which is one per cent of the total fund. The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure likes to tell members frequently that Western Australia has 10 per cent of the population of Australia. We use five per cent of the coal used within Australia for electricity generation. If we had been granted 10 per cent of the fund, we would be getting $50 million; if we had been granted five per cent of the fund—that is the amount we use for electricity generation—we would be at least up to $25 million. We have been allocated $5 million so far. That is a problem for a couple of reasons, the main one being that the Garnaut report on carbon trading emissions states that clean coal technology is absolutely essential. The report states — There is potential for disproportionate burdens to fall on coal-based energy intensive regions, unless carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies prove to be commercially viable at an early date. Assistance to established coal-based electricity generators with early testing and deployment of CCS would be a cost-effective, pre-emptive form of structural adjustment assistance. The report also states that early assistance to coal-based electricity generation is essential. It further states — . . . in the absence of commercially successful carbon capture and storage (CCS), some coal-mining and coal-based power-generating firms in Australia would be negatively affected by the introduction of an ETS . . . The carbon trading scheme is due to be introduced in 2010, according to the Rudd Labor government’s timetable. Further in the interim report it states — Coal mining districts may become regions of stagnation and decline under ambitious mitigation strategies if carbon capture and storage (CCS) turns out not to be commercially viable even with high carbon prices, but regions of expansion and exceptional prosperity—possibly well beyond previous contemplation—if CCS turns out to be commercially successful. The Garnaut report states that if carbon capture and storage is done properly, the coal industry will flourish; if it is not, it may sink. It is a significant problem for WA that the Rudd Labor government has promised it a fraction of the money that it is delivering to other states and territories. One major reason — Mr E.S. Ripper: You don’t think that significant parts of carbon capture and storage technology will not be universal? Dr S.C. THOMAS: I was about to come to that, so thanks for the prompt. Some sections of carbon capture and storage can be universally applied; larger sections cannot. Each individual power station must be fitted with equipment that removes carbon dioxide and other gases; either scrubbers or electronic stripping, or however that works. That technology is available now, but there is a difficulty in installing it—particularly retrofitting it—to coal-fired power stations. The individual circumstance of each power station is different. The other major expense of carbon capture and storage is geosequestration. That process requires individual surveys on each individual potential site. That is, if Western Australia were to use Harvey ridge for geosequestration, its share of the $500 million clean coal fund would be used to research Harvey ridge. If Harvey ridge is not successful as a site, WA needs its share of the $500 million clean coal fund to research Perth Basin. If we do not have that money, Western Australia will start to sink. The coal industry in
3004 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
Western Australia is under threat. The Rudd Labor government must give Western Australia its fair share of the clean coal fund, or the future of the coal industry in Western Australia will be at risk. That is a key component. I have covered many areas that concern the state of Western Australia. I now turn to the specific issues that will impact on the south west and my electorate. There were a couple of good things in the budget, but a lot of things were missed out. There were some reasonable things for my electorate in the education budget. The development of Dalyellup Senior High School so that it incorporates years 11 and 12 is very welcome. That is a good government initiative. We agitated for it in 2004. Mr P. Papalia: How much money is that costing? Dr S.C. THOMAS: From memory, the whole project is worth about $24 million. Mr P. Papalia: That’s very good. Dr S.C. THOMAS: It is very good. That is for the whole school, not for the extension; the extension is part of that. I think $2.6 million has been allocated in the 2008-09 budget. I do not want to slag the budget completely and say that it is terrible. There are some positive things in the budget. That is a good thing. I was disappointed that the Donnybrook school missed out on funding for maintenance. That school is ageing rapidly and it requires significant investment, not just on the toilets, which the government has said it will do, but also on the designer technology and the arts buildings, which are Third World buildings that the government has once again neglected. The greatest deficit in the budget is probably in road funding for the electorate. South Western Highway is generally considered to be a death trap, and this budget does not adequately address the safety issues related to South Western Highway. Mr E.S. Ripper: Would you like us to borrow more to build more roads? Dr S.C. THOMAS: I would like the Treasurer to reprioritise where he is building roads at the moment and look at South Western Highway. Mr E.S. Ripper: Which roads would you cancel? Dr S.C. THOMAS: If the Treasurer gave me a pen and the budget and told me that I could rearrange it how I like, I would tell him which ones I would move around. The Treasurer sits down with his committee of four and says, “We’ll prioritise this up, this down, that sideways and that out.” If he wants me to take over, which is exactly what I want to do—I want to take over his job—I would be perfectly happy to do so. Mr E.S. Ripper: You have to get re-elected to Parliament first. Dr S.C. THOMAS: South Western Highway desperately needs funding for improvements. Requests for funding for the coalfields highway have come across the Treasurer’s desk every year for the past five or six years. The previous Liberal government allocated some money towards upgrading part of the Coalfields Highway north from the rolling hills through to Collie. Main Roads WA has asked for $20 million year in and year out to finish that project, but it missed out again. That is a complete shame. The greater Bunbury region scheme is interesting. There has been some fuss and furore about the greater Bunbury region scheme. Opposition members have said in this place that it lacks some resources, so I half expected some resources to be provided for the greater Bunbury region scheme. However, I was very disappointed. There were a number of disappointments for the south west in the budget, but another real disappointment is with the funding for the South West Development Commission. A couple of years ago funding for the South West Development Commission was sitting at $9.5 million, but it has now dropped down to $7.5 million, and in the forward estimates it goes down to $5 million. The South West Development Commission is not doing very well. Its capital works program in the 2008-09 budget is $50 000, which is down from just over $5 million in the 2007-08 budget. That is a 99 per cent decrease. Those figures can be found on page 912 of volume 3 of budget paper No 2. That level of funding is an insult to an area that provides 14 per cent of the gross state product. It is an absolute disgrace to have a significant drop in the funding for the development commission in that area. Mr Acting Speaker, you will be pleased to know that I am coming to the end of my comments! However, I would like to raise a couple of other issues before I conclude. The first issue is the then Gallop Labor government’s support for exporting coal through the port of Bunbury. The government announced that the new baseload power station would be gas fired. Of course, that caused some heartache in Collie. The now Minister for Energy wandered down to Collie and said, “Don’t worry, guys; we’ve got a $70 million coal rescue package, $10 million of which is from the coal futures fund and $60 million of which is to assist the port of Bunbury to allow trial exports of coal through the port of Bunbury.” What has happened to the $60 million for the port of Bunbury? Trial exports of coal are going out through the port of Kwinana. Why is coal being exported through
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3005 the port of Kwinana? It is being exported through the port of Kwinana because there are problems with capacity and competition at the port of Bunbury. What is the response of the government? The Treasurer can find out for me. I will ask this question during the budget estimates hearings. Has the government asked for financial contributions from companies that want to export coal through the port of Bunbury; and, if so, how much will those contributions be? He does not know. That is not the Treasurer’s area, so it is probably unfair of me to ask him that question, and I accept that. However, I will ask the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure whether the government’s promised $60 million rescue package for coal has disappeared and whether the Carpenter Labor government is asking for financial contributions from companies that might like to export to help subsidise activity in the port. Coal export activity at the port might have helped to underwrite additional activity and revenue at the port of Bunbury. That is another disgraceful example of a broken promise and a broken commitment to the people of the south west. My final point about my electorate comes from the comments made last night by one Labor member of Parliament when he said that my office had apparently rung a company called United Constructions Pty Ltd to try to push for Bunbury people to get jobs with that company in areas around Collie. That is an absolute furphy. It is not the first absolute furphy from that source, and it probably will not be the last. However, let me put on the record that a constituent of mine who lives between Donnybrook and Collie—for those who do not know geography, that is in the opposite direction from Bunbury—was seeking, I think, a trades assistant job with United Constructions and was told that he would not be employed because, under a deal struck with the unions, people who live more than 50 kilometres from the site must be paid a travel allowance and this made it uneconomical to employ them. I am not complaining about that. However, the problem was that this person lived within 50 kilometres and was not required to be paid the additional amount and ended up getting a job. For that Labor member of Parliament to make absolutely vague and untrue assertions is a sad reflection of the state of honesty and truth in the Parliament of Western Australia. I raised that issue earlier with the member for Murchison-Eyre. It is a sad state that the Western Australian Parliament has reached. The environment has missed out in the budget. Many other areas have also missed out. I know that public order issues could have been better supported. There are some very good things in this budget. I applaud the Treasurer’s additional spending on child protection. It is a great initiative. It is not all bad. I will make a final comment about the capital works budget. The capital works budget for the south west of Western Australia is mainly for the provision of water, sewerage and electricity. The government of Western Australia is merely a bank, because ultimately the consumers of Western Australia will pay for those initiatives in electricity prices, water rates and sewerage rates. If we remove from the capital works budget for the south west of Western Australia those sections that the consumer will pay for—the areas on which the government has boasted of having spent $500 million—there is almost nothing left. It is a smoke-and-mirrors approach that betrays this government’s attitude to budgeting. Debate interrupted, pursuant to standing orders. [Continued on page 3023.] ACTS AMENDMENT (WESTERN AUSTRALIA DAY) BILL 2008 Second Reading MR C.J. BARNETT (Cottesloe) [4.01 pm]: I move — That the bill be now read a second time. The purpose of this bill is to rename Foundation Day, which is observed on 1 June each year, as Western Australia Day and in so doing amend the Public and Bank Holidays Act 1972 and the Minimum Conditions of Employment Act 1993. The first European settlers, under the command of Captain James Stirling, RN, Lieutenant Governor, arrived from Britain to settle the Swan River Colony on 1 June 1829. Foundation Day is an important day for all Western Australians and is celebrated with a public holiday on the first Monday in June. Now, almost 180 years after European settlement, it is in my view appropriate for Foundation Day to become known as Western Australia Day. The story of Western Australia’s European settlement began in 1826 when the British, under the command of Major Edmund Lockyer, established an army outpost at King George Sound on the south coast. Before that Western Australia had been reached by the Dutch, French, Portuguese and British, but explorers at the time found the land too harsh and left it to the Indigenous people. In 1827 James Stirling led explorations of the Swan River and reported back to Britain of favourable conditions, recommending that a colony be established in the area. Britain agreed and began sending ships carrying the first settlers. The military, aboard HMS Challenger, arrived ahead of Captain Stirling’s civilian vessel Parmelia. Later, HMS Sulphur arrived with a contingent of an army garrison.
3006 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
The colonists first sighted the Western Australian coastline on 1 June 1829, a harsh winter’s day; they were unable to set foot on the land. Despite this setback, 1 June has always been regarded as Foundation Day because it marked the end of the settler’s sea voyage from Britain. Today, Western Australia is a state of more than two million people. There are some 200 nationalities, at least 170 different languages spoken and more than 100 different faiths practised. We commemorate Foundation Day to mark a historic event; that is important. Interestingly, South Australia is the only other state to do so, with a public holiday to remember its proclamation on 28 December. At a national level, Australia Day has become a festival about Australia’s history and what it means to be Australian. It has grown in significance since the bicentennial in 1988 to become a truly national day of celebration. With the proposed Western Australia Day, we have the opportunity to broaden 1 June from simply remembering one day in history to a celebration for all who have made Western Australia their home. It is also a day to genuinely acknowledge Indigenous people as the original inhabitants and to recognise 40 000 years of Indigenous history. In my view, it would make Western Australia Day a contemporary celebration of our state and its people. I would be delighted if 1 June 2009 were to be known as Western Australia Day. I trust that members of both houses will appreciate the symbolic importance of this bill by supporting its passage through Parliament. I commend the bill to the house. Debate adjourned, on motion by Mr R.F. Johnson. THE CLIFFE — REMOVAL FROM REGISTER OF HERITAGE PLACES Motion MR C.J. BARNETT (Cottesloe) [4.04 pm]: I move — That this house resolves, pursuant to section 54(7) of the Heritage of Western Australia Act 1990, that the property known as The Cliffe, which was permanently entered into the Register of Heritage Places on 19 July 2005, notice of which appears in the Government Gazette of 29 July 2005 at page 3365, should be removed from the Register of Heritage Places. I spoke some time ago through a grievance debate on the issue of The Cliffe and I do not propose to waste the time of the house by going through that again, although I will take two or three minutes to remind members of the circumstances. The Cliffe is a rambling timber home that was built in two stages between 1894 and 1898 by an engineer, Neil McNeil. It was built as a display home to demonstrate that timber houses could be built in Peppermint Grove. At the time Peppermint Grove had placed a ban on building with timber. McNeil was a timber merchant and obviously had an interest in displaying the merits of timber housing. The house has a long history. Part of the property was subdivided in 1915 to create 20 lots, which were sold. The property was subsequently sold by Neil McNeil’s wife following his death. It was then owned by an industrialist, Sir Lance Brisbane. In 1962 the property was further subdivided into six lots by a group called Cotswold Investments. A Dr Harold McComb then owned the house. Sharon and Mark Creasy purchased the house for $2.7 million in 1995 and they are the current owners of the house; I think the house is in the name of Sharon Creasy. At the time the Creasys purchased the house there was no mention of any municipal or state heritage listing of the property. They bought the house believing there was no heritage issue, with the intention of demolishing the house and developing their home on that site. It has had a long history, covering successive governments and ministers, and I think it is a history that now needs to be brought to a conclusion. Without going through this again, it was the Creasys’ intention to develop the property, and they would still like to do that. That would require the demolition of the existing timber structure. Shortly after the Creasys purchased the house, the Heritage Council took an interest in the property, and it was placed on the heritage list on an interim basis. That situation has continued for quite some time. In 2004, after many disputes and some nine years after the Creasys purchased the site, the Heritage Council placed the house on permanent heritage registration. There have been legal disputes and actions through the Supreme Court, and the Creasys estimate that they have spent something like $225 000 in legal costs on this property. In fairness to the government and to the Creasys, every effort has been made to find a perfect solution, if one could be found. Investigations were made into whether the house could be relocated. That is effectively impractical, and the bottom line is that no-one particularly wants it; certainly not the local governments of the area. The cost of restoring the property has been estimated at $2.8 million. People might say that the state could purchase the property. Again, that has been looked at over the years, but I do not think anyone could justify the expense of restoration or purchase. There are many far more deserving and important heritage issues in Western Australia, bearing in mind that this is a private property and a privately owned house. The Minister for Housing and Works has visited the house on two occasions and she might agree with me that it is basically uninhabitable at the moment. The house was no doubt attractive in its former glory days. From a distance it can certainly look attractive, but if one walks through it today, it is clearly dilapidated; ceilings have fallen down and the floors are
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3007 hopelessly uneven. Interestingly, it was built as a display home. The first time I walked inside the house I expected it to be full of magnificent ornate fireplaces and wooden panels. It is not. It is basically bare and always has been. Mr J.C. Kobelke: Roughly what area of land is involved? Mr C.J. BARNETT: I think there are several titles on the property. There is an extended area of land. It is a valuable piece of real estate. I could not guess at the full market value of the site. If it were unencumbered, it would be worth many millions of dollars. Mrs M.H. Roberts: It was subdivided down to about a twentieth of the original size. Mr C.J. BARNETT: There are still parts of the old stable network. I would describe it as an interesting old property. I do not, as a layperson, consider it to have great heritage value. It is a private property and it is never going to be available to the public. The Creasys are not interested in trying to restore it as it is not practical or worth it to do so. In summary, the house was placed on the heritage list after it was purchased by the current owners. It is an interesting, but not exceptional, property. It is a private house. It is in extremely poor condition, requiring at least $2.8 million to make it safe, let alone habitable. The state quite correctly is not interested in purchasing the property—I do not think anyone could justify that—nor is the state able to relocate the house. Indeed, there have been private attempts to see whether that is viable and, despite good intentions, it has come to nothing. It is not a home that is open to the public, it is not visible from the street, and it is very hard to find a public benefit or use for this building. It is certainly not worth the millions of dollars that would be involved in any attempt to relocate or restore it. Members will agree that there are far more significant and worthy heritage causes in Western Australia than this house. The owners have no intention of restoring the building in any way. I thank the Minister for Housing and Works for visiting the site. I know it would be a precedent to have a site removed from the heritage list and would require a resolution of both houses of Parliament before that could happen. I commend the minister and others who have looked at it. If the house is struck from the heritage list, there will be some anguish amongst proponents and supporters of heritage properties, but we have to be sensible about these issues. Although I have supported other heritage projects in my electorate and continue to do so, in good conscience I do not think this is worthy of support. I think the cost is way beyond the merit or value of what is now a dilapidated and essentially broken down, old wooden house in Peppermint Grove. MRS M.H. ROBERTS (Midland — Minister for Housing and Works) [4.12 pm]: I thank the member for Cottesloe for moving this motion. The member first raised this issue with me about a year ago. I too, like him, had an impression prior to looking through this house that I was really going to see something spectacular and something that I hoped would be in better condition. I did hope, when I first looked at this issue, that we could find a solution. People have been trying to find a solution to this situation for some 12 years now. It has gone on for a very long time. Without doubt, the owners of this property are people of means. Advice from lawyers so far has cost the owners more than $200 000 to look at how they can deal with the heritage issues. I understand they have also been quite amenable to assisting financially with the relocation of the house to other sites, preferably within the local shire or to a neighbouring shire, or indeed anywhere. I know through the member for Cottesloe that the owners have indicated a preparedness to pay a considerable amount of money to have the house relocated and restored at another site. The restoration cost, mind you, at its existing site has been costed at $2.8 million; a considerable amount of money. The owners too, in order to get out of this protracted issue, offered to sell the property to the state. It is not something that I could justify spending money on as Minister for Heritage. As the Member for Cottesloe has suggested, there are much more significant priorities. If I can just put matters in context, each year as Minister for Heritage I administer a fund of some $1 million for heritage grants. Those grants are shared between local government authorities and individuals right throughout the state of Western Australia. The expenditure of a lot of money on one individual property very rarely happens. On occasions, our government, and no doubt previous governments, has singled out some particularly significant buildings and made grants outside that million-dollar grant program. I cite by way of example the grants that were given for work on St George’s Cathedral, St Mary’s Cathedral and I think also St Patrick’s. Maley’s Bridge in Geraldton was another project that received a one-off grant. From time to time government does consider the particularly worthwhile purposes of such grants. That is usually where there is some contribution by local government, federal government and sometimes a fundraising appeal as well. The house in question is not one of the iconic heritage buildings in Western Australia and I do not think that we could justify spending public money to assist in the relocation of this house. The owners have made it quite clear that they do not intend to restore it, and indeed that was not the reason they bought the building. Looking through the history of the house, one sees that a number of things have occurred. I can see why the Creasys are aggrieved at the position they have found themselves in. As the member for
3008 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
Cottesloe pointed out, this property was not heritage listed when they purchased it. I understand that when they purchased the property, it was not even on the municipal inventory, so they bought it for the purpose of redeveloping the site to a family home. I think Mr Creasy’s mother may have an adjoining property or a property in the immediate vicinity. They have opposed the heritage listing of The Cliffe but the matter has gone on for a number of years. They have been involved in litigation with the state. There has been a lot of advice from state solicitors to government over the years about this. Indeed, I think prior to my suggesting that I would be amenable to considering removing The Cliffe from the Register of Heritage Places, the Creasys had a court action listed in the Supreme Court that they were intending to proceed with. What the result of that litigation might be, I am not sure, but legal advice can be obtained both ways. It is not really my intention to get into that. As the member for Cottesloe suggested, this issue might be a precedent. It is not every day that places are removed from the heritage register. I think I have probably added a couple of hundred places to the register in the year or so that I have been Minister for Heritage. This will be the first occasion on which we have moved to take something off the register. It is not a step that I have taken lightly. I did look through the house in some detail. I was expecting to form a contrary view—that this was a place that should be conserved or that we should make other arrangements for. I have now satisfied myself that that is not practical in the circumstances and that, on balance, this is a place that should be removed from the heritage register. As a result of forming that view, last year I caused a notice to be placed in the Government Gazette, which I know the member for Cottesloe is aware of. It was published in the Government Gazette of Friday, 7 September 2007 as follows — The reason that the Minister for Heritage has proposed the removal is as follows— “Given: that the Hon. Member for Cottesloe, the Hon. Colin Barnett has raised with me in the Legislative Assembly the protracted dispute with respect to this property; that this property is dilapidated beyond reasonable repair, compromising its heritage value; and that there is no perceived public utility in maintaining the heritage listing; I propose to remove this property from the State Register of Heritage Places.” The heritage act requires that a motion be passed in both houses of Parliament. That is why the member for Cottesloe has moved the motion in this house today and why a motion will also be required in the other house. I indicate my support for the member for Cottesloe’s sensible motion. I know that people who are proud supporters of heritage in our state will be disappointed to see this heritage listing removed. I know many of those people have not had the opportunity to inspect the property, which is not highly visible from the street. The Cliffe is a private property that most people have not had the opportunity to see. However, many people will see this as a sensible and practical heritage decision. We must determine our priorities on heritage matters in order to protect and preserve priority buildings, not all of which will necessarily be grand buildings. Some of the buildings that need protection will be of value for an assortment of reasons and some, no doubt, will be quite humble buildings or places. This decision has been made after much consideration has been given to a whole range of issues. If it were practical to do so, I would have liked to find another location to transport and relocate The Cliffe and re-establish it to its former glory. That would have been good to do, but it is neither practical to do nor would it be a cost- effective use of heritage dollars. If we were to have significant amounts of money to spend on heritage issues it might be different, but my view is that there are much higher priorities. Question put and passed. Request for Council’s Concurrence On motion by Mr C.J. Barnett, resolved — That the Legislative Council be acquainted with the resolution and be invited to pass a similar resolution. REGIONAL WESTERN AUSTRALIA — DETERIORATION IN ESSENTIAL SERVICES Motion MR G. WOODHAMS (Greenough) [4.22 pm]: I move — That this state government be condemned for the serious deterioration in essential services in regional Western Australia. The reasons I move this motion will be self-evident to many people in this place. Members who take a cursory glance at the notices and orders for this very day will find 30 pieces of private members’ business, 20 of which refer specifically to issues in regional Western Australia. This represents those members’ great concern about
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3009 regional services that are provided either in a fairly deleterious manner or not at all. These concerns cross a wide range of issues, including police stations, the dairy industry, school positions, government corporations, the needs of the great southern communities, regional investment funds and the like. Members might have a good read and acquaint themselves with those items of business, for they contain a very strong message that all is not well in regional Western Australia. The message that a range of services need to be improved for the betterment of everybody in the regions pertains to all members from all parties on both sides of this house, particularly to members from regional parts of the state. I reiterate: 20 of the 30 items on today’s notice paper pertain to regional Western Australia. I travel my electorate on a regular basis. Interestingly, from the perspective of my electorate, it does not matter where I go—whether I am speaking to community groups or to farmers and primary producers on their properties—a range of very different issues are brought to my attention. Obviously, some consistent themes, such as the provision of water, housing and power, exist in very different communities. Law and order is another very consistent theme and, particularly for members like me and the member for Stirling, who sits next to me, travelling on our roads these days can be particularly challenging. A range of services are called for right across the regions, no matter where one might be. My area of, if one likes, expertise and my area of experience is in the mid-west. I noted with interest the comments of the Minister for Heritage and for Housing and Works, on the previous motion before the house, and her reference to some money that she had made available for work on Maley Bridge, which is in the electorate of Greenough. Although I am sure that that money is very welcome, the bridge remains in the same condition as in early 2006, when floods carried much of it away. I hope—and I use the words advisedly—that the Minister for Heritage does not a shallow promise make. It is with somewhat of a sense of deja vu that I speak about Maley’s convict bridge because it remains in the same condition and thereby in many senses reflects what this government represents to much of regional Western Australia; that is, let it deteriorate, let it stay there, fill it with promise but do not do anything about it. I am sure that other members on this side of the house will speak to a range of different issues, some of which I have already mentioned, including the provision of water, housing, power and, for argument’s sake, the provision of sufficient police services to enable law and order issues to be adequately addressed. However, while I have this opportunity this evening, I particularly want to focus on education issues. It certainly is an area that I have followed with a great deal of interest. On previous occasions in this house I have addressed education issues and the need to give people with a range of disabilities a reasonable chance to be educated. I am not concerned about the actual program or about the government’s intentions in this area. However, I am concerned about the stability of the student learning environment and, in particular, the school environment experienced by students who have learning disabilities. I can offer evidence of some instability, and in fact it might suit the purposes of what I am going to say to now list a number of schools that I have visited in recent times and will continue to visit while I serve in the Parliament. I will just mention them now and later I will give my reasons for doing so: Mullewa District High School, Northampton District High School, Yuna Primary School, Carnamah District High School, Dalwallinu District High School, Dongara District High School, Dowerin District High School, Jurien Bay District High School, Kalbarri District High School and Morawa District High School. I have mentioned 10 schools. Over the time that I have been visiting these schools there has been a significant turnover in the principals and the administrators in each of those schools. Only two of the 10 schools that I have listed have the same principal now as the one I met when I visited the school two or three years ago. Those principals are Darrin Tinley from Morawa District High School and Janine Calver from Dongara District High School—both of whom, might I mention, are doing an absolutely fantastic job. Their support for the students with disabilities in their schools is unparalleled. Darrin and Janine are marvellous people who provide great support to their staff and students. However, the other schools face the challenge of a consistent and often rapid turnover of not only principals and administrators, but also the staff who deliver programs associated with students who have learning disabilities. Therefore, support for students with disabilities is an area that I think we have to acknowledge. The need to support these students is growing in our communities and our society; therefore, more people who have disabilities are included—and rightly so—in our schooling programs. However, it seems to me that the often considerable turnover in staff, particularly in regional schools, further disadvantages many of these students despite the best intentions of government and policy. In many senses I am referring to the need for stability in the teaching workforce and teachers who work with students with learning disabilities is but one of the areas that I am talking about. The circumstances in regional Western Australia are that teachers are often looking to transfer for a range of reasons. There are temporary teachers who are doing a marvellous job. I am sure the Minister for Education and Training is acquainted with many of these situations, if not personally, then certainly through submissions to him from various schools and teachers etc. We need to provide a range of incentives to help, not only in the instance that I have described—which I have used as an example of the entire school system across regional Western Australia—but also in a range of areas. I should also include the word “remote”. As many people in this house know, the Department of Education and Training
3010 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] has two types of schools outside the metropolitan area in a very broad and general sense; that is, regional and remote. The ways in which those schools are staffed, the facilities provided and the way they are funded are quite different. I want to quote a couple of dot points from the Budget Statements because I think they point to a way forward that I believe the government acknowledges but perhaps needs to underline with deeds and with funds. The dot points that I want to quote are found under “Major Initiatives For 2008-09”, at page 856 of the Budget Statements— • Review the processes for selection and appointment of staff to promotional positions in schools. • Develop a comprehensive leadership strategy for aspirant, newly appointed and experienced school leaders. That almost encapsulates the crisis that many of our regional and remote schools are experiencing in that they are unable to hold on to qualified people. These schools are not attracting aspirant teachers, and experienced school leaders are not staying in these communities. That raises questions about why this might be the case. It is not my intention to argue through the whole salary case for teachers. Certainly, the minister is well and truly informed in that respect and there is a range of opinions about what teachers should be paid, how they should be paid and what they should be paid for certain levels of experience etc. I know the member for Stirling, who has great and personal experience in this area, will be speaking on that topic. I do not think it can be denied that teachers should be more highly paid, so I will leave it at that. Why do teachers not receive major financial incentives, far greater than that planned or proposed, for working in hard-to-staff regional and remote communities? From the educational point of view, realistically, the answer to that question is not the answer to the whole problem, but I think it is something that needs to be considered. To get the best out of our teachers is probably the greatest ambition that this Minister for Education and Training, this place and all of us could have. However, we need to go some way towards providing teachers with circumstances, conditions and environments to live, work and socialise in that will enable them to bring out their best so they are not always in a siege mentality. Teachers should not always be caught up in a range of bureaucratic initiatives, if we like, which cause them to be distracted from the main cause; that is, teaching. One really big issue that teachers are caught up in, I believe, and which detracts from trying to develop, as is stated in the budget, a comprehensive leadership strategy for aspirant, newly appointed and experienced school leaders, is housing. I know the housing issue is not exclusive to teachers; it affects people generally in the public sector in Western Australia. Certainly, last week’s demonstration, protest, rally—call it what we may—was an excellent example of some of the great concerns of the public sector in this state about a range of conditions that it is subject to, particularly housing. Often when I go into schools, and particularly when I talk to younger teachers considering moving into a rural community, one of their major concerns is the state of the housing and whether there actually is any housing. I have met with aspirant teachers who are in their last year of university and who have been targeted or are targeting themselves to work, teach, and live in a regional community. I think it is marvellous that a teacher would be interested in promoting him or herself to work, teach, and live in a regional community. A major problem that these teachers confront and have to solve is the housing issue. Some people I have spoken to do not know whether they can find housing. Some people at regional schools will try to find housing for those teachers. I accessed a 22-page housing and transport document from the Department of Education and Training website to try to understand the policy of this government for its teachers. I think it is a worthwhile venture for members to download that document. From that housing document I extracted that those conditions would be fairly similar across most of the public sector. This is really part of the argument I have with the government—that housing at this point in many regional communities is either totally non-existent, not substantial or not adequate. I would suggest that for all of us who work in this place, which has its own challenges, housing is not as challenging or as tough as it is in many of the regional and remote communities that we expect teachers to work in and to educate in and provide absolutely the best possible educational program they can to students right across Western Australia. We really should be aiming to provide an attractive standard of housing, which will help to develop a far more viable education community and thus an environment in which some valuable partnerships can be created between the teachers and their school, the different elements in that community, and the different levels of government—I mean both local government and state government. I take my hat off to a shire such as the Shire of Morawa, which has worked proactively with the local district high school and the Morawa College of Agriculture to try to build, develop and maintain housing in that community that will meet the needs of staff moving into the Morawa community, so that a reasonable level of educational standards can be maintained and so that when people go to the community of Morawa, they will feel welcome. Those people should feel that there is an incentive for them to stay in the community because they have a decent house to live in and the community cares for them. When administrators confront challenges as a result of being in a town in which perhaps there is no reasonable housing, what do they want to do? They want to leave. A lack of reasonable housing is a great disincentive. Members should bear in mind that I am talking just about the education sector, and what I am talking about can be applied to a range of educational issues.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3011
The quality of an education system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers. If teachers feel they are disadvantaged and are unable to deliver their programs successfully, much of that can often be slotted back to the circumstances in which they find themselves when they are out of school. I will give the house an example of staff who turned up for the first day of school in late January 2008 or perhaps early February 2007 at what was for them a new school in a new community. Members will appreciate that many of the communities in my electorate have been doing it reasonably tough from a primary industry point of view. When those people go into such a community, there will be a Government Regional Officers’ Housing house there, but that house will not have been looked after for the six weeks of the school holidays. The lawn will not have been watered and nothing will have been taken care of. These people might arrive with or without furniture. Quite often, a young graduate student will not have had the financial capacity to save to buy furniture. He might have mum’s lounge and dad’s La-Z-Boy chair or something like that. However, he will not bring a lot of goods and chattels with him; he will not bring much in the way of possessions. He will arrive in a community with which he is not familiar. There is the expression that there is no place like home. This will be that person’s home. When he turns up, if there is a lawn, the lawn will not have been watered. Probably everything in the yard will have died. No relationship has been developed between the Department of Education and Training, GROH and the local government to try to do something about looking after those houses. I believe that the government could, with very little effort, improve the situation quite considerably by looking at the individual circumstances, not of the teacher as such, but of GROH houses in the communities to which teachers are going, particularly when there is a turnover of staff, and when getting good teachers depends on how they are selected and trained. That brings me to another point. One of the ways in which we train people in this state is by saying to them that if they want to be teachers, they must go to Perth and to Curtin University of Technology, Edith Cowan University or perhaps Murdoch University, or, if they have larger, deeper pockets, they might want to go to the University of Notre Dame Australia. In saying that, we start to provide another range of disincentives for people from regional Western Australia. To get a university education, they must go to Perth. To get an education in education, they must go to Perth. Actually, that is not entirely true, because people can do some of their studies perhaps at Bunbury through ECU, perhaps at Kalgoorlie through Curtin University, perhaps at Broome through the University of Notre Dame, or perhaps at Geraldton through Curtin University. This is where I—“beg to differ” is probably not the right term to use—take umbrage at the attitude of the Perth- based universities. I will exclude Notre Dame from this for the time being. Certainly, the other Perth-based universities have absolutely no interest at all in regional universities or campuses developing strong programs in education that will inspire people from regional communities to return to and become involved in those communities. If people can afford to go to Perth for three or four years to get their university education so that they will eventually end up with a qualification to teach, there is a pretty good chance that a lot of the incentive to live and teach in regional Western Australia will have been knocked out of them. I am asking—I have not asked in this place, but I have had conversations with the minister—that this government engage in discussions with the Perth-based universities to look at ways of providing incentives for regional Western Australians who want to get an education to become qualified teachers to stay in those regional hubs where universities have a base and where the local community is tremendously supportive of them. It seems that to a certain extent the powerbrokers within the Perth-based universities have no real interest in and no real desire about providing teacher education that will be successful at a regional level. I will close with a couple of remarks that have been made to me. In the past week, I have spoken to people with the intention of raising some of these issues today in this place. There is considerable concern in many regional communities about what might notionally be called the super-school solution—the super-school solution being the bussing of students from school to school to enable a wider range of the curriculum to be developed for those students. I will cite an example in my part of the world—that is, the mid-west—from Kalbarri through to Toodyay, let us say, or perhaps the other way from Lancelin to Kalannie. Curiously, at the next election that will be in the new seat of Moore. In all that area, there is only one senior high school. Therefore, if certain subjects are not able to be provided at that school, which is the Central Midlands Senior High School in Moora, where are those students to go? Perhaps they could study those subjects through the Schools of Isolated and Distance Education. That is one question mark. Where do they go? Maybe they should migrate to Perth. Maybe that is the answer. I think not. There is another part of that. Across that region that I have described, there are seven or eight district high schools. At the moment they are confronted with compulsory education for years 11 and 12. What sorts of incentives are they given to run these courses? What staff do they get? What resources do they get? What support is provided? Is it the super-school solution? Do we bus kids from Mullewa to Morawa or Carnamah to Morawa on roads that are hardly adequate? The roads are like goat tracks with a bit of bitumen in the middle. I do not think we do. These communities have special needs and special requirements that this generalised template approach, as currently documented, would not
3012 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] deliver. We will fail our students and, more importantly, in terms of failing our students, we will fail all the people in our communities, and the deterioration of many of the essential services in regional Western Australia will continue. MR D.T. REDMAN (Stirling) [4.51 pm]: I support the motion moved by the member for Greenough. The motion is very broad for good reason; that is, the National Party would like to raise a raft of issues in this place that relate to regional areas, not the least of which is education. I thought the member for Greenough put the issues succinctly. I will comment on two areas that I very briefly touched on yesterday in the appropriation debate. First, I will refer to commercial water charges that apply to people in regional areas. Members talk about key service provision within regional areas and I will highlight a couple of areas in which changes have put an unreasonable pressure on regional businesses. This is one change that nearly went under the radar. It was released two or three weeks ago via an email. I believe that businesses in regional areas were notified only in the past week or so of the quantum effect of the changes to charges for commercial water users. The policy position that came out highlights changes, including cost increases and price increases, for that group of people. It does not impact upon metropolitan users; it impacts only on commercial users in regional areas. I will outline the current circumstances for commercial water users in Western Australia. In regional Western Australia charges for commercial water users are divided into five classes. Already there is a distinction between those areas in which a lot of water is available for use and those areas in which not a lot of water is available for use. The class 1 zone highlights those areas in which a relatively large amount of water is available and the class 5 zone highlights areas in which water is considerably less available and the cost of supplying water to those communities is higher. The class 1 zone includes towns such as Albany, Broome, Cunderdin, Geraldton and Collie—it is interesting that the member for Collie-Wellington is in the chamber. Currently, the difference in commercial water charges between country areas and the metropolitan area for class 1 zones is 69.7 per cent. A commercial water user who lives in Collie currently pays 69.7 per cent more for his water than a person who lives in the metropolitan area. To give members an idea of the towns in the class 2 area, I use the examples of Binningup, Carnarvon and Manjimup. Currently, commercial water users in these towns pay 163.6 per cent more for their water than people in the metropolitan area. I will use the example of 100 000 kilolitres. If 50 000 kilolitres applies, the cost does not change very much, because there is a smaller price for the first 300 kilolitres, and above that the price is consistent. A commercial water user in Binningup currently pays 163.6 per cent more for water than a person who lives in the metropolitan area. The examples of towns in the class 3 zones are Mt Barker, Nannup, Bridgetown and Augusta. Currently commercial water users in those towns pay 206.1 per cent more for their water than people in the metropolitan area. Class 4 zones include towns such as Denmark, Walpole, Northcliffe and Cranbrook. The commercial water users in these towns currently pay 255.9 per cent more for their water. The towns in class 5 zones include Lake King, Wellstead, in my electorate, and Ravensthorpe. The commercial water users pay 288.3 per cent more for their water. They are the differences between commercial water charges in the metropolitan area and country areas and those charges will continue to apply up to the commencement of the next financial year. Currently, the distinction in commercial water charges between the different communities depends on how readily available the resource is. Secondly, there is also a clear difference—on average a 200 per cent difference—between metropolitan and country areas. Let us consider the changes that almost slipped under the radar two weeks ago by email. Last year an inquiry was undertaken by the Economic Regulation Authority. It is interesting that the inquiry ran into late December, over the summer period when, of course, one would not expect a lot of people to pay attention to these sorts of things. As a result of that inquiry, the government made a decision to implement water reforms to, as it says, more closely reflect the cost of provision of service in those regions. Based on the Economic Regulation Authority’s recommendation, the government is moving towards a cost-reflective structure. The government is moving towards a 15-band system. I have described the five classes, or bands. The government is now moving to a 15-band system. The government’s proposal is, over five years, to move particular communities from one of the five bands into one of the 15 bands. An interim period will apply. For example, if a community moves from band 1 to band 5 over five years it might, for an interim period, be moved to band 4 to soften the blow. I suggest that regional members look at the interim band for the next 12 months to ascertain how it applies to the communities in their electorates. The communities that I represent, as well as those in the south west that I hope to represent one day, will, in the next 12 months, be subject to increases in water charges of between 15 and 20 per cent. Already places like Mt Barker, Nannup, Bridgetown and Augusta pay 200 per cent more for water usage, but in the next 12 months they will be faced with increases in commercial water charges of between 15 and 20 per cent. Over the next five years, when the full changes are implemented, the increase will be between
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3013
82 and 112 per cent. Those increases are substantial and these changes are not appropriate for the wealth- creating areas of this state. I will give some examples of the wealth-creating areas of this state. First, I refer to Albany. I would like the member for Albany to be in the chamber to listen to my comments. Next year the increase in commercial water charges for businesses in Albany will be 14 per cent. Commercial water users in Albany are already paying 70 per cent more for their water than are people in the metropolitan area, and now there will be a further 14 per cent increase in the next 12 months. Over five years it will amount to a 83 per cent increase on top of the increased charges they are currently paying. It is interesting that this financial year there will be a 23 per cent increase in commercial water charges in Albany for water consumption in excess of 300 kilolitres. The same applies to Collie. If a commercial water user uses more than 300 kilolitres a year, which is the amount used by a household, the change will be an increase of 23 per cent. Does the member for Collie-Wellington support an increase of 23 per cent in commercial water charges for small businesses in his electorate? I think not. They will be hit with that increase when they are already paying 70 per cent more than a Perth water user. Mr P.D. Omodei: Are you saying 300 kilolitres or 3 000 kilolitres? Mr D.T. REDMAN: No, 300 kilolitres. I am talking about the percentage increase. Mr P.D. Omodei: The average is about 60 kilolitres. Mr D.T. REDMAN: The charges depend on the area, and the zone system is quite complex. As I have outlined, there is already a big difference between the commercial water charges imposed on metropolitan and country users, and the proposed change will result in another impost on country small business. In addition to the changes proposed over the next five years, which represent an increase of between 80 and 100 per cent in the great southern and the south west regions, there will be a move towards a flat line structure. Currently, it is a two-tier structure—the first 300 kilolitres, and a higher rate for any kilolitres in excess of 300 kilolitres. We can only assume that the flat line structure will be at the higher rate. When that is implemented, that will be yet another impost on small businesses in regional Western Australia. To give members an idea of the changes that will apply to commercial water users in a bunch of great southern and south west communities over the next five years, Albany will incur an 83 per cent increase; Augusta, 93 per cent; Bridgetown, 112 per cent; Cranbrook, 85 per cent; Denmark, 85 per cent; Manjimup, 87 per cent; Mt Barker, 112 per cent; Nannup, 112 per cent; Northcliffe, 85 per cent; Pemberton, 112 per cent; and Walpole, 85 per cent. They will be the increases in water charges over the next five years for communities that are already paying, on average, double what metropolitan users are paying. How can that impost on regional people and businesses possibly be justified? It is really interesting to read outcome 8—“Fair Pricing for Regional Residences and Businesses”—of the government’s 2003 regional development policy, which is entitled “Regional Western Australia: A better place to live”. Outcome 8 has four outcome priorities, one of which is —
• Maintain uniform tariff and pricing policies for delivery of power and water to regional residents and small businesses. The increase in water and power charges is clearly in breach of the government’s policy position. One of the strategies listed under outcome 8 states —
• Ensure that recommendations made by the Economic Regulation Authority fully consider the needs of regional residents and businesses. I do not have any faith that the Economic Regulation Authority will come up with a pricing position that reflects anywhere near what it should be for the wealth-creating areas of the state. This government has clearly chosen to support the ERA recommendations, and is moving towards a position that will put a substantial impost on small businesses in regional Western Australia. I have only highlighted the changes for some of the key areas that I represent. It is interesting to consider some other areas in regional Western Australia where the impost is more significant. For Beverley there will be a 20.5 per cent price increase in the next year for the first 300 kilolitres of water; over the following five years there will be a 150 per cent increase. In Cunderdin there will be an increase of 273 per cent over the next five years. In Porongurup—a town in my electorate—commercial water prices will increase by over 300 per cent; admittedly there are not too many businesses there that use a lot of water, but it is a substantial impost on that community. For good measure, I also use the example of Binningup, which is where a second desalination plant is being built. I have said in this place that I support the building of the desalination plant, but the people of Binningup have raised some concerns about that facility, which will provide another 45 gigalitres of water to Perth. The people of Binningup are being told that over the next five years there will be an increase of between 140 per cent and 150 per cent on current commercial water charges. They have to wear the building of a facility
3014 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] for provision of water to Perth, whilst being told that their commercial water charges will be increased by between 140 per cent to 150 per cent—I am sure they will be rapt with that! I have spent a long time in this house talking about electricity supply headworks charges imposed on edge-of- grid areas. Ravensthorpe has been the hardest hit in Western Australia. In my electorate, Denmark and Walpole have been hardest hit. Members know the pressure that puts on regional businesses. Now there will be an increase in commercial water charges that is in direct contrast to the government’s policy on uniform pricing in its 2003 regional development policy. How can Country Labor members see that as an acceptable position? They should be jumping up and down from the highest point about it, yet I have not heard boo from them. An inquiry is presently underway into developer contributions to Water Corporation developments and water supply issues. Yesterday in Parliament I read out key components of the Great Southern Development Commission’s submission to the Economic Regulation Authority’s inquiry into transparency in the Water Corporation’s community service obligations related to water supply. I imagine the ERA, having seen this new water pricing schedule for commercial water use in regional areas—which in some cases outlines a 250 per cent increase in water charges—will come up with a ripper outcome for water developer contributions that I am sure country people will be absolutely rapt with! What faith can we have in that? We do not have a hope of that being on the side of regional people and businesses in the wealth-creating areas of Western Australia. Even the Great Southern Development Commission, a government agency, highlights that issue and the potential pressures on development in regional Western Australia. In its submission it refers to the potential for there to be “no-growth zones” The submission states — This example illustrates that a risk of further reducing or removing CSOs in regional areas is that some towns and communities could end up being declared “no growth zones”. From a regional development perspective, GSDC finds this unacceptable. So do I. It will be interesting to see the outcome of that ERA inquiry. I have talked ad nauseam in this house about the water reforms related to water licence charges. Again, they are an impost on regional users in particular, especially when no attention has been paid whatsoever to Perth city bore users and no attempt has been made to put any sort of impost on the use of bores, even though they are depleting the aquifer—the Gnangara Mound—to the point of creating significant environmental issues. How can those issues be equated? The minister did not show any sort of sympathy for south west users; fortunately, a disallowance motion has had a good outcome for those people, but as the minister has control of these things, I am sure that will be short lived. I raised the increase in water charges because I think that people who are commercial water users in regional Western Australia will have only just seen these increases and they will have a helluva surprise when they see what is in store for them. I remember what happened when the notion of increasing electricity prices by 50 per cent over a number of years for people living in the city was floated. In some of these cases, the increases are 150 per cent and 200 per cent. However, what do we hear? We hear very little from Country Labor members in particular, who should be jumping up and down about it. The ink is not even dry on the one vote, one value legislation, yet this government is levying another policy position which takes a hit on regional Western Australia. These are the wealth-creating areas of this state, and small businesses in the regions, which are the lifeblood of our regional communities, are being targeted. It is an issue that Country Labor members really need to be aware of, and I am happy to show them the information because they need to take this issue up hard. I was hoping that the Minister for Education and Training might have been in this place, as I particularly wanted to — Mr P. Papalia interjected. Mr D.T. REDMAN: The member will pass it on to him? Mr P. Papalia: Yes. Mr D.T. REDMAN: That is wonderful. I support the member for Greenough’s points about education. [Member’s time extended.] Mr D.T. REDMAN: I highlight the issue of the appointment of principals and deputy principals in all schools, but particularly those in regional Western Australia. Concern has been raised in this place by the National Party about the high turnover rate and the high number of acting principals and deputy principals in schools, which is a particular concern to regional communities. We have lobbied the minister and the Director General of Education about a number of potential changes, about which we are still to meet with them and ascertain whether they have taken up some of the points made. Indeed, there was a response—whether it was a response to our submission or
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3015 not, I do not know—with some key changes from government, which stated that it had moved away from the pooling system and was allowing people to apply directly to schools, thereby enabling a more regular turnover. In other words, as soon as there was a vacancy in a school it could be applied for and filled permanently so there would not be a backlog of acting positions. I have some concerns about that change; however, the outcome has been—and will be—that there are fewer acting positions in schools in regional Western Australia. There is another looming issue, which I highlighted yesterday when I said that labour pressures will first manifest themselves in regional Western Australia. This applies right across the service sector, although I am talking about the education sector. There must be incentives to encourage people to teach in or take on leadership roles at schools in regional Western Australia. Money forms part of that incentive. I am sure that that matter is being discussed in the current negotiations with the State School Teachers’ Union of WA. One of the really big issues for country administrators in particular is their mobility; that is, their capacity to move out of the areas that they have moved to. Under the current system, all level 3, 4, 5 and 6 positions are based on merit selection. A person has to apply for a position and win it on merit. I do not have a problem with merit selection; I think it is a great system and I cannot think of a better one. I have been through the system and I appreciate the reason it is applied. Mr T.K. Waldron: And you got selected! Mr D.T. REDMAN: Yes, I got selected—lucky me! Issues arise when people move to a level 3 or 4 school in regional Western Australia. I will use the level 5 school in Halls Creek as an example. A person would win a position at that school on merit. The person might want to stay at the school for three, four or five years. I think it is wonderful that people choose to spend some of their teaching career in regional Western Australia. It is enriching and I am sure they would make a positive contribution to the education of kids in this state. However, if that person wanted to move from the school in Halls Creek, he or she must win another position on merit; that is, the person must apply for other positions. In order to be competitive in the merit selection process, people need to ensure that they remain engaged in that process. The notion is that people must keep applying for these positions, that they keep up to speed with changes in the department, that they remain competitive and that their referees and supporting references are up to date. In that way, they have a far better chance of winning positions. A person at a school in Halls Creek would have to address the selection criteria for a position at, for instance, a school in Margaret River, which I presume would also be a level 5 school. Often there are criteria relevant to particular schools. As members know, there is a big difference between the profile of the schools in Halls Creek and Margaret River and in the education needs in those areas. It would be very difficult for the person at the school in Halls Creek to meet the criteria required for the position at the school in Margaret River. I argue that our system is not sensitive enough to discern the differences in skills between two people who in my opinion would work effectively in either of those two schools; therefore, we should allow them to swap over without having to go through the merit selection process. I propose that we return to a system of transfers between schools of the same level. A person should be able to transfer between two level 5 primary or high schools without having to go through a merit selection process. That is the system that we used to have. Layered on top of that system was a series of transfer points. A person who went to Giles, Wiluna or an isolated school with special needs would earn more transfer points than a person who went to Margaret River Senior High School. People were not cornered. Although people often enjoy the time they spend in regional Western Australia, they often do not want to stay in those areas for the rest of their lives. At some stage they want to return to either the city or a preferred location, often a coastal location. People were able to earn more transfer points than normal, depending on how isolated the school was, and could win the right to transfer to a school without having to go up against everyone else under the merit selection process. I thought that was a good system. First, it kept alive the opportunity for mobility for administrators in regional areas; and, secondly, it meant that people were prepared in the first instance to go to regional areas because they would not be isolated in those areas and unable to transfer to another school. We need to seriously look at that system. I have seen the word “transfer” written in a couple of Department of Education and Training documents and also in the minister’s documents. I would like the minister to give serious consideration to that system. It has in-principle support from the teachers’ union. It has the support of the administrators in regional areas to whom I have spoken. Therefore, it needs to be closely looked at. The mobility issue is the key to people’s enthusiasm. It gives people a benefit for moving to and working in regional Western Australia. If we are to continue staffing these schools with quality, competent people who want to be there, we must give them the necessary incentives to do so. It is not always about money. When making decisions, people often place a higher priority on the issues of location and mobility than they do on money that goes into their back pockets. The merit selection process within the school system is fairly complex. I know that there are competing interests. My colleagues and I have raised with Sharyn O’Neill some options to address specific issues in regional areas. However, this is one policy position that needs to be seriously considered. The first areas to manifest a lack of staffing will be in regional Western Australia. If we do not want to deplete the quality of education and the
3016 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] capacity for kids who live in remote areas to have a quality education, we need to put in place a policy setting that encourages people to work in and make a contribution to these areas and then enables them to return to their preferred location at a later date. I have had a number of conversations with people about this issue. I encourage the minister and senior people in the department to have discussions with the various leadership executive associations to gain their support. The people I have spoken to have indicated that it has some merit. In summary, I reiterate the two points I have raised. First, the commercial charges for water are an unrealistic and unfair burden on people in regional Western Australia, given that they already pay considerably more than do people in the metropolitan area. That puts downward pressure on regional businesses in particular, which are the backbone of not only regional communities, but also our economy. The second issue I highlighted was the scope of the old transfer system and the ability to enact same-level transfers within a category of schools without requiring people to go through the merit selection process. That would address the issue of mobility for country principals and deputy principals so that they do not get stuck in an area for a number of years and therefore do not want to go there in the first instance. MR T.K. WALDRON (Wagin — Deputy Leader of the National Party) [5.17 pm]: I support the motion. It is a good motion. It is a broad motion, but it goes even further in some cases than merely the deterioration in essential services in regional Western Australia, because some essential services are no longer there. After listening to the first two speakers—I am sure that we will hear from other members in this place—it should be becoming fairly clear to people that there is a real problem. This is my eighth year in this place and the problem seems to be growing. It seems to me that, every time a budget is brought down or an announcement is made, things are getting worse. Many people live in regional areas, and it is starting to have a real effect on the morale and confidence of people, particularly in inland areas, because they are feeling left out, forgotten and rejected. That is a fact. Mr P.D. Omodei: Where is the inland—anywhere that is not on the coast, I presume? Mr T.K. WALDRON: I get annoyed when the government says that it is spending all this money in country WA. I acknowledge that it is spending money in country WA; I am not stupid. However, it is spending money in Albany, Bunbury, Geraldton and Carnarvon, while Newdegate, Kirup and other such places do not crack a mention. I do not deny that the government should spend money in those major towns. I acknowledge that Albany is very important to my region. However, that should not be at the expense of some of the projects that I referred to yesterday in my contribution to the budget debate. Other members want to speak on the motion, so I will not go through all those matters again. The member for Stirling highlighted the issue of commercial water charges. If that is not a real wake-up call to the government and country members, I do not know what is. That is downright unfair. There is no equity in that at all. Country people acknowledge at times that there will be higher costs and inequities, but the gap is becoming far too wide. The member for Greenough raised teachers’ issues. I support him, with emphasis on teachers’ housing, but I will not go through all those issues again. During question time I listened to all the dorothy dix questions about the wonderful federal budget. Obviously there are some good things in the federal budget; I will not be stupid about that. I tell country members that the regional partnership program has been axed. Two hundred projects in country Western Australia were wiped out last night; they are gone. Mr P.B. Watson: There is a new one coming in. Mr T.K. WALDRON: The member should tell me what it is. There is a new one coming in? That is good. The member should tell us about it. Several members interjected. Mr T.K. WALDRON: Is that right? What is the state government doing? Can the member for Albany tell me why, for about the fifth year in a row, there are seven announcements in the budget papers for the great southern and six for Albany? Does he think that is fair? Mr P.B. Watson: There is a very good local member! Mr T.K. WALDRON: Yes. I want to tell members about regional partnerships. In my region, for example, the Katanning pool will straightaway go out the window, the aged persons homes in Wagin will go out the window, and the new sporting facility in Gingin will go out the window. That is just an example. There were 200 projects and now they are gone. If another program comes in to replace them, well and good. I will acknowledge that and say, “Great!” However, we have not seen it. How long has the Labor Party been in government? Mr P.D. Omodei: Where’s the budget entry to match the federal funding for that promise?
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3017
Mr T.K. WALDRON: It is gone. That will have a huge effect on country Western Australia. If country members on the member for Albany’s side refuse to acknowledge that, they do so at their own peril. This is a major issue. Even those projects that have been approved but have not yet been signed off are gone. The government now has an issue because it has money out there. Under the community sporting and recreation facilities fund, funding had been allocated money to the Katanning pool. What will happen now? I do not know. The government will be flooded with complaints. If there is another program, I call on the government to go to the federal government and get something done, because this is having a huge impact out there. Mr P.B. Watson: We are, member for Wagin. Mr T.K. WALDRON: Okay; I will remind the member for Albany of that. I am happy to help him, and I am sure every other country member is happy to help him. Wickepin is a small town; it wanted to upgrade its sports centre and its ram-selling centre. For those who do not know, Wickepin is a very well-known area for stud rams. This week is Volunteer Week, and that community got off its bum. It raised nearly $300 000 on its own before it went to the government. It secured a reasonable partnership, which luckily was signed off a year or so ago; it is done. There is now a magnificent facility that is regularly utilised. This is what we need in country Western Australia. I am talking about not only people in Wickepin, but also people from all around Western Australia. We are not stupid about it; the people of Wickepin raised $300 000. I have a house in Willetton, and when the Willetton sports club was starting up people donated money for it. I admire them for that. There are some really good people and volunteers in that area and right across Perth, but people in the city are not asked to donate time after time in the way that people in the country are. If people in the country do not put money in, they do not get anything. This was a great program that actually inspired people. People got off their behinds and made things happen. If members drive around regional Western Australia, they will see the results of these programs everywhere. If members want to call it pork- barrelling, they can, but I can tell members that these programs have delivered a lot to regional Western Australia. I have been a member for eight years and during that time, were it not for these programs, regional Western Australia would have received very little. I am not saying that the state government has not delivered in some areas; of course it has. I want to highlight this because it will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. My office has been inundated today by local governments and others asking what is going to happen. I call on the government to make something happen. If it does, I will stand in this place and applaud it. We talk about infrastructure all the time. I want to talk about people. I mentioned this yesterday. When we talk about services we are actually talking about people. Regional Western Australia is growing; not in all parts, but in my area, generally, we are growing. We will not see a Narrogin or a Dumbleyung explode overnight, but there are land developments. Williams, Darkan, Boddington and other similar places will grow a lot more quickly than people might think. We need services and people to come with them. One of the things that concern me at the moment is police. The police in our areas do a wonderful job; they really do, but they are being asked to do so much. We are down 17 police officers in our region. I know that my local superintendent is concerned about stress. One officer has had a heart attack and another has recently taken a couple of weeks’ spell. It is not only the police; it is also our public service, including the Department for Child Protection. Daycare facilities are also being stretched. People are being put under enormous stress because they are trying to do too much. This is not just about infrastructure, it is about getting people out there. We need some real incentives. I hear the Minister for Education and Training talking about attraction and retention. I know he is working and doing quite a bit to attract more teachers etc. I acknowledge that. What we really need is some bite-the-bullet stuff. We need to offer free housing for police in country Western Australia. Some get housing and some do not. For example, in my region there are two police stations within about 80 kilometres of each other, and one gets free housing while the other does not; I do not know why, but that is what happens. In Pingelly, for instance, we are down three policemen. Just recently one of the new English policemen went up there. He was very keen and wanted to make a go of it. He brought his wife back to look at the house—no go. She would not stay there. I have been to look at the house. I actually have photos of it. One would not expect one’s wife to live in that house, if one were dinkum. Mr P.D. Omodei: Was it a brick house? Mr T.K. WALDRON: It was a brick house, but it was in such poor condition — Mr R.C. Kucera interjected. Mr T.K. WALDRON: Yes, and I know schoolteachers in the same situation. The trouble is, member for Yokine, it is no longer those days. We have moved on and women have different expectations. My mum lived in a mud batt house; we only had a copper and a long-drop dunny! The long-drop dunny was quite fun, but I will not go into that! Mr G. Snook: That didn’t affect you, though! Mr T.K. WALDRON: I have managed to move on!
3018 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
If we were dinkum we would do something about housing. Four local public servants are coming to my office on Friday to talk about that issue. I spoke at the public service rally and I was amazed by the country people and the response I have had since speaking at that rally. I understand that they have a real problem. I encourage the government to lift its pay offer to public servants and to please give them a decent, reasonable district allowance. It is just ridiculous. In Kojonup—my old home town—the price of diesel is the same as the price in Karratha. People get some taxation and district allowances in Karratha, but they do not get them in Kojonup. If we are to attract and retain those people, why would they stay there? If we do not do this, we will have a real problem down the track. I was not going to speak for very long and I got cranked up on this subject. I will not keep going for much longer. Another issue is deep sewerage. The lack of funding to provide deep sewerage for country Western Australia is an absolute disgrace. In 2002 the previous government was set to provide deep sewerage to Boyup Brook. When people built new houses the local government allowed them to have single-drain sewerage, reasoning that there was no point in spending any more money because there would soon be deep sewerage. However, the current government has stopped all that and there is now a problem with the Blackwood River in Boyup Brook because there are sewage issues on the banks of the river. The program was scheduled for 2015, but now it has been stopped. Whoever is in government should prioritise five deep sewerage projects a year, over the next four years, because that is what is needed. I mentioned Hyden. A member interjected. Mr T.K. WALDRON: I have the photos of it. If ever a community has made things work, it is Hyden. It is a great place and the people there do a fantastic job. People may not always agree with everything they do, but they are out there having a crack at it. They only want a hand. A meeting will be held and we are trying to do things ourselves, along with a private company, and the shire and the community will put in probably half the money. We will come back to the Minister for Water Resources to see whether he will support us with the other half. Mr P.D. Omodei: They can slide through that slimy, green stuff that gets in their ears and mouth! Mr T.K. WALDRON: It is disappointing. Mr J.J.M. Bowler: I suggest they look at the local government for a solution. Mr T.K. WALDRON: No. The member for Murchison-Eyre should not blame that local government! As a former Minister for Local Government, I am surprised that the member says that. This local government has shown that it is prepared to help. People from that local government have come to the minister and said, “You say we’ve not got enough money; we are prepared to get off our bums and do it.” Do not knock them, member. Several members interjected. Mr T.K. WALDRON: I am not saying that all local governments are great. Several members interjected. Mr J.J.M. Bowler: I was saying that is what they are supposed to do. Mr T.K. WALDRON: I am sorry. I misunderstood what the member for Murchison-Eyre said. This local government is taking that action, and most of our local governments will do that, although some might not operate so well. I want to finish so that other people can have a crack at speaking on this motion. This afternoon we have been talking to transporters regarding new vehicle regulations for axle widths etc. A report states that these vehicles are too dangerous unless the axle lengths are changed, yet the minister will not release the report! Why will the minister not release the report and say, “We want you to do this, because this is killing people”? Let us see the figures. Why will the minister not release the report? It is things like that that get people completely offside, and I have not even got into the deterioration of hospitals and services. I think the house gets my drift. I think I am a fairly rational person, and I think it is about time this government really took notice and started to do something; otherwise, it will feel the backlash. This inaction might not hurt government members at the moment, but it will hurt them in the end. MR G. SNOOK (Moore) [5.31 pm]: I rise to support the motion and my address will be much shorter than the member for Wagin’s speech to allow some of my colleagues and other members perhaps to make a contribution. Most of the issues have been addressed by previous speakers and it would be to speak ad nauseam to go over them again so I will tack onto a few of the issues raised. Mention was made of services in country towns such as power, water, sewerage etc. I touch on the issue the member for Wagin mentioned in relation to the regional partnership grants that have been cancelled by the Rudd
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3019
Labor government. Dalwallinu, for example, was right at the cusp of pressing the “go” button for its community centre, but this was dependent on the grant coming through. The people of Dalwallinu had expended $100 000 of their own community money. When speaking about how people in the bush chip in for such projects, this is a multifunctional community facility with a raft of operations and different services. It will function for the benefit of the community. This has now got the chop—not so much the project, but the funding. What does a community such as Dalwallinu do? No federal government money is coming in for this project, and there is no chance of getting any additional state money. I am not sure whether the Dalwallinu project has received any money. I would be very pleased if that is the case. The point is that the local community had designed the facility, has the land and has the clearances, but it is waiting for that last lot of funding to come through, and the funding has now stopped. The Dalwallinu community will have to make the choice of either dropping the project in its entirety or taking out a loan for the required amount, which would be many, many hundreds of thousands of dollars as it is a multimillion-dollar project. That is the dilemma that country Western Australia has in the more remote areas. That is outside what is spoken about by various ministers and the Premier regarding the government’s investment in regional Western Australia. True—large amounts of money, way and above what has been previously invested, are provided for projects, but this is directed to the Karrathas, the Port Hedlands, the Geraldtons, the Bunburys and the Albanys. These funds are going to good infrastructure projects—no question. However, all the other infrastructure and services in the inland and outer-lying areas are continuing to deteriorate. As a result of insufficient funding, people in these areas, through a lack of staff and other personnel, are not getting the services they require. I could go through a range of other areas. The Department of Agriculture and Food has continually wound back real increases in its funding. I asked the Premier today what real interest this government has in agriculture, and I was disappointed in his response. Agriculture started this state. Agriculture was the basis of the economy of this state, and all the other services that bolted onto agriculture provided a huge amount of employment. Eleven per cent of the state’s workforce is currently employed because of agriculture. Most of that employment is in rural and regional Western Australia. They are the key elements that this government needs to be aware of so that we can keep that critical mass of people in a vitally important industry such as agriculture, which is the basis from which everything emanates in those inland wheatbelt rural Western Australian areas. If we continue to see a funding decline in real terms—by “real terms”, I mean the percentage increases in the type of investment in real dollars that those major regional centres are getting, which is fantastic—all the infrastructure will be in the ports and regional centres, and not enough people will be left out in the bush. There will not be enough farmers. The skills set will be lost. The average age of farmers in Western Australia and Australia-wide is increasing. It is a serious problem. The government does not have one simple silver-bullet opportunity. As the member for Wagin mentioned, these problems are the additional straws that are placed on the back through added input cost structures for people doing business in the bush. It does not matter whether it is a tourist operator in any of the towns, inland or on the coast; a commercial, retail or wholesale outlet service industry to the agriculture sector; or the pastoral industry themselves—the problem is that the cost of doing business is increasing. Some of those costs are comparable to those faced by city folk, such as fuel; that hits—no question. Whenever anything is freighted to country areas, that cost increase per litre of dieseline is added to the price of that product. What really sticks in the craw of people in the bush, and I am sure people in the metro area, is the add-on of the GST component. The federal government is double-dipping. This state government should really take up with the federal government the double-dipping with the GST added to other cost increases. This is just another crippling cost that adds to the cost of doing business in the bush. The lack of services in the bush is adding to the disincentive for people to stay in business in these areas. It can be seen in every second The West Australian that is read. The other day there was an article about a horticulturalist holding up a cauliflower saying that he is going to throw his hands up in the air and stop growing vegetables because of the cost of doing business. If it is not a story like that, it is something else. Water charges, as has been clearly outlined by the member for Stirling, add to costs. The extra little bits that really add to that burden are compliance costs, such as environmental compliance and all those licensing costs that have been mentioned. For trucks to be accredited, people in the bush must drive their rigs sometimes 100 kilometres. They must get accredited every year. For the small number of kilometres they cover, they are put into the same category as people in the transport business who do a million kilometres over a number of years. There are inequities like that. I could go on, but I know the time and I know that other members wish to speak. However, we have to increase investment in real terms in housing for police officers and other public servants in the regional areas to give them a quality of accommodation that will entice them to stay in our regional and remote country areas.
3020 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
Local governments are continually struck by both federal and state government cost shifting. The Western Australian Local Government Association’s “Systemic Sustainability Study Taskforce” report identifies 84 unsustainable councils. Of the 140 local authorities, the WALGA report has identified 84 councils that do not have a sustainable future. That is an enormous worry. Those councils in the bush find it very difficult to maintain roads to the standards and conditions required. To add to their woes, councils unable to maintain a doctor in their local hospital will lose their hospital. Consequently, they dig into the local funds chest and write out a cheque, sometimes for as much as $200 000 or $300 000 a year, in order to provide an incentive for the local doctor to stay in town. It really is criminal to expect country people—the greatest volunteers and the cheapest investment the government has in this state in terms of value for tax investment—to have to come up with that money. It is poor government policy not to capitalise on country values and give the people real incentives by putting real money back into the bush to keep the bush alive and maintain this state’s security of food supply. We must keep people in our rural and regional areas. MR P.D. OMODEI (Warren-Blackwood) [5.41 pm]: I am sure members who have listened to this debate have realised the real level of concern members from rural areas have about the state of the services delivered in the districts and the regions they represent. With large surpluses and larger budgets, Western Australia now enjoys significant economic growth. For example, over the next four years the Treasurer has budgeted $26 billion for infrastructure projects—massive funds by any measure—yet in regional Western Australia the little people in small country towns suffer. I intend to carry on from where some of my colleagues left off. I will refer to the regional partnership known as DOTARS—Department of Transport and Regional Services—grant funding. That department has now been renamed the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government—or DOIT- RDLG, if one wants to call it that. However, the new federal Rudd Labor government has scrapped all the previous department’s projects. On 19 March 2008 I asked the Premier a question on notice in which I referred to the DOTARS regional partnership. I asked — (a) will the Premier provide the following: (i) the name, number and timetable of projects proposed for Western Australia; and (ii) the State Government commitment for each project in dollar terms and ‘in kind’ support? (b) has the Premier or relevant Minister or Department(s) made contact with Prime Minister Rudd or the relevant Commonwealth Minister as to keeping commitments made in writing or otherwise before the Federal Election; (i) if yes, what was the response; (c) what action does the Premier intend to take on this issue; (d) if the Federal Government reneges on this issue, will the State Government fully fund the proposed projects; (i) if not, why not; (e) is the Premier aware that many of the projects have already started, plant and materials ordered and legal commitments made; (i) if yes, will the Premier ensure that these projects come to fruition; and (f) is the Premier aware (case in point) that the Nannup Timewood Centre project showcasing the world’s biggest wooden clock and Telecentre upgrade will be seriously compromised without his direct intervention on the Rural Partnerships Issue? This is the answer I was supplied — Department of the Premier and Cabinet advises: (a) (i) The Commonwealth Department of Transport and Regional Services (DOTARS) administers the Regional Partnerships Funds. Funny, but we knew that. The answer continues — The State Government does not have responsibility for providing information about Commonwealth Government funding programmes. (ii) The State Government funds and provides in-kind support to a large number of regional projects through its own funding programmes.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3021
The State Government does not have a list of any proposed projects under the Commonwealth's Regional Partnerships Funds. Therefore it is not possible to provide details of any State Government funding to these proposed projects. (b) The Premier is advised that the Minister for Regional Development has discussed this matter with the Commonwealth Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. (i) The Premier is advised that discussions are continuing. (c) The Minister for Regional Development has carriage of this issue on behalf of the State Government. (d) The State Government has a number of funding programmes which are available to applicants seeking funding for projects in regional areas. The next answer, “Not applicable”, was given to the question about ensuring that projects come to fruition, and was followed by the answer to the question about whether the Premier was aware of the projects, as follows — (e) The Commonwealth has advised that there will be a proper process for accessing funding consistent with the recommendations of the recent Australian National Audit Office audit into the Regional Partnerships Funds. The Commonwealth has advised that all proponents will need to apply and satisfy criteria for proper management and cost controls. The Commonwealth also advises that proponents have been advised to wait until a properly executed funding agreement is in place before starting any project. (i) Not applicable. And finally — (f) The Minister for Regional Development is currently in discussions with the Commonwealth Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government about the Regional Partnerships Funds matter. If ever there was a Yes Minister answer to a question; that was it. We know that a large number of projects—in excess of 50—across regional Western Australia were agreed to in the years before the federal government changed at the last election. The state government was solidly committed to those same projects. I have had a look at this budget and I cannot find any matching funding from the state. I must admit that a number of the projects are supported by Lotteries Commission grants or by matching or in-kind grants. However, there is no reason the state government could not have accurately answered my question on notice and identified in detail each project—including the federal funding component, the state and local funding components, and the matching arrangements. I will give some examples from my area of regional funding that I am aware of that was approved: the Bunbury Sea Rescue—an inshore project for the purchase of a rescue boat; the Dunsborough Country Club—in August 2007, $320 000 for the new lease of life project; the Shire of Nannup’s Timewood Centre, $400 600; the Gnangangarick Waugal Sculpture Park project in the Shire of Donnybrook Balingup—$70 000 in May 2007; the Leschenault Morrissey Homestead Special Needs and Community Facility—$165 000; the Shire of Augusta- Margaret River for the Jewell Cave upgrade project—$810 000; the Busselton Jetty upgrade—$6 million in July 2007. No-one can tell me the state government does not know about the Busselton Jetty project. Government members have stood in this Parliament to berate the member for Vasse over that matter. Then we had the Margaret River wine cloning rapid multiplication project, for which an application was submitted in July 2007 and which was granted $373 000; the Geographe Bay Cape Naturaliste Light House project, for which an application was submitted in July 2007 and which was granted $437 000; the Stinton Gardens function room, for which an application was submitted in August 2007 for $68 381; the Australian Playing Fields project received $455 000; the southwest speedway training centre received $33 000; the Lake Kepawari project—the member for Collie-Wellington is asleep—for which an application was submitted in December 2007 and which received $507 000. Do not tell me the member for Collie-Wellington does not know about that project. I am sure he knows about it. However, I cannot get a proper answer from the Premier’s department about this project. These are significant projects for the regions. I can go on. The Stirling Street Arts Centre—another $40 000; the Ferguson Valley Centre—another $40 000; the Donnybrook Medical Centre—$400 000 approved in November 2007; the Manjimup truffles project—another $50 000; St Mary’s Community Care Buz HIVE project— $46 000; and the Manjimup avocado summer fruit program—for which application was submitted in 2007 and which received $611 000. These are not minor projects. They are significant projects and this government should have been able to tell this Parliament about them by way of answer to the written question I submitted in March. There is no reason this government could not come up with every single detail in response to my question and, if need be, tell this house
3022 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] that there would be a program to replace the regional funding program. It could be some new whiz-bang, fantastic Labor project—I really do not care. I care about a whole lot of project teams that have assiduously worked well and truly beyond the call of duty to raise funds for these projects because that is the only way we get them up. Farmers go out and plant grain or plant potatoes or run cattle. Whatever the project is, it is achieved in the country through hard work by those communities. Those communities should be rewarded for their effort because nine times out of 10 they produce the lion’s share of the project. I have given the example of the Department of Transport and Regional Services project, which I had intended to discuss in my response to the budget. However, I have now got that off my chest. I have an entire file that is more than one-inch thick on these types of projects for which communities time and again have asked me what the state government is doing about them. These people know the federal projects have been canned, but they want to know what our state government, Premier and Treasurer are doing to ensure that these projects come to fruition. I know the member for Bunbury will tell members that Bunbury Sea Rescue has already ordered the boat. What kind of legal commitments does it have? The same thing applies to the wooden clock project at Nannup. Kevin Bird is making the wooden clock. He is an amazing fellow, very small in stature, and he makes these amazing wooden clocks. All the moving parts are made out of wood. Kevin’s wife is a shire councillor and they work very, very hard for the community. The whole community works very hard. This clock will be a centrepiece; it will put Nannup on the tourist map and it is part of a resource centre and telecentre—the Nannup Timewood Centre—the whole box and dice. It is an excellent project and something that the people and Shire of Nannup are very, very proud of. Members only have to talk to Barbara Dunnet, the Nannup Shire Council President. I asked a question about this matter—I am not a Johnny-come-lately; I do not waste time asking stupid questions in this place—and it was a serious question that should have been answered by the government. An even more important services issue concerns child health services in my own community of Manjimup, where my electorate office is. As members would know, Manjimup has a population of about 5 000 people and probably about 7 500 people in the greater area of Manjimup. It is a service centre used by a lot of people from Bridgetown, Nannup, Walpole and the broader community. The available staff for child health services in Manjimup are a child health nurse, 0.8, and a family nurse, 0.6, to service the entire area. Bear in mind that Manjimup has a high school with in excess of 700 students, two primary schools with somewhere between 300 and 400 students each, and Catholic schools that would have at least another 250 students. The nurses also service the areas of Pemberton, which has a district high school, as does Northcliffe. Bridgetown also has a high school, but Bridgetown has some of its own services. Therefore, we have a situation in which the place is severely understaffed to deal with families at risk. Since the restructure of the timber industry in the lower south west, there is no doubt that Manjimup has attracted a lot of families, which we would describe as families at risk. These families are not only Indigenous families, but also white families—they are families on low incomes who are struggling to survive. The Department for Communities’ boundaries have changed and it is now administered from Albany, which is a long way from Manjimup. Counselling is also very busy and it is very difficult to — Mr P.B. Watson: Member, what went to Albany, sorry? Mr P.D. OMODEI: The Department for Communities. Rather than operating from Bunbury it now operates from Albany. I could understand the Albany office covering the area as far as Walpole, but it is another 130-odd kilometres to Manjimup from there. Disabled or elderly people tend to get quicker access because of their dire need. Home and Community Care and Silver Chain are stretched. I will give members an example. A client in Manjimup had a caesarean and a stillborn child. She had massive blood loss and was very fortunate to have survived. The family has two small children who need to be cared for—one in primary school and one who has just started kindergarten. The only home help that the child health nurse could find was someone from the local church group who offered one to two hours a week to clean the bathroom and mop and vacuum the floors. The child health nurse has also been trying to assist a mother who has two small children and is pregnant with triplets. This family will have five children under four years of age. The cost to the state would have been greatly reduced if that mother had been able to go full term at King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women. However, she had to be flown to Perth by air ambulance and, because of the costs that we heard about in yesterday’s debate in this place on the Royal Flying Doctor Service, the mother had to be brought back to Manjimup by car. She was in pain and suffering and, certainly, it was a very painful journey for her. The RFDS said that the cost of the flight was to the Perth hospital; therefore, it could not bring the mother back by plane. This was in a modern era and it simply would not happen in a regional centre or in the metropolitan area. We cannot describe Manjimup as a small town; it is a significant subregional centre. When the nurses go into a family home for home assistance, the child health committee has to assess the house, as far as safety is concerned, for public liability. People who have home carers must have their homes assessed. The health committee is charged $75 for the assessment, which is charged to the Manjimup Family Centre so that carers can help those people.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3023
There is also the issue of insurance. The Manjimup Family Centre is 64 years old and has been servicing that community for all this time. It is at a critical stage; it has a tiny bit of money in the bank that it has scrimped and saved by using its car and a lot of other things it was allocated. However, there is no real assistance for families at risk. As I say, in a booming, modern economy at a time when we talk about providing for the next generation and building on the boom, we have in a significant country town these kinds of issues in which families are being placed at risk because of a lack of government resources. That is just not good enough. I reiterate it is 0.8 for the child health nurse and 0.6 for the family nurse. I can tell members that it was a lot better in days gone by than what it is in today’s modern scenario. I raise an issue on behalf of the Manjimup Family Centre’s Andre Foulon, who has just come up with an amazing new program called Bands@Manjimup, which almost won the family youth project award. There is a photograph of people involved in the project with the Minister for Youth in the Family Centre News anniversary edition. I think the project was runner-up. That project attracted young people and gave them something to do. The centre’s budget has an extra $671 but it still must deal with extra children, rent rises and electricity rises. The budget increases are infinitesimal, such as a 0.75 per cent increase in the budget for 2007-08 for a pay rise for their level 7 and level 1 employees. People who work at the family centre work an extra 12 hours a week without any pay. I wonder whether that would happen in the metropolitan area. I suspect that probably happens in a lot of the non-government agencies. However, I think we really must have a good look at what we are doing for our families, young children and young mums. We need to do things such as identify early learning difficulties in kids and look after young pregnant mothers. That is what an affluent society does. People used to do it in Europe 50 or 60 years ago, yet these communities are struggling and have to almost beg for an increase in funding for family centres and community centres. I can only say that it is very, very important that teachers’ pay and conditions attract teachers to the country. The housing conditions have already been mentioned and comprise Government Employees’ Housing Authority houses that are old, brown brick buildings and old fibro buildings that are not up to scratch anymore. A husband and wife team can get a job in a local government authority in middle management in the metropolitan area or a major regional centre and earn well over $100 000. That cannot happen for a single income family or person who moves to regional Western Australia; they need to have proper housing. My heart goes out to the teachers who live in these conditions. I think some of the members have discussed the issue of levels and permanency and the range of issues that need to be addressed about teachers’ housing. I believe that the principal of a school should live in the town where the school is. A number of our schools in the south west have principals who, and it is their right, choose to live in an area close to the sea whether it be Busselton or Margaret River and so on. I think that needs to be seriously considered because the principal of a school or the sergeant at a police station must live in that town and become part of the culture of those towns, otherwise I think our communities will go backwards. I will leave my remarks there. Obviously, we are very keen for this motion to be carried. It really asks the government to recognise that there are issues that are slipping under the radar. There are a lot of families and a lot of young kids who are suffering and the government needs to do something about it. Debate interrupted, pursuant to standing orders. Sitting suspended from 6.00 to 7.00 pm APPROPRIATION (CONSOLIDATED ACCOUNT) BILL (NO. 1) 2008 APPROPRIATION (CONSOLIDATED ACCOUNT) BILL (NO. 2) 2008 Second Reading — Cognate Debate Resumed from an earlier stage of the sitting. MR J.J.M. BOWLER (Murchison-Eyre) [7.00 pm]: When the state budget was first brought down in this chamber last week, I must say that I was extremely disappointed. The budget speech that was handed out came on 13 printed pages. I read through those 13 pages and nowhere did I see the words “goldfields”, “Kalgoorlie” or “Boulder” mentioned, nor did I see any of the towns in my electorate mentioned. Therefore, I described the budget there and then—maybe it was too precipitous—as the 3P budget: pedestrian, Perth and Pilbara. However, although I may have given it a fail mark initially, upon closer inspection I would have to give it a pass, but only just. I say that because that we have $58 million for waste water and water supply projects and $15.1 million— long overdue—for road improvements in the region, including $11.5 million to reconstruct the Lake Raeside crossing just south of Leonora on the Kalgoorlie-Leonora highway. That project has been promised by successive governments ever since cyclone Bobby washed away that section of the highway in about 1994, I think. Twenty years before that, in 1974, it was also washed away. On both occasions, Leonora and the north eastern goldfields were isolated. Therefore, that $11.5 million will be much welcomed. Lake Raeside has been a big worry for people in the north eastern goldfields, and I welcome that funding.
3024 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
There is also $10.2 million for the Kalgoorlie courthouse upgrade, and I will speak briefly about that. There is $6.4 million for the Blackstone remote multifunction police facility, $3.2 million for the Curtin Vtech—I will speak about education later, but that money is very welcome—and $2.8 million for the first stage of work at the Kalgoorlie Regional Hospital. As I said, the Kalgoorlie courthouse upgrade has been allocated $10.2 million. At the budget presentation in Kalgoorlie last Friday morning, I said to the Minister for Goldfields-Esperance, Hon Ljiljanna Ravlich, that I would like her to take one message back to the government from the goldfields; that is, we would like Minister for Health, who is also the Attorney General, to switch the funding priorities, as $10 million is set aside for the Kalgoorlie courthouse, for which there is no demand in the goldfields; there is no clamour to build a new courthouse. It is something that the community will welcome, but there is no great demand for it. However, there is a huge demand for and a huge level of expectation about the redevelopment of the hospital. That has been going on since the Labor Party came to power in 2001. A number of promises have been made. It was delayed last year, and although the funding will start this year, the goldfields community was hoping that rather than $2.8 million being allocated to the hospital, the $10 million would go towards the redevelopment of the hospital and the $2.8 million would go to the courthouse upgrade. We were not asking for more money; we were just saying that the priorities were the wrong way around. Dr K.D. Hames: That’s the Kalgoorlie Regional Hospital, isn’t it? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: Yes. We would rather have $10.2 million each for the courthouse and the hospital. However, to be fair, if we cannot have the extra money, we are saying that the priorities should be switched. Dr K.D. Hames: I don’t think it has changed since I worked there in 1977. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: One more wing was built after 1977. Sorry, two wings were built in the early 1980s when Ian Taylor was the member for Kalgoorlie. My attitude is this: if this government could see the commonsense of switching those two funds and giving priority to the Kalgoorlie Regional Hospital redevelopment, this budget for the goldfields would go from an initial fail to a pass of just 50 per cent, and it may even get up to 60 per cent. Is a credit 60 per cent or 65 per cent? Mr R.C. Kucera: It is 65 per cent. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: Is it 65 per cent? A distinction is 75 per cent, is it not? The government could even get a credit. People in the goldfields do not complain and rail. Basically, they just get on and do the job themselves. As I said to the Minister for Goldfields-Esperance, when people visit Kalgoorlie, everywhere they go they hear people ask when the hospital is going to be done. Has anyone ever asked about when the courthouse will be done? No. My suggestion is very logical. I say once again to the Minister for Health and Attorney General that if he were to switch those two levels of funding, the mark for the budget could even go from 50 per cent to 65 per cent. I will now move on to some general areas of the budget. One area that particularly interests me is Indigenous affairs, including Indigenous housing. I am a former Minister for Sport and Recreation, and I was involved in the discussions about the new stadium, as was my colleague to my left, who is also a former Minister for Sport and Recreation. I would like to see a new stadium. I am a supporter of the West Coast Eagles and I cannot get to the Eagles games. However, how can I support a $1.1 billion stadium—it will be $2 billion by the time it is finished—when people in my electorate are living in squalor? How can I say that we should spend $1.1 billion on a new football stadium that will be filled to its capacity of 60 000 only when the derby is played, twice a year? The Eagles will have to lose only one more game and Subiaco Oval will not even be filled to its present capacity. At the same time, $370 million-odd—that will balloon out to half a billion dollars—will be spent on the riverfront in Perth. Once again, that is something that we would like to have and it is something that all Western Australians would generally support. They might argue and there might be some conjecture over the architecture, the style and the landscaping, but it is a good project. However, how can we say that it has priority over Indigenous affairs, and Indigenous housing in particular? I have many Indigenous families in my electorate, from the lands around Leonora and Laverton, around Kalgoorlie-Boulder, through to Tjuntjuntjara and Coonana, and they live in Third World squalor. It is a disgrace. The only reason that Fitzroy Crossing and Halls Creek in the Kimberley got any recognition was that a journalist went there and did a story about those places. If journalists want to come to my electorate, I can show them 10 places like that. The trouble is that showing journalists 10 places like that does not have the same impact. It is a disgrace! I wrote to the Premier—if the Premier is listening in his office—some time ago saying that Indigenous housing needed a big increase in funding. There has been a big increase, but it is still not enough. There will be 43 houses built by Homeswest this year in the goldfields-Esperance region. I could easily take 43 houses just into the lands where three to four families are living in one house. That causes all the social problems. That causes the kids not to attend school. That causes people not to get prospects for employment. How would members like it if they were one of three families living in a house built for one family? They could not function. Until this government and the federal government put a massive increase of funds into Indigenous housing, the problem will continue. People, even some who are racist, will say, “Yes, we will build houses for them, but they’ll just wreck them.”
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3025
Houses are being built in Wiluna. I take great pride in the measures I achieved in Wiluna when I was the minister with special responsibility for Wiluna. In Wiluna, where we have built houses and done up some old ones, we made sure that the homemaker program was in there straightaway. That is what must happen. People will say, “Why build new houses for them when they just destroy them?” We have to give them the assistance and the education processes that will help them live in these new houses. When they are in a house, with only one family to a house, they will take pride in the house. The next issue will be jobs, but how can anyone expect adults to go to work and children to go to school when 15 to 20 people live in a three-bedroom house? I could not do it and I doubt whether any member of this house could do it. I therefore urge the government to increase the funding for Indigenous housing. The government has increased funding for the housing and land program to $1.2 billion this year. That is a significant increase. I have not looked at percentages, but the increase is about 40 to 50 per cent—well above inflation. However, that increase would be gobbled up in the first six months just in my electorate alone. I therefore say to the Premier and to the Minister for Housing and Works, Hon Michelle Roberts—who is the ideal person to have the dual portfolios of housing and Indigenous affairs—that we just need more money. I cannot support a stadium or riverfront niceties being built in Perth when my constituents are living the way they are. The next issue I want to talk about is land prices. I think the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is a wonderful minister. I think she has won over the people of Western Australia with her hard work, her zeal, her dedication and her commitment. If she and this government have had one failing, it is in the area of land prices. When the Labor Party came to office in 2001, people could buy a reasonable block of land in a reasonable location, such as Armadale and around the Midland area, for well under $100 000; today it is $200 000. The minister and the government can lay the blame wherever they want to. They can talk about private landholders ramping up land prices. The fact of the matter is that land prices in Perth—even in the goldfields—are too high. In Kalgoorlie-Boulder now a block of land is currently $200 000. That is just far too high. Thankfully, a lot of old battleaxe blocks are being divided, but even there — Mr R.C. Kucera: There are a lot of battleaxes up there! Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: There are a few battleaxes! Even in Kalgoorlie-Boulder the price is now getting up to about $130 000 for a battleaxe block on the back of an old quarter-acre block of land. That is too expensive. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan interjected. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: I just gave the minister a bit of a rap; she should have been in the chamber then. Dr K.D. Hames interjected. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: No, I gave her a rap before. I do not know what is causing the increase in land prices. I doubt that it is the environmental lobby, which seems to be voracious in over-planning house releases, or private landholders who are holding onto land to make super profits. I am sure that if people could sell a block of land now for $200 000, they would rush in and get it developed. I cannot imagine people sitting on their land and holding up development now when they could get that money in their pockets. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: Member, you’ve got to invest. You are actually not taking into account how much it costs to create a block. Developers are saying that they are not going to put in $86 000 or $90 000 a block, which is what it takes to create the block, when they don’t know how long they will have it on the market, as sales are so slow. That is one problem. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: Getting back to the minister’s point about planning, I think we need to attack the fact that it costs so much. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: Are you saying that we don’t put in sewerage, we don’t put in power and we don’t put in roads? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: I think we over-plan almost to the death of some projects. I am saying that we do not want to see happen here what has happened in Houston. I was in Houston, where the opposite is the case. A friend of mine bought a two-storey, four-bedroom house in Houston for $165 000. The land cost $30 000. However, there is poor planning in Houston and it will have some problems down the track. However, we go too far the other way. We go to ridiculous lengths in planning with environmental clearances and controls. People are complaining that one of the problems they will face in the new satellite city south of Perth is noise. Of course they will face bloody noise, because it is in that location because it is next to the railway line and the freeway. We could take away the railway line and the freeway but then people would not want to put a satellite city there. How ridiculous! Those people objecting should be dismissed out of hand. Mr J.E. McGrath: You should be back in the party.
3026 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: I am just pointing out again the fantastic achievements of the minister and the one failing. With only one failing out of 100, people cannot complain too much. The next issue I want to talk about is education. The Minister for Education and Training has just walked into the chamber. When the Labor Party came to office in 2001, it was left with a hotchpotch by the previous Minister for Education, the member for Cottesloe, when Eastern Goldfields College was divided. Mr J.E. McGrath: It was a Labor minister. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: No. At the time, people in the goldfields thought that having an upper school and a middle school would work and would certainly improve upper school achievements, and it did. The upper school side of things has been a success. However, that has been counterbalanced by some very poor performances and poor outcomes in the middle school. Dr K.D. Hames: I agree. It’s exactly the same in my electorate; the middle school is hopeless. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: The middle school comprises years 8, 9 and 10. Sadly, it is when children in the goldfields are at that age level that families decide to either stay in or leave the goldfields. They leave because they do not want to send their kids to years 8, 9 and 10 there because the middle school for those years in the goldfields is a debacle. It has great staff and they are doing their best, but they have some serious problems. Even though extra money for programs is thrown at it, less is spent per student at Eastern Goldfields College than is spent at any other high school in the state. Why do I say that? Successive governments, Liberal and Labor, have thrown extra money at programs there, but the fact is that there are so many teachers in their first and second years out of university that the wages bill is about $1.5 million a year less than it is for an equivalent size school in Perth. What I am saying is that less is spent on the students. The outcomes are some of the worst, if not the worst, in the state; perhaps Port Hedland is worse. The outcome levels are terrible. It is not as though the government is spending all this extra money and there are poor outcomes. Less money per student is spent at Kalgoorlie and the outcomes are terrible. I made one suggestion to the teachers’ union when I was a minister and when we were facing a teacher shortage. The teacher shortage is being felt most in my electorate. Last year the Minister for Education and Training did a magnificent job in getting a lot of teachers out of non-teaching areas and into the classroom. That overcame the problem in the goldfields. There was hardly a school in the goldfields in 2008 that started the year with a teacher shortage. However, that will not happen again next year, as people can be taken out of those non-teaching areas only once. Next year they cannot be taken out again, so there will be another teacher shortage; there is nothing more sure. That is because there is an Australia-wide shortage of teachers, but it is particularly the case in Western Australia. Guess where it will be felt the hardest? It will be felt hardest in my electorate, in towns such as Leonora, Laverton, Leinster and even Kalgoorlie-Boulder. What is the solution? My solution is this: a school that normally has 20 teachers—according to the number of students, type of students and percentage of low socioeconomic students—but can get only 18 teachers is roughly 10 per cent down on staffing levels. Although the Department of Education and Training’s budget allows the school to pay for 20 teachers, I say the school should pay the 18 teachers the amount that 20 teachers would receive. I basically said to the union that instead of 26 kids to a class, the school would have 26 plus 2.6, or plus 10 per cent—which would be about 29 kids. The union does not want that because it wants smaller class sizes. That is great, but the reality is that we will not have the teachers. The fact that we will not have the teachers should be recognised. The teachers in remote areas are the teachers who are doing the extra workload, and they should be paid subject to the amount allocated in the budget for a full complement of teachers. The government would not have to find more money in the budget, because at the start of the school year it would know the number of kids in the school system and what the full complement of teachers would be; therefore, it would use the budgeted amount to pay the teachers for the extra work they were doing. That might encourage the teachers to stay in the regions. The teachers in the regions would start earning a little bit more money; otherwise, as the member for Stirling said, they would continue to gravitate to the western suburbs of Perth. The western suburbs of Perth would be the last to feel and face a teacher shortage. The teacher shortage would be felt in schools in my electorate, where the outcomes are already worse than those in the western suburbs. I would not mind if, for whatever reason, our education system was producing better outcomes in my electorate, such as higher TEE scores than those achieved in Perth’s western suburbs, but it is not. For whatever reason, the outcomes are abysmally low, and they will get worse as the teacher shortage deepens in the next five to six years. I cannot see an end to it; it will get worse. The union might complain and say that I am going against its campaign for smaller class sizes and better conditions. However, my proposal recognises that, in the short term, there will be a teacher shortage. The minister has embarked on a number of recruitment campaigns, but there is a limit to how many teachers from outside this state can be attracted to this state. If we start increasing the number of student teachers at our universities, it will take four years to get them out into classrooms. We will have a teacher shortage. Let us recognise that fact and try to address the problem in regional and remote areas. The mining industry is the lifeblood of this state. It pays the members in this place and makes them feel good. I get the feeling that at times both the state government and the federal government pay lip service to the fact that
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3027 the mining industry exists and produces the state’s wealth. Yesterday’s federal budget did not provide for flow- through shares. Both the state and federal governments believe that this wealth will continue forever and that new mines will continue to be established. I advise members that the mines are now being mined quicker than they were previously. The current boom is not about finding new mines; it is about mining the mines quicker. That means they will close quicker and we will need to find new mines. Mr J.E. McGrath: Do you support a casino in Kalgoorlie? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: No, I do not support a casino in Kalgoorlie in the same way that I do not support poker machines in Western Australia. [Member’s time extended.] Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: We take the golden goose for granted. I am very concerned about cutting back in the areas that can be explored through the acquisition of former pastoral stations throughout the goldfields and turned into reserves. Recently I was reassured a little by the Minister for the Environment on that matter, but it remains a grave concern to me. The federal and state governments need to look at the issue in the long term. If we start greenfield exploration now for new mines, it would take, on average, five to six years to prove up a mine and three or four years after that to develop it. Therefore, we would be looking at eight years before a mine was in full production. Out of the existing mines in Western Australia—not iron ore mines, but nickel mines and most of the goldmines—more than half will be closed within eight years. Mr P.D. Omodei: Are you referring to Mt Weld? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: Mt Weld, which is south of Laverton—the new rare earth project. Mr P.D. Omodei: It is the area that people are talking about making a conservation park for permanent tenure. It is a highly mineralised area. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: That is one area, but what is of particular concern is the Mt Manning Range, north of Southern Cross. The iron ore in the Yilgarn region is of a higher quality and tonnage than the iron ore in the mid- west. The mid-west has had four or five years start on the Yilgarn region. Some wonderful iron ore deposits can be found in the Yilgarn, but that whole area will be sterilised if we let the green lobby take over totally. We are going into the silly season; that is, into an election. I notice that every time we face an election both parties beat their breast and say that they will jail more people than the other party. They say that they will lock people up for longer than the other party would. They then spend the next three and a half years trying to work out how to reduce the number of people in our jails. Many of my constituents are in jail because they did not have a white man’s bit of paper called a driver’s licence. Until now some of these people could not get a driver’s licence. Thankfully, they now have a police station at which they can get a driver’s licence. These people, who have been driving for years, would drive to Laverton and be picked up for a random breath test. Although they were not drunk, they would be asked for their licence. They would ask what a licence was. They would be shown what a licence is and because they did not have one, they would be given, perhaps, a $40 fine. Over four or five years they may have been picked up for the same offence three times. They have not been picked up for being a bad driver or for speeding, but the third time they are picked up for not having a driver’s licence they are automatically jailed. They do not have a choice. That is the reason, member for Hillarys, members must be cautious about wanting to have mandatory jail sentences. This is a case for which a mandatory jail sentence should be removed. Magistrates and judges should be given the discretion to determine whether to jail the person or impose another penalty. Mr R.F. Johnson: That is the existing law. I am not advocating that; I am advocating certain penalties against people who continually drink and drive, drive at excessive speed and act in a hoon behaviour and are a danger on the roads. There is one lady in Kalgoorlie who, as you are probably aware, has been before the courts about 14 times and on eight occasions it has been for drink-driving offences. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: In such a case I do not have a complaint. However, some of my constituents are in jail because they do not have a white man’s piece of paper. Mr R.C. Kucera: We have the same problem with refugees in the city at the moment. It is a great shame that the police service has discontinued the special program for teaching Indigenous people how to drive. Mr R.F. Johnson: I agree that it should be doing that, but you cannot let people flout the law all the time, irrespective of their background. They have to obey the law of the land. If they are picked up more than once, the police or the licensing department should ensure that these people are forced to take a test and get a white man’s piece of paper , if that is what the member wants to call it. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure has organised with the new Warburton Police Station for those people to get a licence. Better still, the new superintendent of the Eastern Goldfields Regional Prison is processing prisoners who do not have a driver’s licence to enable them to get the necessary
3028 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] permit. When they leave prison, they have a driver’s licence and will not go out again to become a criminal by driving without a licence a fifth time and then go back through the revolving door. Mr J.E. McGrath: Do they own their own vehicle? Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: I do not know. It does not matter whether they are driving their own vehicle or somebody else’s vehicle. Vehicles can be confiscated. People can be penalised in many ways to encourage good behaviour. A friend of mine is a prison officer and he takes these people into court. After the court has sentenced them to jail they try to walk out to the front of the court. They do not know whether they are going to jail or walking out the door. When the prison officer says that they are to go with him, they say that it is okay. If we think jail is a deterrent, we are kidding ourselves. We are locking up people who should not be in jail. They are away from their families and loved ones. It is not humane. Mr R.F. Johnson: The system is failing them. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: The member for Hillarys wants to lock up people. As we approach the election both parties will thump their chest and say, “We will lock up more people for longer than the other mob.” They will then spend the next three and a half years trying to find a way to get them out of jail because it is too costly to keep them in jail and it is counterproductive. People come out of jail and all they have learnt is to be a better criminal. I will finish on a silly issue; that is, the members of Parliament car park. When I came into this place in 2001 every car in that car park was Australian-made. Now, much to my disgust, a quarter of the cars, paid for by the taxpayers of Western Australia, are not Australian-made. I have no complaints about what people do with their own money. If they want to buy an overseas-made car, they can do it. However, a quarter to one-third of the cars in the members’ car park are overseas-made cars. Can members imagine the parliamentary vehicles of Japanese members of Parliament being Commodores and Falcons? They would be Toyotas, Mazdas etc. In Germany would they drive Toyotas or anything else that was not made in Germany? It is a disgrace that members are using taxpayers’ money — Mr J.E. McGrath: It wouldn’t be many. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: It does not matter whether it is one. The only one we can possibly condone is the Toyota Prius, which is not made in Australia. Politicians should not be driving cars that are almost identical to those made in Australia by Australian workers. No wonder the Mitsubishi factory in Adelaide has just closed when politicians are not using taxpayers’ money to buy Australian-made cars. That argument is symbolic. No-one can stop members doing what they want with their own money; they can buy whatever they want. However, if it is taxpayers’ money, whether members are ministers or backbenchers, they should be buying Australian-made cars first. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: I stand by my decision to get a Prius. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: I said that that was the only car that members can justify buying, because it is not made in Australia. We hope the Rudd government will provide encouragement and financial incentives for our car manufacturers to go down that path. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: I think that is going to happen. Mr J.J.M. BOWLER: I might even buy a Prius myself. On the other hand I think I will stick with Commodores! MR J.E. McGRATH (South Perth) [7.31 pm]: I would like to begin my remarks in the budget debate by making a few comments about one of my shadow portfolios; namely racing. I want to talk about the Betfair fiasco. Mr P.D. Omodei: It’s a fiasco. Mr J.E. McGRATH: What a fiasco it turned out to be. Members might recall how the member for Rockingham, the former Minister for Racing and Gaming, who was in the chamber earlier — Mr J.J.M. Bowler I was the one who took them to court. Mr J.E. McGRATH: The former Minister for Racing and Gaming got on his high horse and led a wild charge to ban betting exchanges, particularly one called Betfair, from operating in Western Australia. This government rammed through legislation that would see Western Australians face fines of up to $10 000 or two years in jail if found guilty of placing bets with any betting exchange operator. However, that penalty would probably not apply to anyone who seriously assaulted a police officer. I think that, in this instance, the government made a shocking error of judgement. Not only did Betfair take the WA government to the High Court and win the case, but also all the costs were awarded against the government. Now the current Minister for Racing and Gaming, who is a member of the other place, tells us that the taxpayers of Western Australia may have to foot a bill for half a
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3029 million dollars over that lost court case. We received that information last night when Hon Barry House asked the minister how much Betfair’s court challenge would cost the Western Australian taxpayers. The minister replied that she had not received any notice of the question. She went on to make the following comments — I would say that it would be in the order of around $500 000, if that. It will probably be less than that. It will be anything from $200 000 to $500 000. I have not yet been presented with the final figure, but I will be quite happy to make that public. We will be very reassured by that because, considering that it is taxpayers’ money, the government has a duty to make it public. Are we sure that that figure is correct? It is a figure that has been bandied around in the media today after the minister’s answer last night that it could be $500 000. However, I am advised that Racing and Wagering Western Australia’s costs in fighting this case might reasonably be close to $1 million, which is on top of the contribution to Betfair’s costs. Who knows what the final figure will be? All we know is that it is an amount that must be carried by the taxpayers of Western Australia. What is worse is that the legislation that was passed in 2006 has not delivered a single dollar of revenue to Western Australia, which may have been the case if the government had been prepared to negotiate with Betfair. The opposition warned the former minister, the member for Rockingham, that he should consult more widely before jumping in and making that decision. Do members know what the minister did? He would not even meet the executives of Betfair. That highly successful worldwide company, a betting agency that operates on the internet, was approved by such bodies as the Australian Football League and the Australian Cricket Board to bet on its product. The then Minister for Racing and Gaming in Western Australia refused to meet Betfair. Do members know how many times Betfair tried unsuccessfully to meet the minister? Would they believe it was eight times? Noel Crichton-Browne got a meeting with the member for Rockingham before he was a minister, and he did not make even one phone call, but the Betfair people could not get a meeting with the former Minister for Racing and Gaming. This government is a joke. It bangs on about the immaturity of people on this side of the chamber when its ministers are either downright incompetent or are so arrogant that they will not meet people who are major players in gambling when very important legislation is to be introduced such as that which seeks to ban the internet betting agency from operating in Western Australia. This government is happy to talk about putting $1.5 million into the South Sydney Rabbitohs to help that team. It is hardly the most successful team in Australia. I think it has won one game this year, yet this government spoke to people involved with the Rabbitohs who came to Perth. Mr R.C. Kucera: They have a good-looking owner! Mr J.E. McGRATH: Yes. I do not know whether it was the owners of the club who came here, but I believe the government is considering paying $1.5 million to have the “Go West Now” campaign placed on the Rabbitohs’ guernseys. This government will talk to people in a sporting club like that, yet a former minister would not pay Betfair the courtesy of an interview. That was his attitude despite the fact that Betfair is part-owned by James Packer’s gaming and media company Publishing and Broadcasting Ltd, and we know that PBL owns Burswood Casino. As shadow minister for gaming, I know that Burswood Casino has a very good relationship with the government. I am bewildered by the fact that, while all this was going on, the former Minister for Racing and Gaming refused to meet this reputable betting agency on a very important issue. It is interesting that the member for Rockingham’s successor as Minister for Racing and Gaming, the member for Murchison-Eyre, who has just left the chamber, agreed to meet Betfair when he was the minister. It is interesting also that he agreed to that meeting after the legislation had been passed and Betfair had launched a legal challenge against the government’s decision. An article in The West Australian of Friday, 2 February 2007 under the headline “Unlike McGowan, Bowler agrees to meet Betfair” reads — Racing and Gaming Minister John Bowler has agreed to meet officials from controversial internet betting giant Betfair this month, something his predecessor, Mark McGowan, refused to do on numerous occasions while overseeing legislation banning West Australians from punting on betting exchanges. Betfair, half-owned by James Packer’s Publishing and Broadcasting Ltd, is taking the State Government to the High Court believing new laws banning West Australians from punting with betting exchanges such as Betfair breach the Commonwealth Constitution. Last year, when the State Government was drawing up its legislation, Betfair tried unsuccessfully to meet Mr McGowan on at least eight occasions. Betfair director Andrew Twaits said the meeting with Mr Bowler would help to dispel some myths about the anti-betting exchange legislation However, something happened. The meeting that the new minister Mr Bowler was to have with Betfair was called off. A story appeared five days later in The West Australian under the headline “Bowler calls off Betfair meeting”. It states — Just days after indicating he was happy to talk with officials of Betfair, Racing and Gaming Minister John Bowler has cancelled this month’s meeting with the internet betting giant.
3030 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
Last Thursday, three days after Betfair . . . launched legal action against the State Government in the High Court over its new anti-betting exchange laws, Mr Bowler’s office confirmed that the Minister was still meeting Betfair. But on Monday Mr Bowler announced he had postponed the meeting and would not reschedule with Betfair until the High Court action was completed. It is worth with pointing out — Mr Bowler postponed the meeting even though he was aware when Betfair wrote to him seeking a meeting that legal action was likely. What happened? Who intervened to dissuade the new minister from meeting with Betfair? Who pulled the plug on the meeting? Was it the member for Rockingham? Was it the Premier? Was it the Attorney General, who wields a lot of power in the ALP, or was it one of the highly paid spin doctors? Something happened. What happened to Betfair is similar to the sort of jackboot behaviour that we saw a couple of weeks ago when 16 police officers raided the Sunday Times. They had received a complaint from the Department of the Premier and Cabinet about something that had fallen off the back of a truck and into the hands of a Sunday Times journalist. The story did not please the government so the police arrived on the scene. What sort of state are we living in? That incident received publicity around Australia. Police with guns went into a newspaper office in a free country to conduct a search. Even the member for Yokine would not have done that in the old days when he was a policeman; he would have at least left his firearm in the car. Mr P. Papalia: Why are you so keen on Betfair? Mr J.E. McGRATH: I am keen on the fact that we need to let the people of Western Australia know why they will be paying such a big bill for defending the government’s legislation in the High Court. We need to do that because it is public money. We did not oppose the bill, and I will explain to the member why we did not. We are a big supporter of the racing industry. Mr P. Papalia: Betfair will not support the Western Australian racing industry. Mr J.E. McGRATH: Betfair was legalised by the Tasmanian Labor government. Mr P. Papalia: I know what you are talking about but besides that, what is in it for the Western Australian racing industry to give Betfair easy access to our market? Mr J.E. McGRATH: That is not the point. Mr P. Papalia: Where is the benefit to the Western Australian taxpayer? Mr J.E. McGRATH: Why do people who do not follow the racing industry have to contribute to a bungled court case? Mr P. Papalia: They will contribute because we will not have the revenue from the TAB that we otherwise would have had. Mr J.E. McGRATH: The member has missed the point. Has he ever been to the races? I will take him there one day and explain a few things to him. Let us look at some of the comments that were made during the progress of the bill. I have already said that the opposition supported the bill. We did not oppose it because the racing industry wanted to ban Betfair. We asked the minister to consult more widely because more time was needed. We are moving into a new era of betting on racing through internet gambling. I will explain it to the member. The member for Avon was the only member who spoke out and warned the government that it would lose the court case. I pay him his due. He said it was against the federal Constitution and would not stand up if tested in the court. He pointed to section 92 of the Constitution, which states that there shall be no restriction of trade or commerce between the states. Regardless of whether that section of the Constitution is right or wrong, it is in the Constitution. The member for Avon told the minister on several occasions that he could not make the legislation stand up in court, and he was proved to be correct. The opposition decided it would not oppose the legislation because the racing industry had some concerns about the integrity of the sport and the erosion of TAB profits, which is fair enough. Initially I had concerns about the integrity of the sporting industry and I even put out a media release. When I raised my concerns during the debate, the minister read it out to me. I thought Betfair might encourage unscrupulous people to offer inducements to trainers or jockeys to stop horses from winning. Unlike the minister, I agreed to meet with Betfair and it flew over some representatives. They could not get a meeting with the minister so they asked to talk to me as the shadow Minister for Racing and Gaming, which I did. The minister could not believe that I had spoken to people from Betfair. He said he was gobsmacked. I admit that they were difficult times. After speaking with the people from Betfair I was satisfied that the issues of integrity would be addressed. Betfair was prepared
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3031 to give all its books to the racing stewards so that the stewards would have even more accountability of who was operating on the races than they do when people bet in cash because all Betfair transactions are recorded. They were difficult times for the opposition. Influential people in the racing media were peddling all kinds of misinformation and a lot of intimidatory tactics were employed during the debate. I was given the impression that if the Liberal Party did not support the legislation, a campaign would be run against us in the pages of The West Australian. I was disappointed to hear that and wondered why someone from The West Australian would say that. I do not know whether there was another agenda because Racing and Wagering WA is a big customer of the newspaper through the TABform and the daily lift-out. That certainly made it difficult for us to go through the process. I also took the view that the opposition had to support the racing industry because it was trying to protect its major revenue source. We knew that the government had not looked at this issue closely enough. I still do not know why the minister was so intransigent and wanted to rush through this legislation. The opposition in the upper house tried to have the bill referred to a committee. Hon Barry House said that Western Australia was entering a new world of internet gambling and that we should not rush in and make any rash decisions. What did the government do? It got the Greens (WA) onside and the bill was bulldozed through Parliament. This form of betting is difficult even for me to understand and comprehend and yet the legislation was rushed through Parliament without even talking to the proponents and without looking at it properly, which a committee might have done. As a result, the taxpayers have been left with a bill. We still do not know how much that bill will be. The Minister for Racing and Gaming said last night that it could be as high as $500 000 and my sources say it could be higher. We will find out and we will continue to pursue the government until we know what the cost is so that the public knows how much this action has cost the government. I will speak for a few minutes about how the government has politicised the racing industry. Hon Nick Griffiths, who is a member of the other place, was the Minister for Racing and Gaming when Racing and Wagering WA was introduced. He was the champion of the new body. People in the racing industry have welcomed it and I support Racing and Wagering WA. The racing industry says that Hon Nick Griffiths was the best racing minister it has had for some time. They speak very highly of him but he somehow fell out of favour with the factions in the ALP. I do not know which faction he is in but he was left standing on the outside looking in and will not be running at the next election. Hon Nick Griffiths was a very strong supporter of RWWA. I note that the former Minister for Racing and Gaming, the member for Rockingham, is back in the chamber. We have a good relationship and what I say today is not personal; it is about putting on the record what happened during that very difficult debate. I have a problem with the government whenever there is a controversy in racing, such as when the TAB had to settle a matter out of court over the Craig Rosendorff affair. He was a Perth jeweller who fancied a bet. The TAB knew he liked to bet and made it easier for him to bet by giving him credit to bet. It became quite a famous case because he lost millions of dollars. One day a smart lawyer told him that the Totalisator Agency Board had broken the law by allowing him to bet on credit. It is unlawful for the TAB to give credit to customers; customers have to have the money in advance or they have to have money in a TAB account. The matter did not reach court because the TAB settled out of court. The member for Rockingham was the Minister for Racing and Gaming at the time. The settlement figure has never been revealed. [Member’s time extended.] Mr J.E. McGRATH: Whenever that case is mentioned—it has been mentioned a couple of times—the government responds by saying that Racing and Wagering WA is an independent body, that it has no comment to make about RWWA and that it does not want to get involved because the matter is one that the racing industry must sort out. However, when there is a good news announcement, who is out there fronting it? The Minister for Racing and Gaming! I refer to a recent article about traineeships that appeared in The West Australian, the headline of which reads “Trainers welcome scheme”. The article reads — Trainers statewide have thrown their full weight behind a government initiative to boost skilled labour in the racing industry. Racing Minister Ljiljanna Ravlich yesterday announced Racing and Wagering WA would support a course by the WA College of Agriculture at Narrogin to provide training for much needed stablehands and track riders. It is a great course that the opposition supports. RWWA came up with the initiative, but the Minister for Racing and Gaming made the announcement. I have been told that racing money, not government money, has been put into the scheme. Why would I not suspect that the government is politicising the racing game? Mr A.P. O’Gorman: How is it politicising the racing game? Mr J.E. McGRATH: Because RWWA, which is an independent body, used racing funds to start a program but the government announced the program. Why would the chief executive officer of RWWA not make the announcement? I remind members that the Liberal Party supports the racing industry. Earlier in the week I was
3032 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] present when an announcement was made about the Ascot summer carnival, which is fantastic. The former Minister for Racing and Gaming will be happy to know that a charter flight has been booked to bring horses from Melbourne in November. I think RWWA money has been used to underwrite the flight. A couple of years ago I suggested that such a flight should be underwritten. The then minister castigated me and said that he would never spend public money on a flight that will help eastern states horses come to Perth to plunder our prize money. Now the racing industry is doing that. People who bring horses to Perth will have to pay their way, but the flight has been underwritten. Those sorts of things have to be underwritten if we want to make the carnival a success. Mr R.C. Kucera: Is not that also an attempt to get over the ravages of the flu? Mr J.E. McGRATH: No, not really. The flu virus has been sorted out. It was also announced at the meeting that the distance of the Perth Cup would change from 3 200 metres to 2 400 metres. I am a traditionalist and I think it should have stayed at 3 200 metres. Mr J.B. D’Orazio: Let’s start a petition! Mr J.E. McGRATH: We should. Mr J.B. D’Orazio interjected. Mr J.E. McGRATH: Does the member for Ballajura not believe that it should change? Mr J.B. D’Orazio: It should stay at 3 200 metres. Mr J.E. McGRATH: The member for Ballajura is a very astute racing judge and a keen follower of the sport of kings. Some things in life should be protected and preserved. The Perth Cup is held on New Year’s Day every year. It should be a 3 200-metre race. If it is not attracting the best horses in the world, so what? People will still attend it because it is an event. Mr J.B. D’Orazio: Yes, but Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney all have it. Mr J.E. McGRATH: Adelaide and Brisbane are set to reduce the distance of their cup races. The trend is to reduce the distance. The Perth Cup is special. Perth Cup is a better event than the Adelaide or Brisbane Cups. It is held on a famous holiday and, similar to the Melbourne Cup, it attracts once-a-year punters. Once-a-year punters often have a bet on the Perth Cup. It would not matter if Radish were running, they would still have a bet. I will refer to my other shadow portfolios. I have only five! We are thin on the ground. The Premier said that he wants to introduce lockouts at pubs. I support some form of lockout; however, I am not sure whether midnight is the correct time because it is too early. A lot of young and not so young people finish work at 11.00 pm. When I was a journalist we would often finish at midnight and we would look for a sly grog place to get a drink. Today people have the option of going to a small bar. It was not that long ago that the government encouraged us to support the introduction of small bars. My friend the member for Rockingham was the minister at the time. He has introduced much legislation in this place. I have been involved in much of that legislation. The government wanted us to support freeing up the liquor industry to give people a greater choice of venues at which they could have a drink. We supported the introduction of small bars. Indeed, the member for Warren-Blackwood, who was Leader of the Opposition at the time, put his head on the line to support the legislation, which has been well received. We were told that the government wanted to introduce those measures because Perth was dull and because we needed to give people more choice. We were told that people who got off a plane needed to be able to go to a venue in town for a drink at night. All of a sudden the government wants to stop people from going to pubs at midnight. Mr A.P. O’Gorman: It is two hours before their closing time. Mr J.E. McGRATH: It is my understanding that people will not be able to get into a pub at five past midnight. Those who are already in a pub will be able to stay for another two hours. I believe the Perth City Accord will work through this issue. Mr R.C. Kucera: Those provisions are already in the accord. They were in the original accord to stop entry after a certain time. It was up to the licensee. A licensee could stop people from getting pass-outs to stop people from going from club to club. Mr J.E. McGRATH: That is what the accord wants to do. I support that. Mr R.C. Kucera: It worked in the original accord. There is no reason why it should not work again. Mr J.E. McGRATH: Some young people resent that move. They say that if they finish work late and want to go into Northbridge, or if they go to dinner with their family and their parents go home and they want to go into Northbridge to meet their mates, they will not be able to get into pubs after midnight. I am not necessarily
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3033 talking about a pub at which there is a lot of trouble. It could be a small quiet bar. Perhaps we must consider a strategy that will target the main trouble spots. The accord is working through it. We should leave it at that and see what it comes up with. The Australian Hotel Association, believe it or not, supports lockouts. I spoke to an AHA representative during the week and he said that it supports the principle of lockouts. It proposed a similar measure to the then Minister for Racing and Gaming, Mark McGowan, in 2006. Does the minister remember that? The AHA supports lockouts because they mean a gradual flow of patrons out of venues between the lockout time and venue closing times. Further, they send a message to the patron that it is getting close to the time at which they must wind up the evening’s activities and they allow the licensee to gradually alleviate the occupancy pressures on the premises close to closing time. The AHA supports lockouts but it is not happy that the Premier is making policy on the run. His statement at the weekend gave a clear indication that he wants to introduce midnight lockouts. That should be up to the discretion of Director of Liquor Licensing. He will no doubt go through that issue. Another of my shadow portfolios is housing. It is a good range of portfolios, is it not, member for Yokine? Housing affordability and housing availability are probably the biggest issues that governments around Australia are facing at the present time. We have seen what the Rudd government has done. I think it has come up with some very good initiatives. The Carpenter government obviously now realises how serious the situation is. The budget will inject $1.2 billion into affordable housing projects in 2008-09. We must ask the question: why has it taken so long? I think the Carpenter government has been caught off guard by the boom. Industry groups and the opposition have been calling on the government for some time to address housing affordability. Housing affordability is placing greater stress on rentals. Young people, and not so young people, who want to rent must queue with 20 or 25 other people just to look at a property. It is a serious situation. I think high rent prices in Western Australia will be around for a while. It is not all the fault of the state. We cannot control interest rates. When interest rates rise, as they have, it injects some nervousness into the community. I think that many people have held off making a decision and have said that they would wait to see whether the next round of interest rate changes will be up or down. We must look at the situation, but I believe that the government has been sitting on its hands. For example, I read in a local newspaper that in the member for Peel’s constituency a family was living in a tent at a caravan park. A lady came to see me at Parliament. She had 10 children and her husband works, but they could not get rental accommodation. They did not want Homeswest. However, they were given some publicity by the Sunday Times, as a result of which a lady telephoned them to say that she had a house they could rent. This is a serious situation, as we heard the member for Murchison-Eyre say. MR M. McGOWAN (Rockingham — Minister for Education and Training) [8.03 pm]: I will be very brief. The reason I have been spurred into action to speak in this debate is that I was listening to the member for South Perth on the monitor in my office. I thought I might come in here and correct the historical record. It is not usual for a minister to make a speech about a former portfolio, but I thought I would come in here to make sure that the member for South Perth has completely straight what the historical record is on the issue of Betfair and what happened back in 2005 when the government decided to legislate to prevent Betfair gaining a foothold in Western Australia. It is now another minister’s portfolio, so I want to step very carefully in what I say and I will be very brief. The issues I want to address are not recent events but events that occurred when I was minister in 2005. Some members will recall that we objected to the Tasmanian government’s decision to license Betfair in Tasmania. We said that we did not think it was in the interests of Western Australia. We got advice that we could take action. Indeed, as minister in 2005, my predecessor as minister, Hon Nick Griffiths, had also indicated an intent to take on Betfair when it intended to establish itself in Western Australia. When I took up the issue the then and current shadow Minister for Racing and Gaming was a supporter of the approach that we adopted, and not just a supporter; he was in fact as enthusiastic—or more enthusiastic—about taking on Betfair as I was as minister. As evidence of that, I will read out in its entirety every single word of the press release put out by the member for South Perth, John McGrath MLA — Mr J.E. McGrath interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN: I did not interject on the member for South Perth. I did not even speak to the television! I sat in silence while I listened to the member for South Perth. I will read out every single word. The ACTING SPEAKER (Mr A.P. O’Gorman): May I remind the minister that it is not usual to read an entire document. He should paraphrase it or use quotes out of it. Mr M. McGOWAN: Thank you, Mr Acting Speaker. It is very short. It reads — Media Statement John McGrath MLA Member for South Perth Shadow Spokesperson for Seniors; Racing, Gaming and Liquor Licensing
3034 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
4 November 2005 Betfair introduction would hinder racing success Liberal Party against introducing betting exchanges The Parliamentary Liberal Party will support the Gallop Government’s plans to thwart Betfair obtaining a license to operate in Western Australia. Opposition Racing and Gaming spokesman John McGrath said it was disgusting that the Tasmanian Labor Government had gone against the wishes of the Australian racing industry and licensed the internet gambling agency. Point of Order Mr J.E. McGRATH: The former Minister for Racing and Gaming, now Minister for Education and Training, is obviously not listening to your ruling and he intends to read the whole press release. I will give him a copy of the press release if he wants it. I have already admitted that I did support the government line, but I want to put on record that that was before I had a meeting with Betfair. The ACTING SPEAKER: The member just needs to make the point of order. He cannot debate what the minister has said. Mr J.E. McGRATH: The point of order, Mr Acting Speaker, is that you made a ruling for the former Minister for Racing and Gaming, the now Minister for Education and Training and member for Rockingham, and I do not think he is following your ruling. The ACTING SPEAKER: I made the ruling that he could quote from it. I ask that he not read it all. He can paraphrase it and he can also table the document for the remainder of today’s sitting if he so wishes. He can table it as a minister, anyhow. There is no point of order. I am sure that the minister will adhere to my ruling. Debate Resumed Mr M. McGOWAN: Obviously, Mr Acting Speaker. Several members interjected. Mr M. McGOWAN: This is important. I am trying to be brief. I listened for 30 minutes to the member for South Perth talk about it. All I want is three minutes. “The nature of the business Betfair operates is against all the principles of wagering in Australia,” Mr McGrath said. “By giving its clients the opportunity to act as bookmakers and ‘lay’ a horse to lose, it leaves the industry wide open to corruption. “And with Betfair an internet-operated business, with clients all around the world, racing stewards in Australia would face an enormous task to properly scrutinise all transactions, even if Betfair provided its betting sheets.” I will paraphrase this bit. He talked about Makybe Diva — “Racing in Western Australia in particular is enjoying massive growth as a result of this increased TAB betting and it would be disappointing to see that affected by an internet operation that wasn’t making a proper contribution to the well being of the industry,” he said. I like the member for South Perth, but when he stood and rewrote the history about what happened, I had to come in here and object and let members know, and in particular let the media know that might be covering this issue, that this was a bipartisan position. I do not resile from what we did. We made a decision that we thought was in the interests of the racing industry of Western Australia, supported by the racing industry and supported by the opposition at that point in time. We took it to its conclusion — Mr J.E. McGrath interjected. The ACTING SPEAKER: Order, member for South Perth! Mr M. McGOWAN: Obviously, we stood up to interests that were strong and powerful in this country. We took a stand on principle that we thought was in the interests of the racing industry and we were unsuccessful. I just wanted to make sure that everyone in Western Australia who has an interest in this would understand two years later when things become hazy about what happened back then. The issue was jointly pursued by all sides of Parliament and voted in favour of by both sides of Parliament and pursued, before it entered the Parliament, by the Liberal Party in those aggressive tones that I just read out to the house.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3035
MR R.C. KUCERA (Yokine) [8.08 pm]: Before I talk about the budget, as a patron of the Welsh society, and on behalf of Denis Hippolyte, one of the attendants, I wish the very best of luck to Cardiff City Football Club in the FA Cup final this Saturday night. It is the first time the team has made the final since 1929. If there are any other Welsh people around this place, I wish them well. Cymru Am Byth! I speak about the 2008 budget, firstly, in relation to the broader budget and, secondly, in relation to my electorate of Yokine, taking into account, of course, that the electorate will be carved into the two electorates of Nollamara and Mt Lawley. I want to talk of the particular benefits for my constituents, given the priorities that impact upon them within those constituent boundaries. Firstly, the broader budget concentrates very much on infrastructure projects. There is no doubt that infrastructure is needed right across the state. In fact, most of the infrastructure projects that are listed in the budget have already been announced. Unlike the member for Murchison-Eyre, I am particularly pleased about the emphasis that has been placed on the new stadium, the centre of sporting excellence at AK Reserve, and the Challenge complex that is designed to replace Perry Lakes Stadium. Those facilities will be on built on the site of the existing facilities. This will lift this state to a new level of prestige in the sporting world. Also, unlike the member for Murchison-Eyre, I think there are ways in which those facilities be funded. Some of those ways are mentioned in the report of the stadium task force. I recall that when I was a child, my grandfather had debenture shares. Boat pens are currently being sold upfront. I see no reason that we could not raise some of the money for this new stadium through the forward sale of seats. The member for Morley — Mr J.B. D’Orazio: Ballajura. Mr R.C. KUCERA: Sorry; it is about to become Morley. He and I have had similar discussions. This stadium will become a money-maker for the state. That is despite the significant criticisms that have been levelled at the deliberations of the stadium task force since its formation. I am sure that more criticisms will be made as the project proceeds. The excellent recommendations that were made by the stadium task force have been vindicated by the announcement that has been made by the Premier about the new stadium. Western Australia is no longer looked at as just the left-hand side of Australia. Western Australia is now the right-hand side of the Indian Ocean basin. The Indian Ocean basin has the largest population base in the world. If we include in the Indian Ocean basin South-East Asia and the closer regions of China, almost half the world’s population is now centred around the Indian Ocean basin. Western Australia is now an integral part of that region. Therefore, the need for Western Australia to be able to compete on the world stage is absolutely essential. It is no longer simply a matter of catering for the Eagles and the Dockers and our local fans. The enormous success of Western Force—the first truly international competition in which any sporting team in this state has been involved, apart from the odd test game that we have played—is proof of that. When 25 000 people turn out on a regular basis for every Western Force match, we realise that there is an urgent need for this stadium. The task force was chaired by John Langoulant, and its members were Ron Alexander, Terry Budge, Paul Jones, Eric Lumsden and Gaye McMath. When I as Minister for Sport and Recreation brought together the members of that task force, they took on what I believed was a seemingly impossible task. Anyone who has had to deal with the various football codes, cricket codes and other sports will know exactly what I mean. They tackled their task with relish. As the minister, I plunged them into the deep end. However, since that task force has reported, I do not recall that anyone, either within government or out of government, has thanked them for the great job that they have done. I thank the members of the task force on behalf of all the future Western Australian sportsmen and sportswomen who will be inspired when they play on that hallowed Subi turf. The finished concept and the planned staged development are world class. There is no doubt about that. In fact, I had the opportunity of visiting both Millennium Stadium and Wembley Stadium when we were first looking at building a stadium in Perth. This stadium will be as good as, if not better than, some of the stadiums I have seen overseas. I might say also that on the world scene, it is rare that a stadium is built that can cater for more than 60 000 or 70 000 people. That is because the main area of sales is not necessarily bums on seats but television. When the Perry Lakes development is completed, our great city will be in a position to bid for future major events, even the Olympic or Commonwealth Games. I know that many people will scoff — Mr P.D. Omodei interjected. Mr R.C. KUCERA: I knew that would happen! However, the reality is that apart from the whitewater park that we need at Armadale, Western Australia has world-class facilities for every known Olympic sport. The rifle- shooting and trap-shooting facility at Whiteman Park is recognised as one of the best in the world. Members can scoff at that — Mr P.D. Omodei: Wait a minute! Mr R.C. KUCERA: I am not having a go at the member for Warren-Blackwood. I am talking about — Mr P.D. Omodei: When we first started talking about a stadium and about locating it at Burswood and building a major complex out there, I went to Kerry Stokes and suggested the possibility of building a Commonwealth Games village.
3036 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
Mr R.C. KUCERA: Exactly. Mr P.D. Omodei: Do you know what he said? He said they have not even decided the television rights for the next Commonwealth Games, let alone the two down the track! Mr R.C. KUCERA: I was not including the member in that comment. As part of the proposed Perry Lakes program with the university, there is room for things like a Commonwealth Games village. These two projects, together with the new Perth Arena at Wellington Street, will guarantee that— apart from, as I have said, the whitewater park—every Olympic sport could be staged in Western Australia. What an exciting prospect! That is also a wonderful reason to make sure that we link that stadium to an iconic development on the Perth foreshore. I do not necessarily agree with the plans for the foreshore that I have seen in the newspaper. I think we all have some reservations about that plan. However, that area needs to be developed. Very few people would argue about that. The Perth foreshore development would complement what is already a great city. I recently had the opportunity of visiting South Bank in Brisbane. The Queensland government has done amazing things with Brisbane River. I can recall sailing along that river 10 or 15 years ago on a yacht. It was one of the worst places that one could ever envisage. It was an absolutely muddy mangrove swamp. That area of the river has now been turned into a magnificent facility, with even an artificial beach, right in the middle of the city. It is tremendous. The second key item for me in the budget—this is a matter that I know is also right up the member for Warren- Blackwood’s alley—is the huge boost that has been provided for child protection. Since I was elected to this place in 2001, I have been advocating, particularly within my own party room, for the development of adequately resourced mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse. I have made no secret of that. I have often been out of line with the ideology in my party room on that matter. I have heard the view that mandatory reporting will create too much work and will require enormous resourcing. Mr P.D. Omodei: You have got me worried now! I am starting to agree with you! Mr R.C. KUCERA: I make no secret of the fact that I have always advocated that. Those who know me within the party system will know that I have had that view ever since I was a young police officer. I do not care what it costs. If it saves one child from being abused, it is worth it. I applaud this government for recognising and resourcing a fundamental role of government—protecting our children. Thirdly, I applaud the additional funding in this budget for disability services. I seem to be handing out accolades to the member for Warren-Blackwood all night tonight! The member for Warren Blackwood was a firm advocate for additional funding in this area. The member for Warren-Blackwood was a good disability services minister when he was in charge of that portfolio. I also want to congratulate the member for Alfred Cove—who is not in the chamber tonight—for her advocacy on the Carer Card and the Companion Card. I do not do this reluctantly, because I have been listening to the member speak about this for nearly two years, and there is no doubt that the persistence of the member for Alfred Cove, together with that of the other advocacy groups, has led to a change in thinking by this government about the Carer Card and the Companion Card. Western Australia has a stand-out record on disability funding. That goes right back to the time of previous governments. However, there is never enough funding in this area. Recognising the need to continuously improve the lot of the most vulnerable people in the community is a basic tenet of Labor Party philosophy. Virtually every year since we have come into government, we have increased funding in this area. I applaud successive governments for that. The other three major community service demands are health, community safety, and education. These three areas have received substantial additional funding in this budget. It is pleasing that many of the new and emerging suburbs will be the beneficiaries of new and improved schools, as will, indeed, some of the older suburbs. We must not forget that the vast majority of our schools, particularly in the inner city suburbs, are now more than 50 and 60 years old. We need to ensure that funding is provided to keep up the maintenance of those schools. Mr C.J. Barnett: If I may interrupt, you deserve some credit for Mt Lawley High School. However, this government has failed to make the hard decisions on small high schools in the northern suburbs. Mr R.C. KUCERA: That may be an issue that the member can address. Mr C.J. Barnett: Mt Lawley is fine. Mr R.C. KUCERA: I will talk about Mt Lawley in a moment, because that is one of the jewels in the crown in my electorate. I now turn to health. The development of Osborne Park Hospital commenced in 2002. I am very pleased that has now come to fruition. I applaud the additional funding for that hospital. A passion of mine when I was Minister for Health was mental health services. Members may recall that we were able to put together the review of
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3037 mental health services under Professor D’Arcy Holman. It was an excellent report. If that report had been followed absolutely and we were able to fund every part of it, it would have gone a huge way. I am very pleased to see the additional funding for mental health services in the budget. It is a growing and vexed area. Whilst on health, I was also very pleased to see the figures for recruitment and retention of nurses and doctors in this state. It is a far cry from what was happening in 2001, but we have a long way to go and we can never back away from it. I have noticed the difference in the value that the community and people generally now place on nursing in particular and the recognition that nursing has in this state. There is no doubt that it has really changed over the past eight years. Funding health services is always a very vexed and difficult area. This budget sets a benchmark for all Australian states, particularly with the tranche of new hospitals that are planned. As an old copper—I use the word “old” advisedly nowadays—I am very pleased to see the additional funds for capital works, particularly for the Stirling police station and the much-needed technology in helicopters. Recruitment is also on target. I could speak on that issue all night. For some of the most disadvantaged groups in my electorate in the northern suburbs of Nollamara, Mirrabooka, Girrawheen etc, housing affordability is still an enormous issue, particularly for refugees and Indigenous people. There is a growing group of very poor people in this community. It was interesting to see Chum Taylor on the television tonight commenting on pensioners and self-funded retirees. Both state and federal governments have to realise that a new group of retired poor people is emerging in this state. We need to start addressing this, whether or not we like it. People are living with candles for light and getting water from downpipes. When I came out of my office at almost midnight the other evening after work, a woman pulled up in a car and asked me if I could give her $10—the old trick—saying she had lost her purse and wanted $10 for some milk and bread. Instead of giving her the money, I took her into a shop and bought her milk and bread. She genuinely needed milk and bread. The old con used to see people go down the road to buy a bottle of port. This woman was looking for some bread and milk at midnight. I know the woman; she lives in my area. I would not embarrass her by naming her. That kind of thing is becoming increasingly evident. There is a group of retired people who are stuck in the middle. Many people in my area are Italian. They did not buy superannuation; they bought rental houses. People might say, “Look at the value of their houses; they have gone up.” I was disappointed that the property tax that they have to pay on those rental premises has not been recognised. It is a concern. It needs to be addressed. There are an enormous number of grand families, families that have to support the offspring of their kids who are drunks and druggies. I know of many in my electorate. The member for Kingsley, Judy Hughes, has done a tremendous job of making sure that this issue is highlighted. We need to keep bringing it before federal and state Parliaments. This issue was not addressed in either budget. A woman was talking about it on the radio this morning. Her grand-daughter has been made a ward of the state. If she goes to the state, she will not get custody of the child. The child will end up in a foster home and the foster parents will be given money to raise the child. Because this woman is determined to hang on to her own grandchild, she gets nothing from any government. We have to address that matter, as consecutive governments have not done anything about it, despite it being raised. As a big-picture, futuristic budget, it recognises the issues that need to be addressed. I am pleased to see the level of regional infrastructure in ports and major road funding that the government talked about. More can always be done. I am talking about regional ports now. I do not know anything about the detail of the future fund but at the end of the day we have to ensure that the federal government knows about the situation in WA. We are building the house in Australia and Canberra is taking the rent. It has been doing that ever since I have been a member. I will move to issues affecting my electorate. Obviously, all the service boosts in the big picture budget will benefit every one of my constituents in a broader way. However, as with all of us, specific and urgent needs affect the quality of life in Yokine. Like all government members, I indicated to my colleagues in cabinet the items I wanted for my electorate. I only asked for three things on this occasion: overpasses on a section of Reid Highway, funds to revitalise the Mirrabooka urban centre—this program is already underway—and a portion of school maintenance for all the schools in my area, all 17 of them; other than Mt Lawley, as mentioned by the member for Cottesloe. That is a great school. It always was. It is even better now. All schools desperately need funding for maintenance. I will speak about two specific items in a moment. I am very disappointed—I rarely say this about my own government—that the two intersections that need attention are longstanding items. I think they were of concern back in the member for Dawesville’s day when he was the member for Yokine. Promises have been levied by both sides of politics since 1997 at both state and federal levels. As a state member working with federal governments, I was promised action on these intersections. In no way am I criticising the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure; she has been an absolute champion in trying to get funding from both the state and federal governments for these intersections. The intersections at Mirrabooka Avenue and Alexander Drive are recognised as the two worst in the state. The intersection of Alexander Drive and Reid Highway is now considered the number one priority intersection in Western Australia now that the one in the Treasurer’s electorate has been fixed—the intersection of Orrong Road
3038 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] and Reid Highway in Kewdale. I am told that the money to build both intersections was originally included in the 1997 budget. I looked at it. Unfortunately, it disappeared. I do not know the political ramifications of that and I will not go into it. Funding was poured into extending Reid Highway west through Carine right out to West Coast Highway. This almost doubled the traffic flow over the ensuing years. I am fearful that exactly the same thing will happen again when I look in the budget and see $53 million to include a new dual carriageway through West Swan. That worries me greatly because it will again double the traffic flow, and we still have these two death traps in my electorate. Members should look at the white crosses out there. I do not normally take up these issues with the government, but I will take up this issue because I am very disappointed. The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure has been tireless in chasing this down but like every other minister—I have been a minister, as have four of the members sitting opposite—one has to cut one’s cloth to suit. I am disappointed. In both cases there was a requirement for matched state funding, even though at the last federal election both sides promised funding for either one of these intersections. In fact, in one case both of them were promised. I quickly want to read a letter from a group that I admire greatly, the Balga Action Group, led by Alan Stafford. Alan Stafford and Phylis Robertson are tireless in their efforts. [Member’s time extended.] Mr R.C. KUCERA: This letter was sent to a number of members. It states — Dear Bob During the recent federal election campaign — The last election — we had the opportunity of discussing our expectation . . . He goes on to talk about what the group expected of its elected officials. He stated — Our main concern is that politically we feel that we are being taken for granted, and whilst we enjoy a good relationship with most politicians, we recognise that political expediency often gives the impression that some speak with a forked tongue when the occasion rises and that is not an act of good faith for a community group that is only interested in the betterment of Balga. We also have the view that because politically, Balga is regarded by many as being represented by various politicians with safe seats, we miss out on those advantages that marginal seats seem to attract, especially in the run up to state elections. The recent federal election saw both sides representing the Federal seat of Stirling throwing fist full’s of dollars our way mainly because it was seen to be a marginal seat. When we discussed our concerns, the view was expressed that historically Labor Governments are supposed to be sympathetic to the views of communities such as ours where nothing happens unless it is fought for, and that the sentimental community view that “Labor” will always look after us, may no longer be the case. In a nut shell, what we are saying, is — This is a good message for all governments, particularly when it comes to the local people in members’ electorates — please do not take us for granted, we represent all views and from time to time, we will be called on to support views you may not agree with — That is dead right! Alan states his case pretty strongly — but we will still expect your full support and cooperation. In closing, please let us know what is happening with the Reid/Alexander/Mirrabooka saga because we understand that an intersection will be built at, . . . I hope he is right— at least one of the intersections if not both . . . He goes on to talk about federal funding. The reason I read that letter this evening is that there is an issue here; there is no doubt about it. I would not be as cynical as to suggest that the funding for this piece of highway over the past decade has been based on political imperatives, as the writer suggests. The new extension will run out through the new electorate of West Swan and I do not think it is any coincidence that that seat is favoured by particular candidates. At the same time the new seat of Nollamara will be the safest Labor seat in Western Australia. I sincerely hope that those two facts do not support what Alan Stafford has said about being taken for
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3039 granted. These two death traps need to be fixed. I do not care whether it is the federal government or the state government, or both of them working together, that does it. They must realise that people cannot be promised something for more than a decade by both sides of this house and of the House of Representatives and be ignored again. I spoke to someone in the minister’s office yesterday. She was quite open about it. She said “I can’t find any money there, Bob. I really do hope that it is going to be in what the federal government is talking about and they did make promises and there are funds there.” I therefore sincerely hope that the federal government listens to what I have said tonight—in fact, that our side of politics listens to it—and that it honours the commitments that have been made to that action group. It is a good action group. It has led to the whole redevelopment of the northern suburbs out through Balga, and I support that group. Similarly I note with pride, but I must admit some degree of envy, the levels of funding for the revitalisation of Geraldton, Albany, Armadale and many other regional and urban centres throughout this state. I say “pride” because in the nearly eight years I have been involved with this government I have seen—in fact we all have— that it takes pride to realise the enormous lift that an infusion of infrastructure funds can give to an entire community. However, I say “envy” when I once again see no additional funding for the proposed and partially commenced revitalisation of the Mirrabooka Square Shopping Centre. It will hopefully attract some level of federal funding, but until then, there will be absolutely no funding for it. I must say that the Mirrabooka centre— I do not seek in any way to denigrate the good people who run the shopping centre there and the area around it— is one of the least attractive urban areas in Perth; there is no doubt about that. The open land there and the state of some of the shopping areas will continue to languish until we do something about them. The City of Stirling expressed concerns to me just half an hour after the budget papers were made public about the Reid Highway overpass. As we approach the next state election I hope that the people of Mirrabooka are not, as the action group has said, taken for granted. I say now that I will make sure that these issues are very much kept in the public eye. I did have a note with me to applaud the completion of the $41 million rebuild of Mt Lawley Senior High School—the member for Cottesloe has done that for me. I also applaud the new facilities in the almost $3 million refurbishment at Mirrabooka Senior High School; they are badly needed. I have to say, if I can comment on it, that the principal there, Mr Armando Giglia, is one of the best principals I have ever worked with. Mr Giglia is outstanding. I probably should not say this in public, but he had serious health problems last year and he still dragged himself back to the school. It is a joy to stand at Mirrabooka Senior High School’s graduation every year and see kids, who have more disadvantages than other kids at most schools put together, come up to the stage and proudly graduate and come out of there with a certificate that really means something to them. That is a great little school and I take my hat off to Armando. He should be teacher of the year. Nollamara Primary School desperately needed a refurbishment last year and got it. It is now running something like seven classes of English as a second language for migrants and refugees. In fact, all the primary schools in that area are running classes of English as a second language and are buckling under the pressure. Again I have approached on numerous occasions the Minister for Education and Training to make sure that we get some desperately needed funding in there. It is a matter of not only funding for extra teachers but also creating programs that support those teachers. All the schools in my area are now more than 50 years old. Sutherland Dianella Primary School in particular has a problem that really needs to be fixed. The toilets are on the outside of the school premises. Primary school age children have to leave the school premises and go out to a toilet. In this day and age and with my old hat on, I believe that is something that should not now be allowed. I must say that the minister has been out to the school and has looked at the premises. There was talk of selling off pieces of land there. The local community will not stand for that. There is therefore a need to fix that school. In addition, the staff facilities are dreadful and need to be fixed. I have raised that matter with the minister and, again, I will be going back and absolutely hammering the desperate need for maintenance money for that; otherwise, one of these days a child will perhaps disappear from that school and that will be on all our heads. It really concerns me. Stana Couzic, the principal, and the school committee there has raised that issue on a number of occasions. Finally Coolbinia Primary School desperately needs new arts and music areas. At the moment it is using two 70- year-old army huts that were taken there by parents 30 years ago. They got them from the Northam army camp when that was vacated. Again, that school needs more funding. In conclusion I say that for almost eight years I have tried to be a very vigorous and persistent advocate for the wonderful people of Yokine. I do not know whether I have succeeded. The people of Yokine have been very fortunate; they have had two very persistent members over the past two decades. I still hear the people sing accolades for my colleague on the other side. He was a good local member and I hope that I am a good local member also. Mr J.B. D’Orazio: Did you say Labor member? I don’t think that’s true. Mr R.C. KUCERA: No, local member, I said. I have to say that the member for Dawesville was a good local member for Yokine. I was disappointed that a redistribution will result in the seat of Yokine disappearing at the next election, largely into the new seat of Mt Lawley, and the remainder into the revamped seat of Nollamara. Regardless of what the future holds for me, I reassure each and every person —
3040 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
Mr J.B. D’Orazio: “The member for Mt Lawley” sounds very good. Mr R.C. KUCERA: It does, does it not? Regardless of what the future holds, I reassure every person in my electorate that regardless of their age, their gender, their ethnicity or their religion, they are all my people while I am the member there, and I will continue to fiercely represent them, no matter what, and certainly until the next election. Who knows what will happen after that? It is a funny thing that I was thinking about what Alan Stafford said in his letter. He said that the great thing about safe seats is that when they start to become unsafe, that is when the people get what they deserve, such as money for those projects that have been neglected in the past decade. That may be the answer. I note what the member for Ballajura just said about Mt Lawley. Perhaps that is the answer: to make some of these safe seats a little unsafe so that we can put people on notice that at no time when a seat is a safe seat—whether it be Liberal, National or Labor—must people be taken for granted, in particular the local electors who vote and elect the people who represent them. I will not talk about my achievements. Kahlil Gibran once said that to understand the heart and mind of a person, look not at what he has already achieved, but at what he aspires to do. I aspire to make sure that my electorate continues to be represented, hopefully by me. DR K.D. HAMES (Dawesville — Deputy Leader of the Opposition) [8.38 pm]: I would like to talk about things that are in the budget for my seat of Dawesville. Mr J.B. D’Orazio: I’m glad you got something. Dr K.D. HAMES: That is it! I can sit down now. That is what my seat of Dawesville got—zero, absolutely zero. Mr J.C. Kobelke: What about infill sewerage? Dr K.D. HAMES: The infill sewerage program was actually put off because there is not enough money in the budget to fund it. I am not sure whether there is money available or not. In reality, the Treasurer—I hope he is listening—does not know how to spell the word Dawesville. In four years I have yet to see the word Dawesville appear in any Labor Party budget. It changed to South Mandurah last year and included a school because that area desperately needed a school. However, in all the other years, the funding has been zero. Nevertheless, as the minister correctly pointed out, some longstanding infill sewerage works for my electorate, which had been delayed indefinitely at one stage, were kindly agreed to by the minister after I had made representation to reinstate them, and that has been going well. Among the list of facilities we particularly need in my electorate, schools rank at the top, as I am sure they do in many other electorates. People will realise that my electorate in Dawesville, and the Peel region generally, has been the fastest growing region in the whole of Australia and still ranks among the fastest growing electorates. As a result, the population in that area is booming and the number of children who wish to attend schools is increasing. However, they are all moving to the private sector for two reasons: firstly, the long distances to travel to the high school. There is no senior high school in my electorate; the kids must go to the Mandurah Senior College, which is doing an excellent job in Mandurah, but it is the only senior high school that is not private in the whole of the Peel region. There is Halls Head Community College, which is a middle school but, as the member for Murchison-Eyre pointed out earlier, middle schools in his electorate and certainly in my electorate are not working. A large group of parents, particularly near Ocean Road, have done a significant amount of lobbying of the Minister for Education and Training. Land has been allocated for a new high school but the minister said that there were insufficient numbers to warrant building a high school in that location. He does not understand that everyone is pulling their children out of the public schools and putting them into private schools because that is the only way they can get their children into a high school in the Peel region. The reality is that if that high school is built there, it will fill up in no time. However, as a second option, the minister was considering changing Halls Head Community College middle school to a full high school. Although that is not the ideal option—I welcome Doug to the gallery—it would still be sufficient to satisfy the needs of my electorate. That does not appear to have made a mention in the budget even though a well-presented and enthusiastic argument was put to the minister by a large number of parents, including teachers from Ocean Road and Falcon Primary Schools. The other thing we desperately need in my electorate is a new police station. Interestingly enough, a police station was promised and the land was purchased prior to the 2001 election. If the coalition had won that 2001 election, by 2003 a new police station would have been built. On winning government in 2001, the Labor Party decided it would not build a police station in my electorate. It sold the land and said it would address the lack of a new police station by increasing police numbers in Mandurah as a whole. It did that, but it found, particularly with the housing boom south of the cut, the distances and huge population growth in the area, that it is impossible to properly service the extremes of my electorate. The police, therefore, are extremely keen to build a new police station in that area. They have been given encouragement and they have looked at opportunities to purchase land. I understood that there would be a push to build that police station in my electorate, but, again,
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3041 there is no sign of that in the budget. It might be one of those things that will be announced leading up to the election. I remind the Minister for Police and Emergency Services that my electorate is the second most marginal Liberal seat in the state. Mr J.C. Kobelke: You have my interest now. Dr K.D. HAMES: That should count for something. We heard the member for Yokine talk about how marginal seats can attract funding to electorates. I have been telling people that, but it has not worked; nonetheless, I have hope. The election is imminent, so I encourage the minister to reconsider that option. I gather the Labor Party has rejected the male—it might have been two—candidate who put his hand up for my seat, in light of the need to preselect a female to maintain the gender balance. I will let her know where we need the police station, and the minister can promise it in the lead-up to the election. I would be very happy to see that happen. He can remind the Minister for Education and Training about the need for a new school at the same time. I notice in the budget a significant amount of money is listed under “Schools Unallocated”. I do not know whether they are unallocated funds because the minister is waiting for the election, has chosen them or is still making up his mind which seats the Labor Party thinks it can win. Dawesville is the second most marginal seat in the state by, from memory, 1.7 per cent. The government should feel free to invest freely in my electorate in the hope it will win it. It might not, but I would be happy for it to try. Given I now have no opportunity to talk about funding for my electorate because none has been allocated, I will take the opportunity that this debate provides to cover a scattered variety of issues relating largely to my shadow portfolios that I want to get on the record to debunk some of the statements that have been made by the government. Part of that is that this “Carps the builder” government is revitalising our health system with a massive infrastructure fund. I would like to get on the record which hospitals were funded under the former Liberal government and which hospitals were funded under the current Labor government. This government has been in power for only seven and a bit years so far, so I will give a bit of leeway to some of the projects that may well be finished before the next election. I will refer to hospitals that have been funded and some for which this government has claimed credit. During the Liberal Party’s eight years in government, it funded five new hospitals: Joondalup Health Campus, with 295 public hospital beds, excluding the private hospital beds that were part of that development; Peel Health Campus, 110 beds; South West Health Campus in Bunbury, a replacement of existing beds but a new construction of 130 beds for Bunbury Regional Hospital; Northam Regional Hospital, 40 beds; and Armadale-Kelmscott Health Campus, 120 beds giving a total of 695 new beds—that is, five major hospital constructions in eight years of government. Mr P.D. Omodei: Plus Nannup, Pemberton and Manjimup. Dr K.D. HAMES: I have not covered those smaller hospitals but perhaps I should have because when I talk about the beds built by the Labor Party in the past seven years, they are mostly for smaller country hospitals. Two hospitals have been constructed since the election of the Labor Party for which it claims credit; namely, Geraldton Regional Hospital and Halls Creek Hospital. Both were included in the 2000-01 budget. Although it was the initial funding, in the four-year forward estimates, funding was allocated for the construction of both hospitals. I do not know whether it turned out to be the full cost, but the fact is that both hospitals were funded in the four-year forward estimates. The government, of course, has seen fit to claim credit for them. If there is a change of government at the forthcoming election, the Liberal Party will construct all the hospitals that will not be finished by the Labor Party. Those hospitals include Swan-Midland hospital, which is to be completed in 2012; Fiona Stanley Hospital, which is to be completed in 2014; Busselton District Hospital, which is to be completed in 2012; Denmark District Hospital, which is to be completed in 2010—I had the figures written on another piece of paper but I do not have it with me so I do not have the exact finishing dates; Albany Regional Hospital will not be finished; the hospital in Kalgoorlie certainly will not be finished—members have heard the comments of the member for Murchison-Eyre; work on the Joondalup Health Campus has not started yet, and is to be completed in 2012; Rockingham-Kwinana hospital has a similar completion date; and Armadale-Kelmscott Memorial Hospital. None of those projects that are listed in the budget will be completed by this government during its eight years in government. The only hospitals that have actually been built that were not on the coalition’s budget in 2000 are Port Hedland Regional Hospital, which has 50 beds; Fitzroy Crossing District Hospital, which has 15 beds; Ravensthorpe District Hospital, which has 11 beds; Moora District Hospital, which has 20 beds and was built only after a huge amount of pressure was applied; Broome District Hospital, which has 36 beds, and it was just a redevelopment of the hospital that did not increase the number of beds but I have given the government credit for it because Northam Regional Hospital was built during the previous government and that did not increase the number of beds either; Derby Regional Hospital was another redevelopment, with 39 beds; Carnarvon Regional Hospital was a redevelopment; and the number of beds at Kununurra District Hospital increased from 26 to 32, which is an increase of just six beds. A total of 177 new beds have been created by the Labor Party during its eight years in government, although that figure depends on Denmark District Hospital. That hospital may well be completed within this term of government. Perhaps another 32 beds could be added to the list. Even 200 beds would be well short of the 695 major hospital beds that were added by the Liberal Party
3042 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] during its eight years in government. The government’s huge boast about providing capital infrastructure for hospitals is nonsense. The future plans for construction are impressive. They are recommended by the Reid report and are well supported by members on both sides of the house. When we win the next election and I am the Minister for Health and those constructions are completed, I commit to giving credit where credit is due for the contribution made by the current Minister for Health towards the construction of those hospitals. I will talk briefly about Aboriginal health services. The Aboriginal health and Indigenous affairs component of the budget was extremely disappointing. We have just heard about the report by the State Coroner, Alistair Hope, regarding the massive needs of remote Aboriginal communities in this state. Lieutenant General John Sanderson has highlighted the severe state of affairs of Aboriginal communities, and the importance of increasing funding significantly and changing our management structures for Indigenous people in this state. The federal Labor and Liberal Parties have said the same thing. Tonight the member for Murchison-Eyre said that Fitzroy Crossing and Halls Creek are not the only two places with major Indigenous housing problems. He said that he could show members a large number of places in his community that are just as bad. There is a large number throughout northern Western Australia and some in the southern parts of Western Australia. Mr M.W. Trenorden: Don’t forget about the central wheatbelt. Dr K.D. HAMES: That is true. A large number of Aboriginal communities need support from the state and federal governments. What do we find in the budget papers? When we look under Aboriginal health, we find about four or five dot points that refer to problems and major initiatives. They are not major initiatives; they are minor initiatives that tinker at the edge of the massive problem. We all know that the life expectancy of Aboriginal people is 20 years fewer than that of non-Indigenous people. We know about the huge rates of incarceration, child deaths and poor health. We know also about the huge problems Aboriginal people face in every step of their lives, yet where in this budget are the major initiatives that will address those problems for Aboriginal people in this state? Where does the budget address the major housing and health issues? The Liberal Party has presented a proposal that I have mentioned publicly about what we believe needs to be done to address the problems of Indigenous communities in this state. I have released a green paper on our Indigenous affairs policy that has been widely distributed and has gathered a reasonable level of support. I have also stated publicly in response to the Hope report what I believe needs to be done to manage Indigenous affairs in this state. [Member’s time extended.] Dr K.D. HAMES: An implementation committee is needed, and I propose to make John Sanderson its chair. It would include also Fiona Stanley, who is widely respected for her commitment to Indigenous health in this state. It could include also Fred Chaney, who has a similar reputation in the broader sense of looking after Aboriginal communities, and senior Indigenous representatives. I propose making John Sanderson the chairman because of the reports he has done and because of his experience in the military. Immaculate planning is needed to make sure that this is not just another step along the way of failed plans and programs for Indigenous communities. I suggest that he be put at the head of what is currently the Department of Indigenous Affairs and that it become an implementation or administration group to support that management committee. All the state and federal funding would feed through that and John Sanderson could implement his recommendation for a regional Indigenous body, particularly in the Kimberley, and the recommendations of the Hope report to ensure that they are put in place. We could channel state and federal government funding through that body, and all state government departments would have to regularly report to and seek approval from that body to expend funds on Indigenous communities in this state. I am not talking about the responsibility for a high school or primary school in Broome just because many of the people who live there are Indigenous. Obviously that is quite rightly the responsibility of the Minister for Education and Training. Nevertheless, many associated issues relating to the attendance of Indigenous children at school, their management at home, their living standards and family standards, and issues relating to alcohol, employment, and educational opportunities, must be managed by that implementation committee. I again put on the record that I believe that must be done as a bipartisan approach with the support of Indigenous communities. It should not be a case of our side saying that it should be done and the government saying that it does not support it. Another component of Indigenous affairs relates to the annual funding of the Department of Indigenous Affairs. A story in The West Australian last week reported that the department was provided with $16 million to address the changeover of its responsibilities. Everyone in remote communities is assuming that that $16 million can be spent on those Indigenous communities. I read some comments from an Indigenous representative in Fitzroy Crossing to the effect that the community was looking forward to seeing where the $16 million would go and what share it would get. I can tell members how much will go to Indigenous communities—absolutely zero. I refer to page 654 of the Budget Statements, which deals with the income statement. The service appropriation for 2007-08 is $24 676 000. The figure for the coming financial year includes some of the $16 million. There is a
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3043 special Treasury figure of $4 928 000. The figure for 2009-10 is $3 274 000; for 2010-11 it is $2 862 000 and for 2011-12 it is $3 106 000. When I saw that I thought great, that is the $16 million that is a special allocation by Treasury to cover the change in management of Indigenous affairs. However, when I look at the original amounts, the figure of $24 676 000 decreases to $23 004 000. It then goes down to $22 174 000, $22 483 000 and $22 934 000. On one hand Treasury is giving $16 million; on the other hand it is giving the department less money to achieve the same results. There will be an increase in the number of full-time equivalents in the agency from 132 FTEs in 2007-08 to 156 in 2008-09. The money is going towards increasing staffing levels in DIA. None of it is going to the communities. The increase in staffing of 24 people will largely be paid for by these amounts. Reducing those levels each year from $24 million to $23 million and to $22 million in the 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 forward estimates means that only an additional $5 million or $6 million has been allocated over those years, not the $16 million that everyone is talking about. It is absolute nonsense. Indigenous people in this state have been conned by the statement that they will get $16 million. Sadly, they will not get a cracker of it. There will be increased services because of the increase in staff. When the member for Willagee became the Minister for Indigenous Affairs, he immediately closed down a large number—I think it was 11 or 12—of the smaller offices that the coalition government had established to help people in places such as Fitzroy Crossing and Halls Creek. Before I conclude, I want to briefly talk about the desalination plant so that, for once, the events will be on the public record. People will say that I am doing this to blow my own trumpet. Perhaps that is true, because I do feel proud about what happened in the lead-up to the building of the desalination plant. I will tell members what happened so that, despite the government’s spin, it is on the record. I forget which year it was that I was not happy about the potential water sources that were being suggested by the Water Corporation. I think it was before we lost the election, so perhaps 2000, but it could have been the year before. I had been reading a lot about desalination. The Water Corporation would not have a bar of desalination plants. It was totally uninterested in desalination. It said that desalination would cost about $2 a kilolitre and that it was out of the picture because we were paying 40c for dam water and 50c for underground water. I put together a ministerial visit. I took with me Jim Gill, who was the chief executive of the Water Corporation; Greg Joyce, because the visit involved looking at housing issues and he was the Director General of the Department of Housing and Works; and the chief executive of the Water and Rivers Commission, Roger Payne. We visited Eilat in southern Israel to look at its desalination plant, which had been operating for a long time. It was taking high-salinity water from the sea, desalinating it and producing water for the local community. Next door to the plant there was a salt pan. The plant was pumping out hypersaline water, which was the residue of the desalinated water, evaporating it and producing salt at the same time. It was a great plant. We then visited America to consider housing issues in San Francisco. We also visited San Diego to look at its desalination plant. Because San Diego had gone through a drought, it had built a desalination plant. It suddenly poured with rain the year before it opened and the desalination plant was mothballed. We also met a large number of people involved in water, because at the time there were calls for an international tender to build a new desalination plant on the east coast of America. I do not think — Mr J.C. Kobelke: Was it the Tampa Bay plant? Dr K.D. HAMES: I cannot remember. A desalination plant was to be built in one of the big east coast states. The state received tenders from companies all over the world, particularly from French and German companies. New technology had significantly reduced the price of desalination. When we got back to Perth, I told Jim Gill to put out a tender for a consultant who could work out what it would cost for us to build a new desalination plant at Kwinana. He told me that there was no need to do that because the department had found an international expert who wanted to come to Perth to work. He said that the department would employ that person to put the plan together. I cannot remember the man’s name, but he did that study at Kwinana and worked out the costs and whether that was the appropriate place to build a plant. The government decided to build its desalination plant down south. We were also thinking of building a desalination plant in the northern suburbs. In those days there were not as many houses in the northern suburbs. We wanted to build a desalination plant near the Mindarie tip, because we thought we could generate power from treating that waste to power a desalination plant. The government has used wind power up north—I understand that argument—but we were looking at a new waste treatment plant for Canning that would generate significant energy that could be tapped into to power a desalination plant. The man who prepared all that work said that it would cost $1.10 a kilolitre, not $2 a kilolitre. At that stage I do not know whether I asked the Water Corporation to prepare a cabinet document or whether I discussed the matter with it and said that I would get it to prepare one. Either way, that is where we were at. We had done all that work and I was ready to submit a document to cabinet. I was going to take a proposal to build a desalination plant before cabinet and argue the case. That was in 2001, when we lost government. The Water Corporation had in its top drawer, if not the cabinet submission, all the work that was needed to prepare a cabinet submission. Was the member for Balcatta the water minister when the Labor Party won the election? Mr J.C. Kobelke: No, it was Hon Nick Griffiths.
3044 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
Dr K.D. HAMES: That is right. He took the document to cabinet and got cabinet support. Of course, the opposition raised concerns about the increased salinity of the water that would be discharged and the power that would be used. I shared both of those concerns. I did not know what work the government had done. I was determined that the government should undertake all the environmental studies to ensure that the discharge would not cause a problem. I also wanted to address the power issue at the other end to ensure that we did not have huge power costs and that we were linking in with environmentally friendly power. We wanted to use a different source than the one used by the government, but that is how it went. Obviously, government ministers were the ones who bit the bullet, put up the money and built it. I give them credit for doing that. Perhaps if not a footnote in history, a footnote in Hansard will recall that I did start it off, I strongly supported it in the first place and I do think it is a good idea. In fact, the day before the minister announced it, I told a Rotary group that it was the best thing to do, because all the rivers of the world flow into the oceans and the oceans clean the water, so we have beautiful clean water and all we have to do is take the salt out. MR P.D. OMODEI (Warren-Blackwood) [9.11 pm]: I will make my contribution to this budget debate and follow up, after the estimates, in the third reading with some local issues. It is interesting to make a speech at this time of the night. The place is, as usual, buzzing, as you can see, Mr Speaker! At least you are here as the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, the Leader of the House is here and the member for Geraldton is here. It is practically a full house. I am sure that all members of the Liberal Party in the upper house are waiting with bated breath to read my speech. This evening I want to concentrate on the issue of members of Parliament travelling overseas and whether it is worthwhile. It comes on the heels of a statement made by Austrade, which criticised our trade offices. I want to record in Hansard, particularly at this time, the issue of flowthrough shares, which was raised by the member for Murchison-Eyre and which has not been put in place by the commonwealth government. The former Liberal coalition government pursued it. I believe it is fundamentally important for the future exploration and development of the resource industry in Western Australia. The member for Murchison-Eyre mentioned issues relating to the importance of incentives for exploration. I think that the federal government’s removal of the incentive for condensate on the North West Shelf is a retrograde step, particularly given the price of diesel fuel. I think the price hit $1.70 in the city today. Fuel is becoming a major issue. I recall it being an election issue when the coalition government was removed from power in Western Australia in 2001. I believe it will also be an issue at the next state election. The issues of flowthrough shares and infrastructure funds are really topical. To its credit, the current commonwealth government has an infrastructure fund. If it has $20 billion in it, we could expect that Western Australia would receive at least 10 per cent on a per capita basis, given that Western Australia has 10 per cent of the nation’s population. However, Western Australia deserves more because obviously it has greater demands for infrastructure and it produces 30 per cent of the gross domestic product of the country. I want to refer to a trip I took to Japan last year and to place on record the kind of itinerary that we pursued to show very clearly that these trips are no junket and are very worthwhile for the state and the nation because of reciprocal information and trade. We went to Japan in February 2007 on a five-day trip with roughly five meetings a day. We flew economy class and had interpreters at every meeting. They were not easy meetings. I will also refer to the trip to China that you very recently led, Mr Speaker. To give members an idea of our itinerary, on the first day we met with Inpex, a totally Japanese-owned company, which is 30 per cent owned by the Japanese government. It currently has a very large office in Perth, with more than 200 employees, and is intimately involved in the project in the Browse Basin off the Kimberley coast, where it is hoping to put a condensate plant on the Maret Islands. There is some competition from the Northern Territory to try to attract Inpex. We met Mr Kunihiko Matsuo, the chairman, and Mr Naoki Kuroda, the president. We had a very productive meeting with them. In the afternoon we had a meeting with the Tokyo Electric Power Company and Mr Susumu Shirakawa, the executive vice-president. Of course, we met with the perennial Mr Hiroshi Takaku, who I understand hosted Richard Court over the past few days when Richard Court received his honour from the Japanese government. The next morning we met with Mr Murray McLean, the Australian Ambassador to Japan, and we talked about defence and trade issues. Murray is well known to us. The same morning we had a meeting with Itochu, at which we met Mr Yoshio Matsukawa of the energy development division; Mr Haruo Maeda, the group general manager of the energy development division; Mr Shoji Hirokawa, the deputy general manager of the energy development division; and Mr Max Hayashi, the deputy general manager of the metals and mineral resources department. These are major companies that trade with Western Australia. At lunch we met with representatives of some of the Japanese steel mills. There were half a dozen of them, in particular from Nippon Steel, JFE, Sumitomo Metals, Kobe Steel and Nisshim Steel, and we had a very interesting interaction with them. Obviously, it was always very formal according to Japanese custom. In the afternoon we met with Mitsubishi Corporation and with Mr Jun Kinukawa, the senior vice-president of the metals group; Mr Haruki Hayashi, the general manager of the iron ore unit of the metals group; Mr Seiji Kato,
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3045 the senior vice-president of the energy business group; and Mr Keigo Hida, the general manager of the Australian unit natural gas business division. Again, Mitsubishi Corporation is a major, multinational trading company that has significant resources in Western Australia and has been a trading partner for many years. Later that day we met with Tokyo Gas. We then travelled to Kobe where we met the general manager of the Western Australian Trade Office, Mr Noriko Hirata, whom you will meet, Mr Speaker, when you go to Japan. The next day we met with Craig Peacock, who is from our trade office, who took us to the Hyogo office. Craig Peacock has been in the Western Australian Trade Office now for quite some time and is highly regarded. He is ultra efficient and did a marvellous job for us while we were there. We paid a courtesy call on the Governor, Toshizo Ido, who has been to Western Australia on a number of occasions, and obviously represents our sister state of Hyogo. We visited the Hanshin Awaji Earthquake Museum, where we experienced a simulated earthquake in Kobe city, which was actually quite frightening. We met with Osamu Niwa, the director general of international affairs and tourism. We paid a courtesy call on the Speaker, Mr Mamoru Osada, of the Hyogo Assembly House, the Diet. We then travelled to Osaka, where we met with the Kansai Electric Power Company. There were discussions at that time on direct flights from Kansai to Perth. We met Mr Yasuhiro Yashima, the executive officer of the office of fossil fuel; Mr Masanori Kataoka, the general manager of the office of fossil fuel; Mr Takayuki Higashijima, the chief manager of the fossil fuel solution group of the office of fossil fuel; Mr Naoyuki Kubo, the manager of the fossil fuel solution group of the office of fossil fuel; and Mr Motofusa Murakami, the manager of the liquefied natural gas group of the office of fossil fuel. They were all from Kansai Electric Power Company, which purchases a lot of LNG from us. When we met with Osaka Gas Company, we met with Mr Yasuo Ryoki, the acting head of the energy resources business unit, and Mr Shinichi Tada, who is from the energy resources bureau unit, which is part of that company. We hosted a dinner with Kansai business leaders from four major Kansai companies. I will not go through all the participants, but there was Mr Yoshihisa Yamaguchi of the Marubeni Corporation; Mr Shinichi Tada of Osaka Gas; Mr Naoyuki Kubo, the manager of the fossil fuel solution group of KEPCO; and Mr Kazushige Arao, the manager of international industry development, which is a division of the Hyogo Prefectural Government. I want to go through this, because it is really important. We then went to Nagoya and met with Mr Yoshikawa from Toyota Motor Company and Mr Takehiko Hashimoto, who is the advisor to the government of Western Australia Tokyo office. Mr Hashimoto was an absolutely marvellous fellow. We then undertook a full visit of the Toyota motor plant. That was certainly an eye-opener. The next day, we visited the Tokyo American Club, and I made an address to the Australia-New Zealand Chamber of Commerce in Japan. Later, we visited the National Diet—the Parliament of Japan—and made a courtesy call on Mr Naokazu Takemoto, who is a member of the House of Representatives and director of the Diet Standing Committee for Rules and Regulations. We then met with Mitsui Corporation and Mr Shoei Utsuda, the president of Mitsui. We then went to a dinner hosted by the Toyota group. That was a memorable occasion. We then came back home to Australia. I have described some parts of our visit to Japan. I want the public of Western Australia to know that it was important for members of Her Majesty’s opposition to visit Japan. Japan is still our major trading partner. We export more than 30 per cent of our goods to Japan. We also, of course, engage in reciprocal trade with Japan. That brings me, Mr Speaker, to the China visit that you hosted only a few weeks ago. That visit was really brought home to me tonight when I watched the images on television and saw the graphic pictures in today’s The West Australian of young children being removed from the rubble after the earthquake in China. It is sobering to think that only 23 days ago we were almost at the epicentre of that earthquake, and if the earthquake had happened then, we could have been the ones who were still being dug out of the rubble. Mr M.W. Trenorden: So it was your fault! Mr P.D. OMODEI: No! I think we were very fortunate. I hear people lament about what is in the budget and what is not in the budget. When we consider Chinese families and China’s one-child policy, we can only imagine the disaster that has been caused to families by that earthquake and the damage that has occurred. To give members some idea of the size of some of these towns, Chengdu, which is in Sichuan Province, covers 12 300 square kilometres, or 4 700 square miles, and has a population of over 11 million. That town is smaller in size than my electorate of Warren-Blackwood, yet it has such a huge population. Chengdu is beautiful city. It is famous for being the habitat of the giant pandas. Mr C.J. Barnett: I believe the Speaker had his photo taken with a panda! Mr P.D. OMODEI: Mr Speaker, you can well imagine that if that earthquake had occurred when you were doing what you were doing with that panda, it could have been quite a disaster for everyone concerned! I must say also that the people of Western Australia need to recognise that it is very important that members of Parliament travel overseas. If that costs the state some money, then that is money well spent, because members of Parliament need to understand the people we are trading with, their culture, and the importance of interaction
3046 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] and the exchange of both cultural and general information. I have always had a picture of China as a bland sort of country, with poor technology, a huge population and a couple of big rivers. In fact, China is about 80 per cent mountainous, with massive rivers, massive buildings and massive populations. We spent our first few days in China in Zhejiang Province. At Hongzhu we met with the People’s Congress. I must say, Mr Speaker, that I thought your contribution to the delegation was outstanding. As you well know, Mr Speaker, you and I have not always seen eye to eye on certain things. As a matter of fact, I think a couple of times you have been unkind to me, because you have thrown me out of the chamber, but I probably deserved it! Mr J.C. Kobelke: You are reflecting on the Speaker! Mr P.D. OMODEI: I have just said that I probably deserved it! I must say to members that it is not easy to lead a delegation of disparate members of Parliament. The protocols are very important. The cultural protocols in particular need to be maintained at all times. Certainly in our meetings with the various People’s Congresses and the different organisations, the leader of our delegation, the Speaker, was the face of Western Australia at those meetings. I must say that I was most impressed with your perseverance, Mr Speaker, and the way in which you handled yourself, and I came away with a different point of view. We also went to Anji, which is a town in Zhejiang, where we visited a unique power station where water is pumped into a large, high basin to produce electric power. We also visited a new company, Style Limited, which produces bamboo flooring, and met a bloke from Perth, Greg Johnson, who happens to own that business. He is producing that product in Anji out of about the 16 500 hectares of bamboo—the bamboo ocean as it is called— that is found in the mountainous country in that area. The bamboo flooring that his company is producing is being sold in Perth and distributed throughout Western Australia. It is an outstanding product, twice as hard as jarrah. There is potential for this technology to be used with our own products in the south west. Greg Johnson has developed that technology in China, and he employs a significant number of people, with state-of-the-art equipment that is probably second to none in the world. Our visit to Shanghai and to the Shanghai People’s Congress was a real eye-opener. We visited the world expo site and the Shanghai Oriental Pearl television tower. While we were in Shanghai, the Speaker hosted a reception for the Chamber of Commerce and the Small Business Development Corporation. The common perception of China is that it has poor to average technology. I found their freeways, airports and ports were outstanding and far outstripped anything in Western Australia or Australia. The maglev train to Pudong Airport, which was developed using German magnetic levitation technology, travels at a maximum speed of 431 kilometre an hour and covers the distance of 30 kilometres in only eight minutes. It is the fastest train in the world; it is second to none. The Chinese are already replicating that train, but they are experiencing some issues with Germany about the technology. We then visited Chengdu and the panda research centre. From a tourist attraction point of view, it was absolutely outstanding. Chengdu is a beautiful city. The town centre that is shown in the photographs, in which the people who have been devastated by the earthquake are congregating, is the same town centre that we visited. We also went to Dujiangyan Dam. Dujiangyan Dam is not actually a dam. It is more of a barrage wall. It was built in 256 BC. It actually splits the Yangtze River in four different directions and controls the water flow to over 700 square miles of irrigated agricultural land. It is also used to control all the sediment in the river when it floods. It is absolutely phenomenal that over 2 000 years ago, people were able to develop such a project, and that it is still in existence today. Our next visit was to Chongqing. Chongqing is a very populous province, 82 400 square kilometres in size, and with a population of 30.9 million. We visited Chongqing Iron and Steel, which has been in operation for over 70 years, having been built in 1938. That company produces a range of steel plate and other products. The iron ore comes from Australia, from our original Hamersley Iron project. The iron ore is barged 2 500 kilometres up the Yangtze River, and now with the Three Gorges Dam, instead of using 3 000-tonne barges, they will have to use up to 10 000-tonne barges. We were actually able to get right up close to the furnace, and we could feel the very strong heat. The last state we visited was Yunnan Province, a western province famous for its copper. Again, we met with the People’s Congress. It was one of the best overseas visits that I have embarked on. It was very well led. [Member’s time extended.] Mr P.D. OMODEI: The visit was very important from the point of view of understanding the culture of the Chinese people, meeting people who held high government office and establishing a great rapport that will stand us in good stead for the long-term future. I said that I was going to talk about the budget, and I will do so during my last few minutes. Whilst the budget is very large, not a lot is new. It contains a lot of repetition of projects that were started in previous years and
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3047 projected forward into the forward estimates. From an agriculture perspective, I was disappointed as there seemed to be a series of cuts to the agriculture budget. For those of us involved in agriculture, particularly in the south west in my electorate, the important issues are biosecurity and the development of new agricultural products and crops. I know that there are some funds in the budget for those things. The government of Western Australia has to understand—it does not matter from which side of politics it is—that the price of fuel, chemicals and fertiliser nationally and internationally is increasing at an alarming rate. For example, diammonium phosphate, which is known as DAP, cost $400 a tonne a year or so ago. It now costs $1 200 a tonne. That adds to an extremely high cost of production. Fuel will possibly cost up to $2 a litre. The cost that that will impose on farmers and production will be quite dramatic. I will refer to the issues of water and roads during the third reading. When I go through the press releases provided by the state government and the Treasurer and ministers, there seems to be a repetition of entries for the same thing. During consideration in detail I want to establish whether there are double entries to make the figures look good or whether they are separate projects. I said at the beginning of my speech that our mining and primary industries are fundamentally important to Western Australia. Flowthrough shares are very important. We need to pursue that. We need to pursue very vigorously a greater share of the GST revenue for this state and ensure that we get our fair share of the infrastructure fund that is being put in place by the commonwealth government. It is fundamentally important that the ports, railway lines and roads be built now to sustain the economic growth of Western Australia. The commonwealth government needs to do that in a very firm way. It is all well and good to make election promises, but the real issues of the Oakajee port near Geraldton, the railway lines or the extensions to Port Hedland harbour and a number of other harbours around the state are fundamentally important. I wish to talk about some of the infrastructure that I do not think is necessarily as important. I have had a change of view about sports stadiums. I believe that hospitals and schools and ensuring that teachers are well resourced and well housed are of fundamental importance to the wellbeing of the state. Just before I went to China I visited my local doctor to get checked out and to make sure that I would not cark it on the way and be a burden on the delegation. Fortunately, it was a very healthy trip. I spoke to my doctor about the sports stadium. When I was the leader of the Liberal Party—obviously the government makes the decisions—I wrote to John Howard to try to get some money from the Commonwealth government. Senator Brandis came over and spoke to Trevor Sprigg. We both wrote letters requesting $100 million from the federal government. I felt that the new stadium should be built at Burswood. I know it would be more expensive, but if we are going to spend $1 billion, let us do it properly and have a stadium for football, rugby and soccer. My doctor said to me, “Do you realise that we are spending $1 billion for an extra 15 000 seats for a group of people who go to football and love football?” I think most people in Western Australia love football. He said, “Football is now a very commercial business. Why can’t the private sector pay for the stadium? Let them own it if necessary.” It is a question of viability and all the rest of it. The point that he made to me that really hit home was that for the price of a football stadium, we could build a new King Edward Memorial Hospital for Women and a new Princess Margaret Hospital for Children. If we weigh up what is important to our society today, we see that even with a huge, growing economy and an affluent society, the gap between the haves and the have-nots when it comes to families at risk and young children is widening. We as members of Parliament should be cognisant of that. We must take responsibility to ensure that future generations are properly catered for. When I was the leader of the Liberal Party I had a very strong view that early intervention in child welfare and support was fundamentally important. It is not just vitally important to identify early learning difficulties in children; we must go back to when a mother falls pregnant, whether she is part of a normal family, a single parent or any other kind of parent. She should be well aware that if she does not lead a healthy lifestyle, it will impact on her child before and after it is born. We should be investing millions of dollars into that kind of project to identify those early learning difficulties with children. We must ensure that mums know that if they drink heavily, smoke and take drugs, it will have a long-term effect on them personally and on the way they look after their family and the way their child grows and is nurtured into the future. If I could make a contribution to this state that is long and lasting, it would be in the area of child health and wellbeing and the wellbeing of parents. I would like to ensure that when families on low incomes struggle, when the fridge or the car breaks down and their children run short of food or are not properly nourished, we consider that the number one priority as members of Parliament. I do not think that we, as a group of members of Parliament making the laws of this state, take that seriously enough. We are more interested in making sure that we have sports stadiums, museums and theatres. All of those are important—I am not saying that they are not—but we have our priorities wrong when it comes to families and children. Obviously, child protection is fundamentally important, and there are significant funds in the budget for that. I heard the member for Murchison-Eyre talking about class sizes. Problems with class sizes depend on where the school is and what kind of demographic it is. If two kids in a class of 28 or 30 kids have a disability and if another two kids are dysfunctional or behave aggressively, it will be impossible for the teacher to properly teach those kids. When the State School Teachers Union of Western Australia came to see me before Christmas to talk
3048 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] about wages and conditions, all of these issues came out. Most of the teachers who visited my office would not necessarily be conservative voters. They were concerned about the education and welfare of those children. The government will get total support from me, and I am sure it will get bipartisan support, when it comes to the education of our children. We need to ensure that teachers are well resourced and able to teach effectively in the classroom. If members found themselves in a primary school classroom with 30 normal kids aged between eight and 10 years, the kids would probably be a breeze to teach, particularly for an experienced teacher. It would be a different situation if we added the ingredients of at least two kids with a disability and kids with aggressive behaviours without any teacher assistance. I can tell members that teachers in the primary schools in my electorate of Warren-Blackwood have real problems trying to cope with what happens in their classrooms. I know about that at first hand, because I have relatives and family members who are teachers and I have always paid a great deal of attention to what happens in schools in my electorate, whether they be high schools, primary schools or special education schools. Education services and special education centres are fundamentally important. If there is one thing I can say to the government, it is that once again the state is projecting a huge budget surplus for next year and the government should put some of that money into education and protecting children, rather than into projects that earlier in our lifetime we would have regarded as luxuries. I will continue to make a forensic examination of the budget during the estimates and third reading debates. I will refer to the issues on which I believe the budget is deficient, but I will also give praise where I believe the budget has been appropriately set. MR P. PAPALIA (Peel) [9.40 pm]: Around 14 months ago, on 23 February last year, I was elected to represent the people of Peel. I remain incredibly proud of and humbled by that opportunity. In fact, I look forward to continuing to assist and to represent the electorate in the coming year. In that spirit, some weeks ago I was very pleased to host the Premier at the official opening of my new electorate office at unit 10A, 2 Oasis Drive, Secret Harbour. Mr M.W. Trenorden: Have you worked out where the harbour is? Mr P. PAPALIA: Secret Harbour? It is an interesting name, is it not? As I said, in the company of dozens of representatives of residents’ associations, service and sporting clubs, community service groups, local governments, school principals and parliamentary colleagues, I celebrated the fact that I was finally able to move my office into my electorate. My office is not only in the geographical centre of my current electorate, but also, coincidentally, in the geographical centre of the future electorate of Warnbro. However, most importantly, it is far closer to the centre of gravity of the greatest population base of the electorate, including the suburbs of Warnbro, Port Kennedy, Golden Bay, Secret Harbour, Singleton, Baldivis and Settlers Hills. For the first time the bulk of the people of the southern suburbs of Rockingham have their state representative’s office within close proximity. Representing the area I do, and noting the previous federal member who represented that area, I feel that it is appropriate to reflect on one particular outcome of the tectonic shift in the national political scene that took place on 24 November last year. For many millions of Australians the election of the Rudd Labor government was reason for great celebration. However, I must admit that there were mixed feelings for those of us in the federal seat of Brand. It is no reflection on our new member of the federal Parliament. Hon Gary Gray is an outstanding current member and potentially a far more influential future senior leader of the Labor Party at the federal level. Mr M.W. Trenorden: I agree. I think he is outstanding. Mr P. PAPALIA: He is. He brings unparalleled political experience to the role and, of course, most recently a vast amount of experience from the commercial sector through his senior executive role with Woodside prior to standing at the recent election. Therefore, those of us in the Brand electorate feel honoured and privileged to have Gary as our local federal member. Nevertheless, to many people the election marked a sad time because it marked the passing of Kim Beazley’s representative role. Kim is admired and respected by many Australians, but he is particularly held in special regard in the seat of Brand where we see on a daily basis at first hand the fruits of his efforts to make the Royal Australian Navy truly a two-ocean navy. Half the surface fleet and the entire submarine fleet are based at Garden Island due, in no small part, to the efforts of Kim and his driving force as Minister for Defence at the time. Thousands of individuals also are based onshore at HMAS Stirling in a number of units, most notably one of my former commands, Australian Clearance Diving Team 4. All the people in these units represent thousands of positive citizens contributing millions of dollars to the local economy and, indeed, the wider state economy. The Collins-class submarine itself is a fitting tribute to Kim Beazley and his service to the nation. When we contemplate the project that was undertaken at the time to build a submarine in Australia, it was an outstanding and astonishing achievement. For a medium power that had never before had the capability nor tried to build in its country its own submarines—to undertake from scratch the building of a modern, very capable conventional submarine—is almost akin to a country trying to establish its own space program, especially when we consider the extent of the knowledge and skill levels that had to be built up from a very low base.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3049
I was therefore particularly incensed in 1996 and the years immediately following when the then incoming Howard government proceeded to denigrate the capability of the Collins-class submarine in an effort to achieve some pretty shallow political outcomes. The actions of the Howard government were completely irresponsible in the national strategic sense. Those actions were so successful that we could probably find a great many people in Australian society today who still believe that the Collins-class submarine is not a very capable one and in many ways may even have been a mistake. The reality is that any serving or recently retired submarine officer in our Navy will confirm that the Collins-class submarine is by far and away the most capable conventional submarine in the world today. Of course, the Howard government subsequently rushed to shore up confidence in the submarine’s capabilities when Australia was faced with problems in East Timor and the government had to call upon the submarine’s capabilities to support the Navy and Army operations in East Timor. The Howard government also had to re-establish the threat—not the direct threat but the implied threat—of the capability of that submarine. There was therefore a great amount of hypocritical effort put into building up the reputation of the submarine and trying to convince our near neighbours and those further away that in fact the submarine was as capable as everyone within the service knew it was. On Tuesday, 8 April this year, Kim Beazley launched the book The Collins Class Submarine Story: Steel, Spies and Spin at the Australian National Maritime Museum at Sydney’s Darling Harbour. There Beazley spoke about how the boats were politicised and about the lack of nation-building projects these days. He said that he had only one profound regret, which was that instead of building only six submarines we should have built eight. Kim’s foresight and vision on the Collins-class submarines were vindicated in the recent announcement by the newly appointed Minister for Defence, Hon Joel Fitzgibbon, that the government intends to build a follow-on submarine. The vindication was confirmed by the meek manner in which the opposition defence spokesman acquiesced to that statement and agreed that it was the right thing to do. Kim was similarly vindicated on another front. As the federal Leader of the Australian Labor Party he was frequently accused by Howard, Downer and Costello of weakness and often famously scorned for having no ticker. The lie was put to that accusation when at, the time of the dual blows of the loss of his leadership of the Australian Labor Party at the federal level and the tragic death of his brother on the same day, Kim Beazley stood in the national limelight and, with a great deal of dignity and undeniable courage, conceded defeat for the leadership of his party, and then focused on his family. I take the opportunity to contrast that brave and honourable behaviour with the behaviour of his detractors since their own recent comparatively minor blow—an election loss. Howard, that man of steel of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation group conference, demonstrated the extent of his courage by failing to face up to an old Indigenous lady in Canberra and other Indigenous people at the Australian National Sorry Day, and instead went to America to trumpet his achievements to an audience of sycophantic neo-conservative Americans. Alexander Downer has dropped his bundle entirely and has contributed more to the Canberra hospitality sector than he has to Parliament in recent times. Finally, Peter Costello, “Captain Smirk” himself, who was so full of bravado, strength and courage when in office, has been shockingly and conspicuously absent from a leadership role after the defeat of the federal Liberal Party. Mr M.W. Trenorden: You will not promote Kim Beazley by abusing others. Kim Beazley deserves your praise. You should be a bit gracious. I think he would be a bit more gracious than you. Mr P. PAPALIA: I am talking about their behaviour in relation to him. I think it was reprehensible and I am happy to place it on the record, which is why I am saying it. Mr M.W. Trenorden: Kim Beazley deserves praise. Mr P. PAPALIA: I am not saying that all their behaviour has been at the same level, but their behaviour towards him and their personal attacks on him were reprehensible, and they have not retracted them. Mr M.W. Trenorden: Any leader of any political party can have mud thrown at him. Mr P. PAPALIA: Not necessarily. In continuing my address, I will talk about the Western Australian defence industry, which Kim Beazley was closely associated with. In 2005, as part of its ongoing efforts to promote the diversification of the state’s economy and thereby insulate the economy against a downturn in the resource and commodity sectors, the government established a task force to assess the level of skills shortages in the WA defence industry. The task force confirmed that although the sector looks set to grow significantly by an average of 40 per cent over a three-year period, very few participants intended to undertake any training of future employees. That leaves them to compete desperately for skilled personnel with the resource and other sectors in a very competitive market. To remedy the situation, the task force recommended the creation of a Defence Industry Skills Unit, which was subsequently created in 2006, and it was to be guided by a board, which was established in March last year. It has been my privilege to chair that board since then. It has been an effective and supportive tool to identify the skills shortages within the industry and to target methods of filling those shortages. I will give members an
3050 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] indication of the level of participation from industry and other sectors that it has received by reference to its membership, which includes Mike Deeks, who is the head of Raytheon in WA; Mike Poynter, the general manager of the WA operations of the Australian Submarine Corporation Pty Ltd; Linda Devereaux, who is the executive manager of human resources at Austal; Phil Christensen, who is the managing director of Formation Design Systems Pty Ltd, which is an incredibly innovative and successful design company based in Fremantle; Chris Eggleton, who heads the ANZAC System Program Office, which represents one of the biggest customers for the WA defence industry through its involvement in the maintenance and upgrading of Anzac-class frigates; and both Rod Clark and Barry Jones from BAE Systems Australia Ltd. They effectively represent all the prime defence industry contractors that operate in Western Australia, predominantly in the shipbuilding industry. We will also welcome to the board very soon Mark Bates, the manager of fast jet military systems for BAE at the Royal Australian Air Force base at Pearce. The board has an aerospace component. The board comprises representatives of other relevant associations who provide input from the professional field, including Graham Priestnall, the chair of the Australian Industry and Defence Network Incorporated in Western Australia, representing several hundred smaller to medium enterprises in the industry; Robert Shaw, the chairman of Group Training WA; and Jim Brown from Engineers Australia, providing input from the professional field. Local government is represented by Chris Fitzhardinge, who is the director of South West Group, which represents a group of southern suburbs councils clustered around the Australian Marine Complex. The government and education sectors are represented by Liz Harris, the managing director of TAFE; Professor Yianni Attikiouzel, from Murdoch University; Gary Fitzgerald, the director of industry and community policy for the Department of Education and Training; and John O’Hare, the general manager of marine and defence in the Department of Industry and Resources. Therefore, a number of key government players are on the board. Peter Mack is an observer who sits on the board and he heads the Defence Materiel Organisation Business Access Office, which is the major potential customer of the defence industry in Western Australia. Within the federal government, that organisation controls a huge budget of around $60 billion over 10 years; it is a rolling $6 billion-a-year budget. All those people are supported by our Defence Industry Skills Unit staff. Terry Booth is the manager of the Defence Industry Skills Unit and Jane Lorrimar is the manager of the Defence Industry Pathways Project. I can report that the board of the Defence Industry Skills Unit has been very active and has achieved significant progress in establishing programs to reach into our schools and communities and to encourage our young people, and sometimes not so young people who are looking at changing careers, to consider the defence industry, and this particular sector, as an attractive career option, which it is. Although we cannot always offer the same remuneration that is offered to people to work in the resource sector or to work offshore, the defence industry can provide a sector that is, to some extent, immunised against the peaks and troughs of sectors that rely on foreign markets. Members are aware that the defence industry has been quarantined from funding cuts in the federal budget. The very nature of the projects means that they extend long distances into the future. People who want a secure future can choose to work in this industry. However, probably the main reason for choosing to work in the industry is that workers can remain at home rather than live the fly in, fly out lifestyle, which has some negative impacts on the workers. They can choose to remain in close proximity to their friends and families and have a good, long and rewarding career in an exciting area. Our programs have been reaching as many as 450 students, and we are looking to expand them. The programs are going into some 14 schools surrounding the Australian Marine Complex and looking further afield all the time. Many of the programs we run are the type associated with school apprenticeship link programs, but they are branded with a defence flavour and receive defence industry mentoring. There are also some innovative programs that people may not be familiar with. One in particular is called Work Smart, which we ran last September and in which 17 students participated. A few dropped out, but 12 finished. It was very successful in one area. In a five-week program, four students spent three weeks at Challenger TAFE in Henderson, and two weeks on the job with an employer. Four students went to Austal Ships and three were offered apprenticeships on completion, after only five weeks. We hope to replicate that sort of success in other areas. I will try to keep my remarks short because we will be pushed for time overall. I read the speech I made this time last year and I see that in this year’s budget the government has continued to support the Rockingham-Kwinana region. It has come through with the goods in a number of areas for which I had listed my hopes and aspirations for my electorate as well as the wider Rockingham-Kwinana area. Everyone knows Rockingham-Kwinana District Hospital will receive a $110 million upgrade. It will be a fantastic improvement, and those additions will open in 2009. Within the education field, Gilmore College is nearing completion and some parts of it are open. That college and the TAFE Automotive Technology Training Centre in Kwinana, at a combined cost of $52.8 million, are coming along nicely. The government recently confirmed that in my electorate it would extend Comet Bay College to years 11 and 12 and it has committed funds in this budget for that purpose. In the area of law and order, we also know that the notable success of the Rockingham Transit Police Station, which has been operating for some time, has received media coverage. Funds have been allocated also for building the Secret
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3051
Harbour Police Station. In a very short period the number of police stations in Rockingham will go from one to three. The area will also be supported by three times as many police in the long term. I can happily report that the Carpenter government’s theme of building Western Australia is being played out not only in Perth in the form of the Fiona Stanley Hospital, the new sports stadium, Perth Arena, the new Museum and the Perth foreshore redevelopment, but also in the electorate of Peel and the wider Rockingham and Kwinana areas. MR M.W. TRENORDEN (Avon) [9.59 pm]: In August 1990, a safe and secure late twentieth century world changed forever with Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait and what has become known as the Gulf War. Thirty-four western nations, including Australia, participated in Operation Desert Storm, ostensibly to protect the sovereignty of an independent Arab nation. The overt reason was to rescue a constitutional monarchy from the clutches of a despot. Covertly, those nations wanted to ensure continuous access to the world’s fifth largest known oil reserve. The attitude amongst western economies that they had to protect unfettered access to major external oil supplies went up in smoke along with 80 per cent of Kuwait’s 950 oil wells. Operation Desert Storm also gave rise to Osama Bin Laden. On 11 September 2001, any comforting sense that safety and security still lay within a nation’s borders disappeared with the twin towers of New York’s World Trade Center and the death of 2 752 people. The effect of those and other events has been that the most powerful economy on earth, the United States, is on the brink of isolation in protecting its homeland and appeasing its people. The widening trade deficit between the US and its new economic archrival, China, has 60 per cent of Americans claiming that international free trade is harmful to local employment. The fact that China has exported hazardous products has given added weight to protectionist arguments. Anti-Chinese sentiment in the US has given rise to 12 bills that are currently before Congress and that have the aim of punishing China and Chinese imports. The perilous overall state of the US economy has the rest of the world holding its breath. As a consequence, many countries have acted to safeguard strategic economic assets within their borders. Gaz de France, a state- owned essential power service provider, has bought out SUEZ, an independent French power distributor, to prevent its takeover by a similar company based in Italy. Belgium has placed a tariff on shoes imported from China because of local angst over unfettered free trade. Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Russia have all engaged in the nationalisation of foreign-owned oil assets within their borders. Russia has also threatened to cut off natural gas supplies to western Europe because of a gas payment dispute with Belarus. Africa and Asia’s poorer economies are reacting to increased global food prices by erecting export barriers in an attempt to gain self-sufficiency in food production. Meaningful international trade negotiations have been shelved and are no longer ratified by countries such as Brazil, India and China. Numerous economies are placing restrictions on foreign investment. State-owned companies are expanding, especially in essential services that have a large national security component such as oil, gas and food supplies. State-funded investment pools from Asia, the Middle East and Russia are the new powerhouses in financial circles in both the US and Europe and are buying up assets such as ports for strategic advantage and not financial return. Multiculturalism is under threat as public support for immigration restrictions grows rapidly in both developed and developing economies. The government claims that tens of thousands of skilled labourers will be needed in the next decade to maintain the resources boom and meet future export demand. If that is the case, such growth in the skilled workforce can be achieved only through immigration. This could place a major strain on the social fabric of the state and enrage the government’s mates, the powerful unions, which have already reacted to the current influx of imported labour in their usual manner. Multilateralism, the concept of cooperative design within such institutions as the United Nations and the World Trade Organisation that is promoted by the middle powers such as Australia, Canada, Norway, Denmark and Sweden, is potentially under threat from reborn unilateralism, even isolationism. With the apparent divergence of international commonality of economic purpose, which is known as globalisation, into national self-interest, any international agreement on issues such as global warming may well be in jeopardy. It will be in jeopardy because many of those who will not act will be state-owned corporations in the nations of the world who will talk and not act because of economic pressures. The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development and the International Monetary Fund have asked the following question: is there a rapidly developing inequality of life and lifestyle in developed economies? The Stolper-Samuelson theorem curse—that is quite a mouthful—states that wealth gained through trade can be unevenly distributed according to workplace skills, especially at the time of accelerated technological demand, development and progress leading to an equitable society. Another theory is that the wealthier economies demand higher taxes and more economic and social regulation, which will bring imbalance to developed communities. Was this information sourced from The West Australian, which is the recalcitrant government’s magnificently malicious obsession? No, it was not. A fair degree was sourced from The Wall Street Journal, one of the world’s most prestigious newspapers. Was any of this information provided by a Western Australian journalist? No, it was not, although I do not have a problem talking to Western Australian journalists. We can
3052 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] only blame internationally renowned economists such as MIT’s Nobel Prize winner Paul Samuelson and Princeton University’s Alan Blinder, among many others. Is there a correlation between this international anti-globalisation backlash and the state of Western Australia? No, there is not. The state of Western Australia has little to nil comprehension of the current state of the global economy and the unilateralist and isolationist push, either in theory or in practice. One example of the reversal is the attitude of Venezuela, which told a multinational oil company to no longer darken its doors. The company concerned has demanded $US4 billion for its nationalised oil assets. The Venezuelan government’s response was to give it $1 billion. If the company argues, it will get nothing. When a multinational oil and gas company does not get its own way on the North West Shelf, it tells the government that it will either pull out or not develop the particular tenement. How do semi-post globalisation, economically responsible governments react? They say that it is the company’s choice and that it should close the door on its way out and that they will develop their own assets. That is the message of some of the nations to which I referred. It is interesting that only a short time ago, the key nations that I spoke of—Bolivia, Venezuela and Russia—were global cot cases that depended on the World Bank for survival. Now they drive many economic activities. Despite the fact that this government has within the state’s borders 40 per cent of the nation’s wealth generators, including much of its rich and diverse resources, it still thinks that globalisation means how many light globes are needed in Parliament House chandeliers. There is absolutely no acceptable policy on state security of state assets for the state on behalf of the people of the state—none. There is no policy. What are the similarities between some wealthy economies with exorbitant tax regimes, strong economic regulation and rapidly developing wage inequalities and Western Australia? In fact, it is worse here than in most other countries in the world. The Stolper-Samuelson theorem curse mainly occurs in economies undergoing enormous industrial advantages, resulting in a large disparity in wages between skilled and unskilled labour. That is the story of Australia. This is because the demand for skilled labour far outweighs all other labour demand. There are no technological or secondary industry advances in this state—state funded or otherwise. The economy is 98 per cent resource driven, with a dig-it-up and ship-it-out policy. In the case of mineral exports, Western Australia ends up importing the result of its exports at thousands of times the cost of the exported raw material. The facts are that, despite Western Australia’s resource-driven wealth, it has only a developing economy with no substantial commercial and secondary industry base that is intrastate, interstate or export driven. There is no state policy requiring a reserve of oil sourced in the state to be retained in the state for this state’s use. There is no adequate policy or comprehensive state plan to meet any deficiency in, or lack of, an imported oil supply through dependent or alternative energies, such as bio-energy, hydrogen or any of the others that are currently being talked about. As unbelievable as it may sound, at a time of emergency Western Australia will have great difficulty in adequately feeding its people for any length of time from its own food sources. By 2020 it probably will not be able to feed its people at all. This state’s food and vegetable industries are decimated. The milk and meat industries are in chaos in this state. It is claimed that 40 per cent of all food consumed in Western Australia is sourced from either the eastern states or overseas. Most of this food is not checked for contaminants or quality by any appropriate state agency, including the Department of Agriculture and Food and the Department of Health. At a time when many nations are identifying food self-sufficiency and food security and food quality as a must, this government identifies none of these as being of any importance. In fact, this government cares so little for the annual $12 billion agri-food industry that it is prepared to invest only $2.2 million per annum to protect it from the effects of climate change and global warming. Are there any similarities between resource-rich economies that are now protecting their strategic economic assets and this state government’s policy and planning? It depends whether we call a new football stadium, a museum in the middle of nowhere and a huge expensive commuter train rattling along with empty carriages some form of strategic economic assets. They are obviously not; they are social assets. Western Australia’s natural gas reserves are of little benefit to the Western Australian citizens whose domestic gas bills are skyrocketing, while overseas commercial consumers pay very little for their gas in comparison. The agreed reserve of natural gas for the state is of no benefit until it can be adequately accessed by the state and its businesses and domestic consumers at a fair and equitable price. The lack of appropriate action by this government has seen rural, regional and remote domestic gas consumers paying close to the same price a litre as they pay for unleaded petrol. This is creating a financially disadvantaged rural underclass. By 2015 the state may be importing 70 per cent of its oil requirements at a price set by the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and multinational oil companies. OPEC nations have few reasons to support western economies, especially those of the coalition of the willing, with which Australia has well and truly been identified. Multinational oil companies, including those accessing the state’s oil and gas reserves, have the worst reputation within the international business community for providing false and misleading information to both governments and shareholders, being far less environmentally friendly and engaging in price fixing and cartel operations to the detriment of consumers. If members think that statement is not true, I have sourced it from Senator John McCain, who is the Republican candidate for the United States presidency.
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3053
This government lacks the entrepreneurial and marketing skills and the business acumen to manage the Western Australian economy to ensure that our current resource assets provide for a sustainable and prosperous non-finite resource, technology-enriched, downstream-developed economic future. This state will be turned from a food bowl into a dust bowl through this government’s attitude that our agri-food industry is unsustainable. Most members opposite believe that is true, when it is not factual. Internal support, whether financial, technological or promotional, for the vegetable, fruit, nuts, grain, oilseed and meat industries is at its lowest ebb since Helen Dance chopped down a tree right about where we are to mark the first Foundation Day 179 years ago. Export marketing and global merchandising of some of the finest quality agricultural products in the world are of little or no interest to this state government. With the assistance of a continuous $15 000 impost on already unaffordable and unrealistic median home prices, we have ensured that Perth is without doubt the most isolated, vintage-champagne-cost capital with an intellectually barren, beer-budget culture in the known world. I am basically saying that we are dreaming. The failure to provide social and economic infrastructure to meet current rural and remote community needs has already created wage, education, health, housing and other essential service inequalities in rural WA that defy any normal standard of economic rationalism within a wealthy economy. [Member’s time extended.] Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Global warming will be controlled by neither international goodwill generated by globalisation nor the apathetic attempts of this government. Carbon trading will cause more arable farming land not to be used in the best interests of the state’s economy. Biofuels can be produced from biomass, the residue from primary agriculture production, without further reducing the state’s food supply. All this sounds just a little too hard. Any future downturn in the Chinese, Japanese and US economies will see Western Australia virtually without an economy. Because of this government, this state knows very little of the positive elements of a healthy, wealthy, progressive economy and the equitable society that it should produce. This government is prepared to be re-elected at any cost, letting 25 per cent of the population suffer on behalf of the Labor Party in this state, and that 25 per cent is obviously all those people who live outside the metropolitan area. Unfortunately, the cost will be to the state’s economy and the best interests of its people. The government has not just dropped the ball; it has failed to notice that the international goalposts have shifted very rapidly. That is the very point of what I am saying. This government is basing its policy on looking in the rear-vision mirror of the car while trying to drive the car forward, and it is bound to crash. What can we do about that? I want to talk about what we can do in the future. The Dampier consortium in Karratha is willing to sell gas to Western Australia at the same price at which it sells gas products overseas. It would do that. It is in its best interests politically to do that. It is not in its best interests economically to do that, because the consumption of gas in Western Australia is minute compared with the demand in the world. Nevertheless, if we were to approach that consortium, I am certain it would make gas available at a fixed price. That fixed price would be able to drive our transport needs, our commercial needs and our private needs for the future. It would source for us a secure supply of fuel at a fixed cost within the state. Gas in its many forms can drive this state. It can drive the agricultural industries, the transport industries and the mining industries. It can drive the industries in the city. More importantly for the people of this state, it can drive the houses and the vehicles of our constituents. That is a highly achievable objective. It is also environmentally correct. It would also provide security for Western Australia’s energy policy. It would cost a lot. However, linking our fortunes and our future to overseas sources will cost a great deal more in both cash and security terms. I now want to talk about food. The opportunities for this state in food production are endless. The Department of Agriculture and Food should be resourced to meet the clear world demand. However, it is not being resourced to meet that demand. This state has lost its way on the question of food research. The new system, which was set up with my support and National Party support, has not been focused correctly. I agree that the direction in which that system is going is correct, and that the drive to put together the greatest amount of resources for research is a good objective. However, that research has lost its focus. The focus of that research has not been driven by the needs of agriculture or the need for cleaner food supplies. It has been driven by universities and the needs of the researchers at those universities. We should be marshalling that system in a better way, because we are losing a fantastic opportunity. It is essential in this arrangement that the researchers meet the needs of the world, not the needs of the researchers. The argument about wheat has now been going on for about three years. No matter what side we take in that argument, we are wrong. It is a 20-year-old argument. Successful economic agriculture in the future will not be about bulk produce. The bulk marketing of wheat is a stupid argument. Those people who are driving that argument and fighting both sides of that argument are misguided. They are decades out of their time. The future is about quality. The future is about health. The future is about security in food. If members have not read about that, and if members have not seen that occur in their own time, they have surely been asleep. I do not have time to go through all of what I want to say. I spoke in my budget reply speech last year about the opportunities in food and agriculture, and I stand by that speech. I will say only that I would love to have the opportunity to get my hands on the levers of this state.
3054 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
I think the opportunities for Western Australia are enormous. I will talk about a few things related to that. Demand from both the federal government and state government will result in up to 15 per cent of arable land in this state moving away from food production, for a range of reasons. None of these reasons is to do with global warming. It will be because the state government and federal government continue to refuse to adequately resource infrastructure. My electorate in the central wheatbelt did not get a zack out of last week’s state budget. It is an area that produces more than $5 billion in agricultural produce. Commercial and industrial applications of the land will increase dramatically and blindingly quickly. If farmers are given the opportunity to be paid more to grow something that will be made into a fuel, or to be paid by some power station in Japan to not grow anything at all, they will take that opportunity with both hands. When it occurs, it will be irreversible. A Japanese university has been coming to Jennacubbine, just outside Northam, for the past four years, measuring the growth of trees in the central wheatbelt. They are ready for carbon trading. The government does not understand that people will come to our state and pay producers more to grow trees on good arable land than they are paid to grow food. That is a fact. That has been driven by the fact that the Howard federal government, the Rudd government and this government have all blindly ignored the consequences of the lack of production of food. No-one will blame the farmers—I should not say that; I will never blame farmers—when people in this state finally realise that they can no longer buy produce from this state because it is no longer viable. I return to my argument about globalisation. The argument that the world will grow something of quality is dead. Isolationism is growing quickly. Nations will protect their own food sources. They will not give food to us. We will not have the capacity to grow food. To repeat myself—people can measure this in the future if they so wish—at some time in the reasonably near future, up to 15 per cent of good-quality, arable land in this state will no longer produce food for either the world or domestic markets. Mr P.D. Omodei: It’s already happening. Mr M.W. TRENORDEN: Of course it is already happening. I am concerned that this government does not understand that this is happening in front of its eyes. There are a raft of people out there who are trying to produce high-quality product and who are unable to make it work because the state government and the federal government will not recognise the fact that investment in infrastructure is an extremely important process. Biodiesel and biofuels are definitely going to be with us. We are talking about $2 a litre for fuel. That will not be sourced from grain. The argument advanced in the USA is wrong. Most of the biofuels in the United States are sourced from corn. The things that are not getting the corn as a result of that are the animals of the world, not the people of the world. In Australia, biofuels will be mostly sourced from trees. They certainly will not be sourced from grains. The Department of Agriculture and Food has already identified a type of mustard in this state that produces dramatic yields. That mustard will grow well in those areas considered by the government to be marginal. As a result of that, those areas on which the government will not spend any money, even for social programs, will be high producers for the state. We will consume that fuel, not the rest of the world. I have said all I will say today, even though I read speeches badly. I am highly concerned that we are not watching the goalposts. The world has changed in front of our eyes and we are planning a process in which we have not seen the goalposts move. By the time we wake up to it we will be way behind. As I said, members should do their own research. They should get on the internet and look at the work done by a few of these professors around the world who are looking at these matters on a daily basis. Russia went from a cot case to a world driver. Venezuela is happily kicking out major oil companies so that it can not only produce oil itself, but also create very sizeable funds to buy our assets. The argument put by the member for Cottesloe about the involvement of the Chinese and others in our north west is correct. They are buying into those areas not to make money out of our assets but to control our assets. MR B.S. WYATT (Victoria Park) [10.30 pm]: I too rise to speak this evening to the Appropriation (Consolidated Account) Bill (No. 1) 2008 and the Appropriation (Consolidated Account) Bill (No. 2) 2008, otherwise known as the budget for 2008. I am now in my third year as a member of this place, and this is rapidly becoming my favourite part of the parliamentary year. It is a rare opportunity for all members of this place to get to their feet and discuss matters of importance to not only their electorates, but also members of Parliament generally. We just heard the member for Avon reflect on his concerns about the effect of globalisation around the world and how that will impact on Western Australia, and certainly his constituents; the member for Peel reflected on Kim Beazley; and the member for Warren-Blackwood reflected on his trip to China, of which I was also a part. I thoroughly enjoyed that trip, something I will come to later. The state budget is a document that sets the course for the government for the upcoming financial year. It is a good state budget. It seeks to address some of the issues I raised in my first speech in this place, primarily focusing on broadening our economic base beyond the resources sector that quite clearly is our driving force. My electorate will get many benefits from the budget. Tax reform for home buyers was announced—the legislation has already been introduced by the Treasurer—as well as land tax reform and a significant increase in spending on health, education, law and order and child protection. I would particularly like to emphasise the increased
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3055 spending in mental health services, an area that is increasingly in demand by my constituents. The Bentley mental health hostel in my electorate has undergone and continues to undergo quite significant upgrades to take into consideration what seems to be rapidly increasing mental health problems in our community. Three million dollars was budgeted to complete stage 1 of the technology precinct master plan in Bentley. The total project is estimated to cost just under $9 million. Bentley Technology Park is known by most members in this place. I spoke about it in my first speech to this place. It is contributing greatly to areas that will go a long way towards broadening our economic base, not just the areas of information, communication and technology but all sorts of different areas. In fact, financial service organisations are moving into the area. In targeting this particular area, the Minister for Industry and Enterprise described it as the future Silicon Valley of Australia. I think he is correct. It has the land, proximity to Curtin University of Technology and the closeness to the city that such an idea and such a project needs. There has been a discussion in my electorate that has been prompted to a certain extent by some of the comments made by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure in her discussions about light rail and public transport. We are all caught up in this climate change debate that we seem to be having in every aspect of the implementation of public policy. I am very keen to get my electorate engaged in it. Later this year I will be conducting a forum to discuss this particular issue. I think the time is right to consider this. With the upgrade of Perth Airport finally on the cards and the increased density of people living in inner city electorates, we need to consider alternate transport options. In fact, just today Parsons Brinckerhoff and Curtin University of Technology held a conference at the Sheraton Hotel to discuss these very issues of place-making and the effect that light rail is having in places such as Portland and Syracuse, places that are similar to Perth, Western Australia. Those places have to deal with the same issues that we are dealing with right now. Certainly, Portland has been able to remove planned freeways and highways from its forward planning because of the rapid increase in the use of public transport, cycling and walking. Indeed, on that point, many parliamentarians rode to a shared breakfast during Bike Week from one of the train stations on the new Mandurah line. The point was made to me that some 40 per cent of people who park their cars immediately around each train station live within a kilometre of the station. Those people must be somehow encouraged to leave their cars at home. Dr G.G. Jacobs: They should walk. Mr B.S. WYATT: Correct. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: If they live within a kilometre or two, it is more likely they would ride and that we need to put in bike terminals. Mr B.S. WYATT: Yes, for bike riders. We need to look at these issues and how we can perhaps follow the successful Portland model. One issue of particular concern that arose not long after I was elected to this place was the release of significant plans for Belmont Park. Those initial plans would have sat perfectly with that successful Portland model. I am disappointed that those plans have been rolled back at this stage. Should that agenda not be pursued, I believe there will be a great reduction in the plans for the waste water initiatives, the parking caps and the use of the Armadale train line as a place-making facility. I put that on the agenda now, as light rail would be a viable option with the size of and access to Bentley Technology Park and the airport increasing rapidly and with the federal and state governments now putting significant moneys into upgrading Great Eastern Highway. I can foresee a plan for a future light rail coming together very nicely. It is not a project that I expect will appear in the next budget; I think it is a 20-year plan for Perth. However, it is a project that the budget debate gives us all an opportunity to consider. Certainly, at this point in the budget debate members of Parliament do their prime job; that is, as state members of Parliament we all represent our electorates, but we are fundamentally here to represent the people and the state of Western Australia. Individually, although we can talk about and are interested in the financial sweets, candies and goodies that each electorate is getting in the budget, overall we must step back and look at the bigger picture and think about what we want the government to do and the priorities we want it to pursue. At budget time we should take stock of the government’s performance, its purpose, what inhibits it from doing its job better, and how current democratic traditions can continue to thrive. It is interesting to note that never before have this issue and these considerations been more prominent. Things happen when a new federal government is elected. It does not matter whether it is a coalition or Labor government that is freshly elected, a lot of activity is generated with a new government. The federation—the discussion now of what it is our federation means and what it should do—is being examined greatly in these economic times. The weakness in our federal structure that has been around now since 1901 comes to be identified only in times of great economic activity; it is not discussed as much when the economic times are slow. I think our country’s enormous wealth is now being inhibited by some of the scoliosis that we are seeing in our federal structure. This is not something new. I am not alone in saying this; the Prime Minister is saying this, and a lot of other members of Parliament are saying this. We also have a very rare opportunity
3056 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] whereby one party is in power not only at the federal level, but also at all state levels. This is not only a great opportunity, but also a great responsibility. There is now an enormous responsibility on governments at all levels to address these issues, because I daresay that if we do not do it now when we certainly have not just the political but also the economic times in which to do it, we will be held to account for a long time to come. A big event occurred not long after the election of Prime Minister Rudd—something that has not received much comment in this place. Indeed, it has received lots of comment all over other parts of Australia, and to a certain extent internationally. It is something that has had a fair bit of criticism and cynicism attached to it. I am referring to the Australia 2020 Summit. It was an opportunity for 1 000 people primarily from all over Australia to come together. However, apart from those 1 000 people, it generated a huge amount of activity among other people, from schools to various community groups, who wanted to get involved and contribute. As a young and new member of Parliament, I found that to be particularly encouraging. I have been looking for an opportunity to quote from a speech that I admire on the issue of apathy. One of the great worries that I have had is: how do members engage with their electorates? How do we encourage our constituents to be excited about what we do in this place and about what our federal members of Parliament do? In 1999 Elie Wiesel gave a fantastic speech to the Seventh White House Millennium Evening in Washington on “The perils of indifference”. Elie was a man who was held in a concentration camp in Europe during the Second World War, and he gave a very emotional speech. I will quote a short part of it — Of course, indifference can be tempting—more than that, seductive. It is so much easier to look away from victims. It is so much easier to avoid such rude interruptions to our work, our dreams, our hopes. It is, after all, awkward, troublesome, to be involved in another person’s pain and despair. Yet, for the person who is indifferent, his or her neighbours are of no consequence. And, therefore, their lives are meaningless. Their hidden or even visible anguish is of no interest. Indifference reduces the other to an abstraction That was the power of his speech. What he thought was the effect of indifference on him as a boy and as a young man in the concentration camps of Europe is something that we, as leaders in our community, need to turn our constituents away from. We need to get people engaged with their communities. That is why I believe we should really admire the Australia 2020 Summit and look at what people contributed. It was not just the 1 000 people who attended the summit in Canberra who contributed; people from all over Australia went to great efforts to make sure that their voices were heard. I encourage all members of Parliament to read the initial summit report. It is not a big document, but it is quite an encouraging document for the many ideas and proposals that fell from the summit. Ideas are really what it is all about in this place. Public policy is the battle of ideas. It is what we are trying to achieve. I encourage all members to look through that report. The summit dealt with a dozen or so topics. However, I would like to look to a couple in particular, if I can do so briefly. What it really comes down to is: how do governments value add to their communities? How can we contribute better in all the areas in which government is supposed to contribute? I refer to two areas from that 2020 summit. One is titled “Australian Governance” and the other effectively deals with foreign relations; that is, Australia’s future security and prosperity in a rapidly changing region and world. State governments—and particularly our state government and our state—should no longer be silent on foreign affairs issues, because we are directly involved in them. I will come to some of the comments made by the member for Avon in that regard. The issues involving some of the relationships that the states have forged with other nations are something from which the commonwealth can take advantage. One of the areas that was recommended was the establishment of a regional energy security forum, including the four major countries—the United States, Japan, China and India. I thought about this government’s role in that forum. It should be huge. It is a great idea. The next 50 years for the world will be purely about energy security. Australia and Western Australia play an enormously important role in that. The Australian governance aspect looked to the creation of a modern federation. It is something to which I have turned my mind for a long time—well before I came into this place. I now bring this matter to the attention of members in this place. It calls for a commission to look at and review the mix of responsibilities of state and federal governments. I do not believe for a minute that centralising in Canberra is an answer to our federal problems. However, I have said and written previously that we are probably looking at a bigger role; that is, devolution to get people more engaged in their government so that they can feel that they own a bit more of the decisions that are made by government. I refer to a Public Accounts Committee report that will be presented to the Parliament tomorrow. It will sit nicely with the state infrastructure strategy that will be released soon and Infrastructure Australia, the newly established federal government body. We are starting to see some consideration of these issues. It is interesting that we are trying to remove from the political process all these organisations and the things that we talk about. We ask how we can make things independent from government and how we can remove them from the political cycle. By doing that we are acknowledging the weakness of the democratic four-year electoral
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3057 cycle that brings the craziness that comes with that. We try to pull out some of the important issues and establish independent bodies that can plan accordingly. Mr T.G. Stephens interjected. Mr B.S. WYATT: I thank the member. Democracy necessarily promotes populism. Populism in itself is not a bad thing. However, if we are talking about infrastructure development worth billions of dollars, in the political process we have to work out how we can plan for the future. I think we can. I am not giving up on everything. To do that we need to work out how to reinvigorate Parliament. I will say it because it is something I have thought: we have the “Washminster” system in Australia, a combination of the Westminster and Washington systems. Perhaps we need to look at removing the executive from the legislature. We should directly elect the Premier and allow him or her to appoint the cabinet and allow the Parliament to perform its role properly by holding the executive to account. Mr T.G. Stephens interjected Mr B.S. WYATT: Not at all. I said that this is a time when summits are being held by a Prime Minister. In the 22 schools in my electorate these discussions are taking place. It is something on which we should have discussions in this place as well. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: Why do you thing it is a better system? Mr B.S. WYATT: I am not saying it is, minister; I am saying that these are the things that we need to talk about because discussions on these issues are taking place in the community and not in this place. I would like to get these discussions going. I draw the attention of members to something I found particularly good. [Member’s time extended.] Mr B.S. WYATT: At page 7 of the initial summit report, one of the suggestions under the productivity agenda was a community corps to allow community service to reduce a person’s higher education contribution scheme debt. It is an interesting option. The situation now is that when people graduate from the higher education system, they have a high HECS debt. Perhaps we need to think of other ways in which graduates can contribute to the community and receive adequate compensation by way of reduced HECS debts. Not long after I was elected to Parliament I was approached by many of my community groups seeking assistance to encourage lawyers onto their boards and committees. I managed to get 10 or so lawyers involved. However, it was difficult because they had to pay debts and were climbing their corporate ladder. It was not particularly easy. Perhaps we need to look at other ways for people to take a year off work. That is becoming an increasingly popular option. The people who do that could contribute in a way that would allow them to get a financial return, although it might not be a direct financial return. This is not a new concept. President Kennedy created the Peace Corp, which lasted for a long time and was popular in the United States, despite the various criticisms of it. I will follow on from the speech given not long ago by the member for Warren-Blackwood about his trip to China, which I was part of. The delegation was led by the Speaker and it was quite a spectacular trip. It alerted me to the reforms that occurred under Deng Xiaoping and have been underway since the late 1970s. They have come to fruition in a way that I could not have comprehended without visiting China. Dr S.C. Thomas: It was a very unpopular trip in Collie. Mr B.S. WYATT: I will come to that later. Although the issue of international relations sits more appropriately at the federal level, it has been raised a couple of times in this place and has been discussed more broadly in the Lowy Institute for International Policy, for example. I think Australia has handled the economic rise of China better than most other countries. We have been very good at it. We have traditionally handled our relationship with China very well. An interesting change is taking place in that relationship with China, courtesy of Deng Xiaoping’s reforms of the late 1970s. China is now a very confident country that is expressing its concerns about energy security, which I referred to earlier, and about the price of iron ore, and it is iron ore that is feeding its development and allowing us to enjoy the standard of living that we are currently enjoying. Colleen Ryan wrote a very good article in The Australian Financial Review on 24 April. It is a perspective on China and is titled “China’s coming to dinner”. It refers to the changing relationship between China and Australia. She points out that the tension in the relationship between Australia and China is not strategic; it has risen out of the economic ties between Australia and China. In particular, it stems from China’s desire to want a piece of the action by buying into corporations that operate in Australia. It is primarily an issue of iron ore but it involves other resources also. This is more of a diplomatic issue than a political issue. The new federal Treasurer has implemented some new guidelines, and the article deals with that issue very well. Mr C.J. Barnett: One of the reasons for that is that literally only in the past two or three months has the issue transcended from being a state issue, or a Western Australian issue, to a national issue. Until then it was a Western Australian issue. It has been out of sight and out of mind.
3058 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
Mr B.S. WYATT: That is right, but that is no longer the case. I would be delighted to leave copies of this very good article for members to read. The Lowy Institute has been pushing this debate. Both articles to which I refer are in The Australian Financial Review. The second article was written by Stephen Grenville and is titled “Sovereign wealth funds only part of the debate”, which was published on 11 February 2008. His concern with sovereign wealth funds is that the economic decisions behind them are not necessarily motivated solely and purely by the desire to increase the value of an individual firm. He is worried that that desire and national interests have started to clash. Colleen Ryan makes the points in her article that China has a much more active, state-owned corporate role to play. She identifies the issue very well in saying that it is now getting beyond simply diplomacy and is entering areas in which politicians are becoming more and more active. In The Australian Financial Review of 3 April, Allan Gyngell, executive director of the Lowy Institute states — The choices we confront in the new regional environment involve more than America and China. China and Japan eye each other jealously and on issues like access to our resources, Australia is already being drawn into their competition. We will have to help shape the relationships between the major powers in ways that help them deal with each other and which create the sort of regional environment that best suits Australia. Perhaps our biggest challenge is to persuade Washington, Beijing and Tokyo that it is not in the interests of any of our major partners to force Australia into a big, defining, either-or choice among them. The timing is critical too. Australia and China share important mutual interests, and because the forms of the emerging regional system have not yet been cemented, we may never have as good an opportunity over the next five to 10 years to help shape our future relationship with China and China’s own role in the world. We are in a very good position at the moment to get this right, and I think we can. I want to make the point that it is something in which the state has a big role to play. I say that because our state, in particular, has a very good relationship with China and with Japan and is developing a good and stronger relationship with India. All these emerging players will have a fundamental role to play in the energy security of the world and the resource security issues over the forthcoming 50 years. This is something that Colleen Ryan identified in her article. She refers to Larry Summers, a former United States Treasury secretary who identified these concerns, which he also has. The International Monetary Fund is now doing a study on these particular issues involving mainly sovereign wealth funds that countries are dealing with. They are issues that we are facing with China that fit neatly into its studies. A lot is now happening in these areas. As Colleen Ryan’s article states — Allan Gyngell believes we need to formulate an umbrella policy to cover the issue of state-owned company investment or investment by sovereign wealth funds, which goes beyond the guidelines for foreign investment already laid out by the Treasurer but which does not discriminate against China. It is probably an unusual matter that a state member of this Parliament would raise in this chamber, but it is something that Western Australia is perhaps better placed than most states to consider and advise the federal government on. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: It is something that affects us very immediately. Mr B.S. WYATT: Absolutely. The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is dealing with this issue as she sits in the chamber tonight. Mr C.J. Barnett: As I have said privately, in the 1960s the rules of the game with Japan were established at the outset and kept to by both parties. There are no rules with China, and that is not China’s fault; it is Australia’s fault. We have not made clear to China what are the rules of its buying and investing in our resources. It’s our fault. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: It is more complex because the nature of the Chinese state capitalism is much more difficult to come to terms with and get behind to find the reality of control is very different from the — The ACTING SPEAKER (Mrs J. Hughes): The member has only three minutes left. Mr B.S. WYATT: I agree with both members but the sticky problem is in the final paragraph in this article. It is an issue that we must address immediately because it is a sticky problem, not least because Australia has already set a precedent in allowing one foreign wealth fund; namely, Singapore Telecom, which is set to make a substantial investment in our second largest telecommunications company, Optus. Do we just keep up the body language diplomacy referred to by Colleen Ryan and hope that China backs off? That is simply not going to happen and it is something we need to address rather urgently so that all parties know the rules under which they operate in Australia, particularly us, as state MPs within Western Australia. I have sought my extension and worked through my time, unfortunately. These are issues that the budget allows us to consider; they have direct relevance to the budget. We are talking about royalties for the state and the commonwealth. They are not directly related to what I may be doing day in and day out in the electorate of Victoria Park. However, I assure my constituents that these issues will affect the electorate of Victoria Park in the future. All members of Parliament
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3059 need to turn their mind to the budget. The budget process is the best time of the parliamentary year, because it provides members with an opportunity to speak about issues about which they would otherwise not be able to speak because they would not be relevant to a particular debate. I conclude by turning my attention specifically to the Appropriation (Consolidated Account) Bill (No. 1) 2008 and the Appropriation (Consolidated Account) Bill (No. 2) 2008. It is a good budget. This process is all about members on this side of the house lauding the budget and members on the other side of the house criticising it. Thankfully, those who are lauding it are in the majority, so the bills will pass. The budget deals with issues that relate to the services that are provided by the state government. It sets up the state very well into the future as it provides the infrastructure expenditure that is required to ensure that the state continues to boom and that its economic base, which I continue to talk about, is broadened so that when the commodity circle inevitably turns, we find ourselves in a very good position in which to handle the future. MR G. WOODHAMS (Greenough) [11.06 pm]: It is that time of the year when I get to pay my tribute to the Nawab of Nyabing, the Balthazar of Belmont, the Treasurer of Torture, Torment and Trial. As heritage and tradition would have it, I have some historical literature that I would like to use to begin my response to the Appropriation (Consolidated Account) Bill (No. 1) 2008 and the Appropriation (Consolidated Account) Bill (No. 2) 2008. I refer to a small piece called “The Budget Path To Heaven”. It was originally sung by Reckless Eric, with apologies to Led Zeppelin. It reads — There is a treasurer who’s sure all that glitters is gold And he’s buying a ticket on the Foreshore And when he gets there he knows if the Ferris Wheel is closed With sixteen million dollars he can get what he paid for And it makes me wonder There’s a sign on the wall but he wants to be sure And you know sometimes words have two meanings In a tree by Claisebrook there’s a songbird who sings Sometimes all of our thoughts are about museums
And it makes me wonder and he’s buying an old power station. There’s a feeling I get when I look over the scarp And my spirit is crying for salvation In my thoughts I have seen rings of smoke through the trees But it was only the ALP’s cannabis legislation And it’s whispered that soon, when there’s another full moon Then the Premier will lead us hereafter And a new Daylight savings day will dawn And the cappuccino drinking chardonnay set will echo with laughter And it makes me wonder Ignore another referendum oooh ignore another referendum If there’s one vote-one value in your hedgerow Don’t be alarmed now It’s just a spring clean for the Jim Queen Yes there’s a jerrymander you can go by but in the long run There’s still time to put out a tender for the road you’re on Your town is struggling, no water, no power and it won’t go, in case you don’t know The treasurer’s calling you to join him. Dear voter can’t you hear the wind blow and did you know Your destiny lies on a Perth whim And as we head down to Subi, The new oval we all know would be Their dropkicks taller than our soul Spending millions for footy don’t you know While teachers struggle to get a go I am glad that the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is in the house tonight, because the piece continues —
3060 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
The powers gone and the Mandurah train is running slow But if you listen very hard The budget will come to you at last With nothing in it, not even bread and lard One vote, one value on a roll Woe oh oh oh oh Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: You haven’t said anything about the public transport corridor or the Geraldton town centre revitalisation. Mr G. WOODHAMS: Perhaps the member for Geraldton will join me in the chorus. The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure can join in the chorus too. I am glad she appreciates this piece. It continues — There’s a Treasurer who’s sure that the regions are old And he’s flying a fair way above them And when he gets there he knows if the stores are all closed It’s him and his like that have condemned ’em And makes me wonder He’s sold our stairway to Kevin The budget contains many things, and I think the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure has alluded to some of them. There are a range of budget spends in the mid-west, which are not to an absolute cent, but very close to an absolute cent, very Geraldton-centric. There is, I believe, a very necessary spend on the transmission line from Pinjar to Geraldton, improving power supplies to that region. Considering the minister’s homework, which she is probably doing at the moment on the tenders that are in for the proposed port at Oakajee, perhaps some of that spend can be justified. Let us hope so, because that would be marvellous. The rest of the spend in the as- described mid-west is all about Geraldton—absolutely about Geraldton. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: The spend in Geraldton is driving the growth throughout the mid-west. Mr G. WOODHAMS: I am sure that the minister will get her chance to speak. Ms A.J.G. MacTiernan: It is. Just think about it. Think about the road from Morawa to Mullewa. Mr G. WOODHAMS: I asked the minister a question about the road between Morawa and Mullewa, and she told me that a transport study had been done. I am still waiting to see the information that she said that she would provide on the upgrades to that road. I suggest that she get on with her work on the two organisations that have tendered for the port of Oakajee, and then maybe she will have something else to say in this house later on. As far as I am concerned I would describe the mid-west, part of which I represent as the member for Greenough and part of which I travel over very often due to decisions made in this place a couple of years ago, as being very poorly served by this budget. The member for Geraldton may stand and say something else. That would be wonderful, and I invite him to do so. While on the subject of the mid-west, an additional $2.8 million has been spent on the central business district revitalisation project, which I believe takes to over $20 million the amount of money that has been spent to remove sand, put it back, remove it and put it back, and dig up roads and put them back. Dr G.G. Jacobs: It is happening in Esperance too. Mr G. WOODHAMS: Yes, it is habitual. That is what is happening there. The good folk of Geraldton, whom I do not represent, are perhaps a little windblown at this point by the Geraldton foreshore redevelopment. Perhaps the $20 million-plus that has gone into that development, may have been more appropriately spent on a service such as the Royal Flying Doctor Service. I merely make that as a suggestion. The wheatbelt is another part of the world in which I spend a considerable amount of time. I have spoken to people across the wheatbelt about the money that is to be spent on the road between Muchea, the northern suburb of Perth, and Wubin in the wheatbelt. It is the considered opinion of most of those people that an upgrade of Great Northern Highway, although needed, is not really the answer to transport problems in that part of the world. Mr M.W. Trenorden: It is funded by the federal government, anyway. Mr G. WOODHAMS: Much of it is funded by the federal government. Perhaps the new federal government may see some wisdom in another suggestion, which I am sure many others in this place are familiar with, and that is the Perth to Darwin highway. All the confusion, anger, disappointment and disasters that occur on the Great Northern Highway, not only between Muchea and Wubin, but points further north and further south, may be alleviated in some sense by a budget in this place that perhaps is a little adventurous and looks at the creation of another major road north of Perth. As the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure so correctly points out, many projects in the north of this state are driving the state’s economy and are really the great reason behind the
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3061 budget that exists at the moment, which is a surplus budget that this government, via the Treasurer, has seen fit to allocate in the way that it has. I suggest that the government could be a little more adventurous and forward thinking and link some of the projects in the north to some of the projects in the south by taking another look at transport links. I am suggesting that it revisit the Perth to Darwin highway suggestion. It is just a suggestion. There are some particular areas in the budget that I like to follow and that I feel I have some responsibility for, particularly from an electoral point of view, on behalf of the people who come to see me and whom I go to see on a regular basis. One of those areas, as members in this place will know, is teaching and the schools in the mid-west and wheatbelt. I referred to this matter earlier today during another debate. Some information is provided on page 856 of the budget papers. One of the dot points states — Continue to develop and implement programs for young people at risk in their 16th and 17th year to ensure all young people in their 16th and 17th year can access a suitable education, training and/or employment option to meet their needs. If members went to virtually any district high school in Western Australia, they would find that, although that statement would have some resonance with people and they would agree with it, people would suggest that it is not happening and that a great number of young people in years 11 and 12 are at risk. These young people are staying at school, which is something that members on this side of the house agreed to. It is certainly something that I endorse. However, I repeat in this house—I said it last year—that I do not believe that the government has tried to fully understand the needs, particularly in smaller regional communities. I can evidence three schools— Carnamah, Morawa and Mullewa District High Schools—at which students have elected to stay for their compulsory education years 11 and 12. The programs provided to them are exceptionally narrow. The current suggestion is that those three schools bus their students to one central location, and so the students consume a great deal of time on the roads, which are very inadequate for a range of purposes, let alone for further bussing students. If the government is serious about its educational programs, particularly this one—that is, that students stay in school until their seventeenth year and be educated to an appropriate level—which I think the majority of people in Western Australia agree with, it must ensure that programs and resources are available in schools and that there is an appropriate number of staff in schools so that those young people are not put at risk, because they are at risk now. They will be at further risk the longer this program rumbles along without any great direction. This is a bandaid measure of bussing students from Mullewa to Morawa, Carnamah to Morawa — Mr M.W. Trenorden: Brookton to Narrogin. Mr G. WOODHAMS: — Brookton to Narrogin, Moora to Merredin, or Jurien to Dongara. I was citing just one example, but a range of measures are being talked about. A superschool solution is being talked about. It would probably be best if the Minister for Education and Training came into this place and gave the lie to that and gave some comfort to the students, teachers, administrators and communities that there is a way forward for those district high schools at which students are now electing to stay because, in many instances, they have no opportunity to go elsewhere. It is impossible for those students to go elsewhere because of the distances and the costs involved. Therefore, their parents say they will need to stay at school in Carnamah, for argument’s sake. There is nothing wrong with Carnamah. It is a great little town. However, in terms of educational opportunities, for some people that is just not going to work. Therefore, this particular major initiative in the 2008-09 budget is simply not going to work. It needs to have some flesh put on its bones. I want to mention another initiative in education that concerns me. This initiative is strongly allied to the issue that I have just been talking about. I am talking here about the Curriculum Council of Western Australia. This issue comes under the heading “Significant Issues and Trends”. It is found at page 880 of the Budget Statements, if any members are keen to take a look at their copy of the Budget Statements, which I am sure many people in this place think is just something that they can use to keep their flyscreen door open — Mr M.W. Trenorden: Or closed! Mr G. WOODHAMS: Yes. It states —
• The implementation of the senior secondary school reform as outlined in the report ‘Our Youth, Our Future’ continues through to 2010. This reform addresses: — the provision of courses and assessments that will allow schools to provide programs to all students, particularly those staying on at school as a result of the raising of the compulsory school leaving age to 17 in 2008; That ties in very closely with the point I have just made about district high schools. I would like to underline again the words “the provision of courses and assessments that will allow schools to provide programs to all students”. That initiative will place further pressure, and in some cases further bureaucratic requirements, on our teaching profession. The teaching profession in the community of Western Australia is already under a great deal of stress and duress. I have described the community of Western Australia. I am not stating that this community
3062 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] is exceptional. As those people in this place who follow educational issues around the world, particularly the western world, would know, there is a crisis in teacher numbers around the world. I would suggest that Western Australia, of all the western economies, has the best and most flexible opportunities to create some solutions; to be adventurous; to not follow, but lead; and to look at the circumstances on a community-by-community basis. I say that because our population is not very large. I say that also because of the commitment that has been made by many people in this community. We also have a marvellous document that is lying somewhere in someone’s bottom drawer called the Twomey report. That report could be the key to solving some of our problems in this state if it were to be released. I have touched briefly on education. The point I am trying to make in touching briefly on education is that I do not believe this budget caters for the teaching profession. I do not find in this budget the flexibility that is required. I am more than prepared to be interrupted at this point. I realise that it is late at night and many members probably have not had enough caffeine. I do not find in these budget papers the provision of increased funding for people in the education sector. It is a pity the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure has left the chamber. I realise she is a far better singer than I am, and I bow to her greater ability in singing songs. If the minister was offended by my verses, I am sure she would be able to come into the chamber another day and sing them to me. The minister did mention Oakajee before she left the chamber. I would have like to have developed that point with her. [Member’s time extended.] Mr G. WOODHAMS: Planning and infrastructure is in volume 2 of the Budget Statements on page 692. I found the one line dedicated to Oakajee—a mid-west infrastructure analysis report and the Oakajee-Narngulu infrastructure corridor study. That is the sum total of the “Significant Issues and Trends” with regard to Oakajee. The minister was being somewhat more honest and open in this place than the information we find here, because the Oakajee proposal has great potential to drive a lot of things, not only in the mid-west but also in the Murchison, the Gascoyne and the greater hinterland of the area between Perth and Carnarvon. That would certainly be something that that part of the world would warmly welcome. I see the Treasurer sitting there; I would certainly welcome the Treasurer’s interjection. With regard to Oakajee, I hope that embedded somewhere in this document—I have highlighted the Oakajee-Narngulu infrastructure corridor study, which is currently being conducted—there is some flexibility in the Treasurer’s budget allocations. I realise from the tenders that the port proponents will fund that, but I hope there is some flexibility in the budget to enable other necessary infrastructure to be developed, whether it is the actual service corridor that other users access, Western Power, gas, road, government rail etc. I only hope that that is embedded there. That is the point I wanted to make about planning and infrastructure with regard to Oakajee for my part of the world, the electorate of Greenough, which is where Oakajee sits. I listened with great interest to the member for Avon. He remarked on a range of agricultural issues, which I thought were most pertinent in this place. I am from a farming background, but that does not mean that my life and interests are exclusively about farming. Having lived and worked mainly in agricultural areas of this and other states of Australia, and in the agricultural workforce of the United States, I found the remarks made by the member for Avon very refreshing, and they provided an insight for people in this place about where agriculture in Western Australia might be going. We have a remarkable opportunity in this state. We had a remarkable opportunity in this state back in the 1850s. In fact, the place where I come from—Greenough—was the state’s breadbasket for the first few years during the 1850s. It was then superseded by other parts of the state. I will not give members a history lesson, but this state has a marvellous track record in agriculture. It disappoints me greatly, in many senses, that agriculture seems to have fallen off the radar as far as this government is concerned. Agriculture in its many forms can have a fantastic part to play, and still does. It is probably the quiet achiever in many senses. It does not get a lot of press; certainly not in this place, but for those of us in the know, we know what a phenomenal driver of the state’s economy it has been and can continue to be. However, it could be even more important than it is now if we pay heed to some of the things the member for Avon said. The less food we produce in this state and the more dependent we become on imports, the more vulnerable we are to exploitation and the less viable many of the projects that are currently touted as the future of Western Australia will be. I urge the government to reconsider its position on agriculture. The other day in this place I heard the Premier defending the Minister for Agriculture and Food, Hon Kim Chance. I had a very close look at the $158 million budget commitment to agriculture, of which $1 million is dedicated to the development of food. There is an opportunity to think outside the square when it comes to agriculture in this state. For a long time sheep, wheat and wool have been the mainstay, the backbone, but we are letting many other opportunities slide by because agriculture is no longer the flavour of the month. There are a couple of things in agriculture that people ask me about on an ongoing basis. They are inescapable; we cannot get away from them. The first is: what has happened to the skeleton weed program? When I read about the major achievements for 2007-08, I learnt that the Department of Agriculture and Food successfully
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3063 delivered services to the grain industry funded skeleton weed program. It is self-funded these days. That is what it means; farmers are funding it themselves. Dr G.G. Jacobs: They are levied. Mr G. WOODHAMS: Yes, they are levied. There is no support from the state government. The budget says that the government has “successfully delivered services”. What does that mean? I also read of the ongoing control programs for animal and plant pests such as feral donkeys and wild dogs. Dr G.G. Jacobs interjected. Mr G. WOODHAMS: Wild dogs are down near the member for Roe’s electorate. They have eaten all the sheep north of him. They will be in the Bay of Isles very shortly. In once sense it is mildly amusing that these dogs are absolutely everywhere but I assure members that they will be turning up in rubbish tips in our regional towns very shortly if they are not already there because they have eaten most of the livestock in some of these regions. People do not have livestock any more. We will see coyotes in Corrigin and dingoes in Dowerin. I do not know whether the statement that “ongoing control programs have been successful in reducing the impact of animal and plant pests such as feral donkeys, wild dogs and a range of agricultural and environmental weeds” is honest. Dr G.G. Jacobs: Member for Greenough, do you think the government’s going to commit anything seriously to a barrier fence or a pastoral barrier fence? Mr G. WOODHAMS: No, I do not. Dr G.G. Jacobs: Is there anything in there about it? Mr G. WOODHAMS: No, there is not at all. This is a very controversial place. I am not often a very controversial person, as the Deputy Speaker will attest. I do not think that people in this place understand what will be the implications for the livestock industry of Western Australia when mulesing is abolished in 2010. I am not an advocate of mulesing but I do not know that people in this place understand just how wide an impact the abolition of mulesing will have. I do not know that the industry and certain people, particularly those single- farmer operations, have been consulted in this process. Mr M.W. Trenorden interjected. Mr G. WOODHAMS: I would say so. I am quite happy to reflect on that another day because this issue has been raised with me by many people who are greatly concerned about what will happen to small farmers in particular. Mr B.S. Wyatt: Is that because the alternative is so hard for a small farmer? Mr M.W. Trenorden: They have other options. They can move to other breeds that do not need mulesing. Wool production will just go. Mr B.S. Wyatt: Because the other breeds do not have wool? Mr M.W. Trenorden: They will just be produced for meat. Mr G. WOODHAMS: That is part of the answer. Mr B.S. Wyatt: I am asking; that is all. Mr G. WOODHAMS: Yes. The final point that I want to address relates to the Mid West Development Commission. If members thought that mulesing was an interesting matter and a subject that came out of left field, I suggest the next matter I raise may also for some members appear to come out of left field. The government should get rid of the Mid West Development Commission, the Wheatbelt Development Commission and the Great Southern Development Commission. Flick them! Get rid of them! Take away their budgets! Give the money to local government. Put that money on the ground. Remove that buffer. Remove that series of bureaucrats; remove that series of inactive, ineffective, totally misunderstanding individuals who really and genuinely in many places have no particular interest in the communities in which they live. Some, I believe, live in Perth and do not live in the regions. They do not reflect the needs and requirements of those communities. That is not to say that some of the people in those various development commissions around the state are not wonderful workers, are not great researchers and do not have good ideas. I believe those people and those funds could be more appropriately deployed. The workers could be more appropriately employed and do a far better job if the money was much more realistically spent. There would be far more jobs generated and more projects created if the moneys dedicated and given to the various development commissions around the state were deposited with local governments. It would finally give local governments the opportunity to make decisions about their future and whether they want to amalgamate with other local governments or go it alone. Here is a marvellous opportunity, because the development commissions are not helping at all.
3064 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
MR J.H.D. DAY (Darling Range) [11.31 pm]: We are, of course, debating the 2008 budget in the debate on the bills that are part of that process. There are a couple of particular aspects of the budget that deserve comment. One of those is the fact that total public sector debt is forecast to increase from a level of $4.7 billion as at the end of June this year, 2008, to $11.4 billion at the same time in 2012, some four years later. I understand that most, if not all, of that debt is associated with the government’s trading enterprises, particularly the electricity corporations and the Water Corporation, and that the debt will therefore be serviced by the income that is received by those corporations for the services they provide. Nevertheless it is a very significant increase. It is one that gives rise to a degree of concern, and one that I think needs to be very carefully managed and watched over the next few years or so. The second particularly notable aspect of the budget, in my view, is the very substantial increase in royalties from mineral and petroleum resources that are expected to be received in the next financial year, 2008-09. Indeed, the increase reflects the trend that has been occurring in the past six to seven years in particular, but of course on a progressive basis ever since the exploitation of those resources has occurred. The forecast increase for 2008-09 is 35.2 per cent, a very substantial increase up to $3.66 billion. That follows an expected 16.3 per cent increase in the current financial year, 2007-08, and an 18 per cent increase in the previous financial year, 2006-07. In the later part of the forward estimates years the increase in 2009-10 is much lower at 5.2 per cent, and there is then a forecast reduction as demand for commodities is expected to decrease. Whether in fact that eventuates may well be another matter. By way of comparison, the royalties received in 2000-01—about the time when there was a change of government to the current Labor government—amounted to $1.16 billion, far less than is currently the case. Going back to 1990-91, just for comparison purposes, the amount received was only $263 million. Therefore, this substantial increase has been brought about by a combination of increases in the prices of various commodities, most notably at the moment, of course, iron ore, but also petroleum and gas products and a range of other minerals, and substantial increases in the quantities that are being produced. That is particularly the case with iron ore, of course. I think that both BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto are undertaking work to increase their production of iron ore exports over the next three or four years to about 300 million or 320 million tonnes each. Probably five or six years ago they were producing in the order of only 50 million tonnes a year each. Therefore, those increases are very substantial indeed. The main point that I am getting to, as members may have worked out from some of my previous comments in the past couple of years, is that there is a substantial comparison between the state budget that was produced a week ago and the federal budget that was produced by the new Labor government last night. In the case of both the current federal government and the previous federal coalition government, which started off this process, investment funds, or so-called sovereign wealth funds, have been created. As I said, they were created originally by the coalition government, but they are being built upon by the current Labor government. In the case of the previous coalition government, the Future Fund, as it is called, was initially established with the sale of Telstra shares to ensure that funds would be available to pay superannuation to retired commonwealth public servants. More recently, the higher education endowment fund and also, I think I am right in saying, a health infrastructure fund were established. In last night’s budget, proposed additions were made to those investment funds in the health, education and infrastructure areas. I make the observation that there was a degree of spin in the federal budget last night and the associated announcements in that some of what is being put into the current federal government’s investment funds is simply being taken out of what was already deposited in the Future Fund by the previous coalition government. That certainly applies to the education fund. Therefore, the amount of new money going into those funds is not quite as much as the federal government has been making out. Nevertheless, the important point is that the principle of putting something aside for the future to create an income stream to provide for some of the community’s future needs is being maintained, and that is a good thing. That is really, in my view, in direct contrast with the lack of action that has been taken by Western Australia, and of course the incumbent government must take responsibility primarily for such lack of action in establishing a similar investment fund. As I have pointed out before, we are receiving huge amounts of income from our natural resources. However, the essential point about those resources is that they are finite and non-renewable. As a state, we need, in my view, to establish and maintain a principle of retaining a proportion of that revenue from, as I said, finite and non-renewable resources and putting it into a fund that should build up over time to a substantial size, so that an income stream will be provided for residents of this state in the long term when the same amount of revenue will not be received from these resources in the future. As I have pointed out previously, a motion on exactly this matter was debated—it was not passed—in 1981. It was a motion moved by the then Labor opposition. Just over a year ago, I introduced the Western Australian Resources Heritage Fund Bill, which is still on the notice paper, to establish such a fund and to put in place the principle that I have been espousing. It is an important issue for this state. I hope that ultimately the idea will be taken up, although I recognise that the government has pressure on it to spend money in a whole range of areas. We need to accept
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3065 and adopt this principle of putting something aside from non-renewable resources. In essence, the family silver is being sold off at an ever-increasing rate and it will not be available forever. In that regard I make an observation on an issue that was raised in question time today about the possible merger of BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto. I am not sure whether the state will receive a significant windfall from stamp duty that may arise from such a merger. The Treasurer made the point, as I understand it, that that issue would not be looked at until such a merger occurs. In the event that the state receives a windfall from stamp duty, those funds should be deposited in an investment fund to which I have been referring. It would certainly be a mistake for such a windfall to be spent on a short-term project. The point has been made to me by a constituent who is working in the mining industry that there is a potential problem when the state or government activity is competing in the construction market for labour and other resources to build projects when the private sector is also undertaking a high rate of construction activities. When both the private and public sectors are, in effect, competing against each other for the relatively scarce labour and other resources, as is currently the case, the cost of construction will increase. It makes a lot of sense to slow down to some extent the rate of government activity and defer or spread out some of those projects. This would alleviate the degree of competition and the bidding up of the cost of projects that currently occurs. The second benefit of deferring or spreading out the construction time for some of the major projects that a state may contemplate is that a stimulus can be provided in the construction sector and, therefore, in the whole economy when, inevitably, as will occur at some time, there is a downturn in the level of activity. It is much better to try to smooth out these activities rather than take part in what some people might consider to be a frenetic rate of activity at the moment. Establishing such a fund and having such a principle would enable that aspect to be dealt with as well. I will make a comment on the royalties received by the state. My comment does not relate to the aspect of establishing an investment fund, but it picks up on something that was also mentioned in question time today. The Premier made great play of the fact that Western Australia, under the new federal Labor government, is expected to receive approximately $100 million from royalties, which the commonwealth government would have otherwise kept, from the Gorgon and Pluto liquefied natural gas projects. I am not sure over what period the $100 million is expected to be received, but that is not the important point. Has the government received advice on whether the receipt of that $100 million will have an effect on the state’s share of goods and services tax payments, which is, quite rightly, currently under debate? We should seek to obtain a modification to the formula that is being used now, because it is making the state’s finances that much more difficult in the future. It is highly likely that under the current process the $100 million that the state will receive will ultimately go into the Commonwealth Grants Commission formula process, resulting in Western Australia having a reduction in its share of GST, in the same way as the state is currently experiencing a reduction from the increased amount of royalties it receives and the other benefits that Western Australia is judged to have compared with other jurisdictions around Australia. The windfall, or the amount of funds that the state government is expecting to receive, might not be anything like the amount it is predicting. The $100 million in reality might be spread across all the states and territories so that Western Australia might only partly benefit from those funds. I also wish to comment on a few local issues in my electorate, including the future of Kalamunda Police Station and its staffing levels. The Shire of Kalamunda, which is within my current electorate, has two police stations. One is located at Kalamunda and has been there for many years and the other is located at Forrestfield and is a much more recent police station. It was built during the time of the previous coalition government and was opened in 1995 or 1996. The announcement of the establishment of the station was made during the Helena by- election back in 1994. Both police stations have a very important role to play. The population of the Shire of Kalamunda is about 50 000 or so and is growing fairly rapidly, as it is around much of Western Australia. Both of the police stations have substantial populations to look after. It is a major concern to the local community that the staffing levels at Kalamunda Police Station are being reduced. The Kalamunda policing district comprises not only a substantial population—probably roughly half the Shire of Kalamunda—but also covers a large geographic area, including Gooseberry Hill, Kalamunda, Lesmurdie and all the rural and semi-rural areas, including Walliston, Carmel and Pickering Brook and eastwards to Mundaring Weir. I understand that the recent officer in charge of Kalamunda Police Station has either resigned or taken up extended leave without pay. He is entitled to do that, but the major concern is that he has not been replaced. This has had the effect of reducing the number of sworn staff from nine to eight. I understand also that Kalamunda Police Station has been placed in control of the officer in charge of Forrestfield Police Station. There is no argument at all about trying to get good integration between the policing efforts of the different police stations within the policing districts and indeed across the state. However, I certainly will be concerned on behalf of the local community if the police presence in the Kalamunda policing district is to be reduced. The information that I have been given by concerned constituents indicates that that is exactly what is happening. The government must respond to this concern. I have written to the Minister for Police about this issue and I am awaiting his response. I understand also that the current situation might reflect the difficulty in attracting sufficient police officers across the state, which is an
3066 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] issue that the government must address very actively. As a result, the level of policing activity, particularly proactive policing activity, which is important for communities in the metropolitan and regional and rural parts of the state is, unfortunately, being diminished. That issue is a major concern in my community. Another issue of concern is the condition of many of the old schools around the state. That matter is exemplified by Kalamunda Senior High School. Its staff are certainly very dedicated and committed; however, having been built around 50 years or so ago, it is one of a number of schools that has a fairly high need for maintenance. I asked that question of the Minister for Education and Training a month or so ago on the needs of the school and the allocation of funds for completing those maintenance works but, unfortunately, I can only say that the answer I got back from the minister, without reading it out, was a smart alec sort of answer. In essence, it simply boasted how wonderful the Labor government has been in dealing with maintenance and capital works issues in government schools. However, he really provided none of the specific information that was requested; he made the statement that more than $5 million has been spent on maintenance and capital works on Kalamunda Senior High School since 2001. If $5 million has been spent, I would certainly like to know where and how. Indeed, I think the minister has got it wrong. I do not think he has given the right information to Parliament at all, because in an article in one of the local newspapers, the acting infrastructure director of the Department of Education and Training, Mr Mal Parr, stated that only $1.7 million had been spent on maintenance and minor repairs at the school since 2001. I think the Minister for Education and Training needs to face up to that issue a little more seriously and provide accurate information. I have submitted another question on notice and hope I get a better answer than I have so far. More importantly, perhaps he needs to ensure that the needs of schools such as those at Kalamunda are better addressed than is the case at the moment. We all remember the situation during the last election campaign when this state government was very busy putting up signs outside government schools, including outside Kalamunda Senior High School, entitled, I think, “Fixing our schools — a $65 million maintenance program”, which was supposed to have been undertaken. [Member’s time extended.] Mr J.H.D. DAY: The erection of those signs was completely improper and, I am pleased to say that the government was forced to remove most of the signs. My point is that the government is very good at making announcements about what will be done, but it is far less effective in actually carrying out some of the commitments it makes. In relation to Kalamunda District Community Hospital, which has been very much an ongoing issue ever since I have been representing the Darling Range electorate and well before that, I am pleased to see that $2.75 million has been allocated for capital works at the hospital. I assume it is for the upgrading of the operating theatre, which is very much overdue. We were told by the Minister for Health last year that that would commence in May 2008 with an expected completion date of October 2008. Dr G.G. Jacobs interjected. Mr J.H.D. DAY: As my colleague the member for Roe effectively interjected, there is no way that will happen. The work has nothing like started. I will be very interested to see whether it will even commence in 2008. Again, big promises have been made by the government but it has been much less effective in carrying them out. The Kalamunda district, of course, was very disappointed when the government removed the maternity services from Kalamunda hospital two years ago. The upgrading and modifications that are necessary to the operating theatre and the sterilising area have been awaited ever since the operating theatre was forced to close at the beginning of last year. This government has been very slow to respond and it seems, unfortunately, that it will take much longer than was expressed by the Minister for Health last year. The final issue I will raise relates to natural resource management, or land care funding, across the state because it does affect my electorate in particular as well as many other hills and outer metropolitan electorates. I understand that the federal government provides funding for natural resource management or land care activities. Under the previous government, it was known as the Natural Heritage Trust program; under the current federal government the title has been changed to Caring for our Country. Funds were provided by the previous federal government. I understand that those funds were in the order of $21 million. Approximately the same amount of funds are available in the state budget. However, there is a major concern within community groups that the funds that would normally be made available to the community groups through the various catchment councils are in doubt. It is important to recognise that the community groups involved in land care management play an important role. They have been involved in the preparation of long-term planning activities that have dealt with issues such as salinity, weed infestation, revegetation with natural vegetation and the maintenance of waterways and important water life activity areas, so to speak. Those community groups are involved in those activities. There are many volunteers in the community and if there is a sudden discontinuation of the funding that is available to those groups, there will be a high level of disillusionment and people will walk away from the very valuable work that they are undertaking. I encourage the government—I understand that the relevant minister in this case is the Minister for Agriculture and Food—to ensure that the necessary funds will be provided through
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3067 the catchment councils to community groups so that there is a continuation of their important work, which many community volunteers wish to continue. Debate adjourned, on motion by Mr J.C. Kobelke (Leader of the House). ESTIMATES COMMITTEES — MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE Report — Presentation MR J.C. KOBELKE (Balcatta — Leader of the House) [11.56 pm]: In accordance with standing orders, I present the report of the management committee prescribing which parts of the estimates and off-budget public corporations will be considered by Estimates Committee A and B and the time allocated for that consideration. [See paper No 3886.] DR G.G. JACOBS (Roe) [11.57 pm]: I will not take very long, being cognisant of the hour. In drawing up the program for budget estimates, I thank the government, the Leader of the House and the relevant ministers for the slight variation in the order, which has been written in the substantive copy, of some of the division timeslots. We can now allocate opposition members to their appropriate portfolios and interests. I thank Madam Deputy Speaker and the government Whip for their cooperation to ensure that we have a worthwhile, beneficial and accountable budget estimates week. The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The question is that the report be adopted. Question put and passed. FATAL ACCIDENTS AMENDMENT BILL 2008 Returned Bill returned from the Council without amendment. House adjourned at 11.58 pm ______
3068 [ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008]
QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
Questions and answers are as supplied to Hansard.
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND WORKS — PROPERTIES AND LAND OWNED 3157. Mr J.E. McGrath to the Minister for Housing and Works In regard to properties and land owned or previously owned by the Department for the past three years (2005, 2006, 2007) will the Minister please advise: (a) how many and which have been sold to the tenants or private investors; (b) what was the sale price for each of these properties; (c) how many vacant properties have been purchased and built upon by the Department; (d) how many properties have been demolished and/or sub-divided by the Department; (e) how many properties have been renovated or re-built by the Department; and (f) how many houses have been purchased by the Department. in each of the following regions: (A) North Metropolitan; (B) South Metropolitan; (C) South East Metropolitan; (D) Southern; (E) South West; (F) Wheatbelt; (G) Central; (H) Midwest/Gascoyne; (I) Pilbara; and (J) Kimberley? Mrs M.H. ROBERTS replied: The Department of Housing and Works advises The State Government is committed to providing more affordable, low-cost housing options including more social housing, assistance for private renters and affordable home ownership opportunities. At least 1,124 extra social housing properties are being delivered; bond assistance has been increased and the innovative shared equity scheme First Start introduced. The State Government is also working with the new Federal Labor Government on a range of initiatives many of which seek to boost low cost housing supply to enhance the State's initiatives and improve housing affordability. Stock sales are aimed at providing home ownership opportunities and are thoroughly considered by the Housing Authority to strike the right balance between facilitating those opportunities and social housing requirements.
(a) DHW Property Sales — DHW Property Sales — General DHW Land Tenants Public Sales 2005 116 357 368 2006 119 344 204 2007 43 171 339 Total 278 872 911 See Tabled Paper No. 3884 for addresses. In addition, through the Joint Venture land development program, the following lots were sold: 2004/2005 — 2265 lots sold for $241.03 million 2005/2006 — 2632 lots sold for $365.23 million 2006/2007 — 2083 lots sold for $402.87 million
[ASSEMBLY - Wednesday, 14 May 2008] 3069
The addresses of these Joint Venture developments are as follows: Ellenbrook Located in the Shire of Swan, North and South of Gnangara Rd and West of the Vines. Dalyellup Located in the Shire of Capel, 5km south of Bunbury and West of Bussell Highway. Seacrest Located in the Shire of Greenough, 4.5km south of Geraldton city centre. Woodrise Located in the Shire of Albany, Corner Ulster and Angove Roads, 3km from Albany city centre Oyster Harbour Located in the Shire of Albany, 6km NE of Albany at Bayonet Head Beeliar Located in the City of Cockburn, Beeliar Drive. Butler Located in the City of Wanneroo, North of Lukin Drive and between Marmion Avenue and freeway reserve. Quinns Located in the City of Wanneroo, North and South of Hampshire Dve and between Marmion Avenue and the beach. Clarkson Located in the City of Wanneroo, Connolly Drive. Wellard Located in the Town of Kwinana, South of Wellard Rd and East of Homestead Road. Banksia Grove Located in the City of Wanneroo, Previously known as Neerabup. (b) See Tabled Paper No. 3884 for sale prices of DHW properties and Land sales. (c) In 2004/2005 — 173 vacant properties were purchased. Of these, 124 properties have been built upon with the new units either completed or under construction. The majority of the remaining 49 properties are planned to be built upon in 2007/2008 or 2008/2009 building programs. In 2005/2006 — 175 vacant properties were purchased. Of these, 85 properties have been built upon with the new units either completed or under construction. The majority of the remaining 90 properties are planned to be built upon in the 2007/2008 or 2008/2009 building programs. In 2006/2007 — 177 vacant properties were purchased. Of these, 5 properties have been built upon with the new units either completed or under construction. The remaining 172 properties are planned to be built upon in the 2007/2008 or 2008/2009 building programs. (d) 2004/2005 387 properties/dwellings demolished 79 lots amalgamated/sub-divided to create 99 new lots with potential to build 342 new dwellings 2005/2006 500 properties/dwellings demolished 85 lots amalgamated/sub-divided to create 89 new lots with potential to build 306 new dwellings 2006/2007 214 properties/dwellings demolished 61 lots amalgamated/sub-divided to create 109 new lots with potential to build 413 new dwellings Note: Due to the diversity of housing types, properties/dwellings demolished should not be interpreted as lots (ie some individual lots may have multiple dwellings). (e) In 2004/2005 — 1086 properties were refurbished In 2005/2006 — 995 properties were refurbished In 2006/2007 — 740 properties were refurbished (f) See Tabled Paper No 3884: this is for properties spot purchased by the Department of Housing and Works. ______