Extract from Hansard [ASSEMBLY — Wednesday, 13 February 2019] P263c-297A Mr Vincent Catania; Mr Bill Johnston; Dr Mike Nahan;

Extract from Hansard [ASSEMBLY — Wednesday, 13 February 2019] p263c-297a Mr Vincent Catania; Mr Bill Johnston; Dr Mike Nahan; Mr Zak Kirkup; Mr Peter Katsambanis; Dr David Honey; Mr Terry Healy; Ms Lisa Baker; Ms Sabine Winton PREMIER’S STATEMENT Amendment to Question Resumed from an earlier stage of the sitting. MR V.A. CATANIA (North West Central) [2.51 pm]: The question is: why are these negotiations so secret? Why is the Premier failing to be open and accountable to ensure that we know exactly how much money we are owed as a state, rather than holding secret negotiations behind the scenes? Does it mean that he does not want us to truly find out that we were owed $300 million but we only got $100 million and that we should feel fortunate for that? Is that why? Is the Premier not confident that he can ensure that we will get the full amount of money owed to the state? Is that why these negotiations are being held in secret? In response to the Leader of the National Party yesterday, he stated — … there is an expectation or requirement for a negotiation between the parties and the opportunity for arbitration at the conclusion of the process. Why is the Premier so secretive about these negotiations? The question has to be asked: is the Premier confident he can retrieve the money that is owed to the state? If he were confident, he would be open and transparent. He would show the Western Australian public how much is owed to the state of Western Australia. In doing so, we would know that the Premier is fair dinkum about getting the right amount of money from BHP. He has held these negotiations in secret for two years without letting the public know what is going on. It is potentially $300 million. We do not know how much it is, but it is somewhere between $200 million and $300 million. Does Parliament not have the right to scrutinise these negotiations? I do not know why they are negotiations. If someone owes something, they should be paying it out in full. Is the Premier trying to protect and hide a deal that he is going to strike with BHP? The government should be open and transparent and not have these secret negotiations. We have a right to know exactly how much is owed to the state. Why is the Premier not being open, transparent and accountable? He is the Premier of Western Australia! He has the numbers in Parliament, so why is the Premier not doing that and why are these negotiations not being put on the table so they can be scrutinised by the public of Western Australia and the Parliament of Western Australia? Today the Auditor General handed down a report titled “Opinions on Ministerial Notifications”. I think we are starting to see a theme. One of the contents on page 3 is “ministerial decision not to provide the taxi user subsidy scheme review report to Parliament”. Why not? Another is “Ministerial decision not to provide the February 2018 Metronet taskforce minutes to Parliament”. Why not? We can see how this secretive government does business. It came into government to be open, accountable and transparent, but what we have seen over the last two years is that the government has been anything but open and transparent on big projects. We still cannot get a figure of how much Metronet will cost the taxpayers of Western Australia or the taxpayers of Australia. I think it is in the order of $10 billion, but we still cannot get those figures from the Minister for Transport because the government is not open and accountable. For two years the Premier has held secret negotiations with BHP over a large sum of money. We do not know exactly how much it is. It is somewhere in the order of $200 million to $300 million. That is the cost of a new primary school every year or it could fix the health system and replace the money taken out by this government, which is ensuring that our hospitals are being left to rack and ruin, particularly those in the mining and pastoral regions. It is time for the Premier to be open, accountable and transparent. Those were exactly his words in opposition, but he is being anything but. He is holding negotiations behind closed doors and not letting anyone know what is going on or how much the people of Western Australia are owed. Meanwhile, he is taxing Western Australians left, right and centre, and saying that this is a legacy of the previous government. This is on his watch. He is now the Premier and the one negotiating with BHP. It was not the previous government; the current government has been negotiating with BHP and that has not been visible to the Western Australian public or this Parliament. It is time that the Premier showed some leadership. The government should be open and accountable and send this to a committee so we can review whether it is in the best interests of the taxpayers of Western Australia. That will ensure that the people of Western Australia are getting their fair share from a finite resource. I urge all members to support the amendment that the Leader of the Nationals WA has moved, because being open and transparent will ensure that the people of Western Australia get their fair share—something the Premier wants to keep secret until he cuts a deal; we want to know what that deal is. MR W.J. JOHNSTON (Cannington — Minister for Mines and Petroleum) [2.57 pm]: The government will not support this amendment. I understand that that is also the position of the Liberal Party. I want to make the problem clear: the National Party does not understand the English language. Let me make it clear that I am not able to state what royalty collections there are from any individual company and neither were former Ministers for Mines and Petroleum. In Western Australia, the tax affairs of any individual taxpayer are secret. The Treasurer [1] Extract from Hansard [ASSEMBLY — Wednesday, 13 February 2019] p263c-297a Mr Vincent Catania; Mr Bill Johnston; Dr Mike Nahan; Mr Zak Kirkup; Mr Peter Katsambanis; Dr David Honey; Mr Terry Healy; Ms Lisa Baker; Ms Sabine Winton cannot tell members how much land tax is paid by the various property owners in this chamber. He does not know what members’ land tax bills look like and he should not. Mr D.T. Redman interjected. Mr W.J. JOHNSTON: Let me speak! I did not interject a single time during anything that the member said. Mr V.A. Catania: You did. Mr W.J. JOHNSTON: No, I did not. Mr V.A. Catania: Yes, you did. Mr W.J. JOHNSTON: When? This is ridiculous! Mr R.S. Love interjected. The SPEAKER: Member for Moore, you are interjecting now, too! Mr W.J. JOHNSTON: I cannot understand why these people are so dumb! Let me make it clear — Mr Z.R.F. Kirkup: Every time, this happens! Mr W.J. JOHNSTON: Every time, this happens. Let me make it clear. The affairs of — The SPEAKER: Members, we had a clean sheet today in question time and no-one was called to order—do not spoil it. Mr W.J. JOHNSTON: The royalty payments cannot be disclosed. I will give members an example. When the member for Churchlands was the minister, he was presented with the problem of a company that had been shown to be gaming the system and not paying its royalties. Originally, he was advised that they thought that they would collect the money. Unfortunately, later on he got legal advice that the royalty was in fact in accord and the company was using a loophole in the regulations under the Mining Act—this was a nickel producer—to avoid paying royalties. The royalties were not at the level being discussed in this particular matter, but they were significant. The recommendation to the former minister was that he should take action to change the regulations to close the loophole. Unfortunately, he did not do that, but when I came to power, I did. I make the point: I cannot tell members the name of the company involved in that case because it is protected. It is rightly protected. Let me return to the points raised in this debate. We have been open and I have answered every question Nationals WA members have asked. I told members yesterday that I would not answer Hon Jacqui Boydell’s question because it was a 12-part question. That question was withdrawn and resubmitted, and I will answer it today. We have been entirely transparent about the information that we can present to the house. But let me make it clear that the reason there is a dispute has nothing to do with the state agreement. The whole point here, if members read what it says in the newspaper, is that BHP believes that it has a deduction and the government has said that that deduction does not apply. The idea that BHP is somehow exploiting a loophole in the state agreement ignores the facts of the case. If that were true, and this was a deduction available under the state agreement, BHP would not be paying additional money, which it is now doing. The member for North West Central said that the government has been talking to BHP in secret for two years. I became aware of this matter in December 2017.

Load more