LOCAL PROJECTS, LOCAL
JOBS —STANDING COMMITTEE ON ESTIMATES AND FINANCIAL OPERATIONS —EIGHTY-SECOND
REPORT
498. Mr Z.R.F. KIRKUP to the Premier:
I
have a supplementary question. Can the Premier confirm that the Local Projects,
Local Jobs project was a pork-barrelling exercise designed to win votes
in marginal seats?
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER: Member for
Southern River, you are not in the chair at the moment; I am. I call you to order
for the first time.
Mr M. McGOWAN
replied:
Before elections, what happens is both sides make
commitments. Both sides make commitments, and they make promises to the people
of the state. That has been happening in democratic systems for—I do
not know—a few hundred years. That is what we did. Before the election,
we made a range of commitments to the people of the state. Mr Sibma has
identified that we delivered on our commitments. He even said that in writing.
I will quote it again so that members hear it. He wrote —
The Government's stated
position is that the LPLJ program is not a grants program, but a program to
honour its election commitments. On this matter, the Committee agrees.
Half of those commitments went into Liberal–National
seats and half the commitments went into Labor seats before the election. We
made other commitments. I do not know whether members have noticed, but one of
our biggest school commitments is in the electorate of Nedlands. We have done
more in the member for South Perth's electorate than the Liberals and
Nationals have ever done, and everyone in South Perth acknowledges that there
has been more work infrastructure and effort in South Perth than ever occurred
when the Liberals and Nationals were in place. Is that pork-barrelling? Is Bob
Hawke College that we built in Nedlands pork-barrelling? No—it is a government
that gets on with the job and does good things across the state. I note the
report does recommend a parliamentary budget office. It has been recommended a number
of times. Various people have indicated support for a parliamentary budget
office. Of course, a parliamentary budget office was recommended by this report
at recommendation 22, which reads —
The Committee recommends that a PBO
—
That is, parliamentary budget office —
be established in Western Australia
to cost announced election policies, and to improve the Parliament's
capacity to conduct financial scrutiny.
Before question time, I went to the Liberal Party's
website and I looked for policies. I went to the Leader of the Opposition's website and I looked for
policies. The word ''policy'' does not appear. There are no
policies. Go to your website! There are no policies. It is six months
until the election campaign begins and they have no policies. There are none there! I urge everyone in the gallery—well,
the one journalist in the gallery. When I first got here, there were
about 20 sitting up there. I urge the one journalist in the gallery to go to
the Liberal Party's website and go to the opposition leader's
website and have a look for policies. There are none! Those members opposite
are meant to be the alternative government
of Western Australia. They have no policies, and yet they have called for the
establishment of a parliamentary budget office to cost policies that
they do not have—I mean, honestly! The opposition in this state does
not support laws to outlaw puppy farming and it does not support our border
arrangements with the east. The Liberal Party in this state undermines good
government every single day.