Estimates
Estimates of revenue and expenditure
Consideration of tabled papers
Resumed from 20 August on the following motion moved by Hon Samantha Rowe (Parliamentary Secretary):
That pursuant to standing order 69(1), the Legislative Council take note of tabled papers 316A–E (2025–26 budget papers) laid upon the table of the house on Thursday 19 June 2025.
Hon Phil Twiss (12:40 pm): I rise as a member of the opposition to give my first speech on the estimates of revenue and expenditure consolidated accounts estimates 2025–26 or, more simply, my reply to the budget speech. It was interesting to hear the discussion around vocational training. I was indentured in the 1980s, not in the Dickens era, as a young sailor who joined and was in the Navy for nine years. Shortly after I finished my training at the base that I was put in, the federal Labor government at the time got rid of the military training apprenticeship schemes and a lot of other apprenticeship schemes in favour of becoming what was called the "clever country". Someone decided that people having a degree was a much more prosperous way for our country to move forward. I think history has shown that that is not quite the case.
It is an honour to give this speech. I would like to think that, along with my other new colleagues, I come to this chamber with a fresh set of eyes. I do not come into this chamber as an economist, although at first glance of the volumes of budget papers, one perhaps for a moment wishes they were. I note that some of my other learned friends have made similar comments. Although I would not for one minute wish to disparage the profession, I am somewhat comforted by the words of Laurence J Peter, who is famed for identifying the Peter principle, in his observation that "an economist is an expert who will know tomorrow why the things he predicted yesterday didn't happen today". It is through that lens that I find myself considering the Treasurer's speech on the WA state budget and the prognostications tied up in the budget figures and statements within.
Budgets are interesting things, especially government budgets. I spent much of the last couple of decades in the world of private sector resources projects. Budgets in that world were tied to time-bound outcomes and carefully defined and allocated. They were based on business decisions arising out of broader investment strategies. Every project was weighed up based on the opportunity cost of the capital invested and a finite allocation of funds. Margins were carefully risk assessed, analysed and, almost without exception, reviewed based on sound financial modelling. Why am I telling members this? As I looked at the budget papers and more generally at the way the government allocates funds, I was struck by the approach that is taken in the way government allocates spending. As I mentioned earlier, I am not an economist, but I do understand that the drivers for spending are quite different between government and for-profit entities. The choices that each make are quite different. This is further differentiated depending on the political and economic philosophy of the government of the day. I do not think I am going out on a limb when I say that individual values and choices, especially at the government level, have profound implications on the fortunes of not only states but entire nations. For instance, one only has to look at the effect the Trump tariffs are having on the rest of the world and the future fortunes of countries that are affected by them.
What does this have to do with the Western Australian state budget? In the state Treasurer's budget speech, Hon Rita Saffioti used phrases based on the word "invest" 60 times. Cases of that use varied from things like "investment in economic infrastructure to streamline approvals to make it easier to do business in Western Australia" to "investment to deliver 540 social and affordable homes" to "investing to support WA households". In some cases, the words used are reasonably well suited. However, in many cases they are not. For something to be an investment, there needs to be a measurable return, and that return needs to reasonably outweigh the cost of achieving its stated aims. At the very least, we owe the long-suffering taxpayers of Western Australia that courtesy. I understand that the measures we have as different political parties may be different and we may ascribe different values to the relative outcomes, but we need to be able to demonstrate it.
There are a number of budget items that my colleagues and I struggled to see the clear investment value of based on the expenditure. As we have seen already, the returns, other than on a performative political basis, are questionable. Not least of these is the Perth street circuit, or what is commonly referred to as the Burswood motorplex. It is this that I refer back to the individual values of members of government and their spending choices that are more rooted in personal preference than in real-world, sound financial decisions that are clearly justified for their actual return on investment or demonstrable societal good. I would also go so far as to say that things like the energy assistance and energy bill relief fall into that category, but I will touch on that much later.
In the project and operations world, we were constantly held accountable for cost and schedule performance to ensure that the outcomes were as close to those planned at the start of the project as possible and that the return on investment was protected or would improve for the shareholders. We were well aware that even though we were responsible at times for massive budgets, the funds were not ours; they belonged to the shareholders. Even though we compel the people of Western Australia to pay taxes and fund the activities that we control as government, we nevertheless remain accountable to them. As I looked at the recent spending decisions of the government, I questioned whether that belief is entirely shared. On 30 July this year, shadow Treasurer Sandra Brewer MLA announced that she would introduce a private member's bill for an independent parliamentary budget office. This was a recommendation in the 2018 Special Inquiry into Government Programs and Projects. I hope that the Premier, Hon Roger Cook, will support such a motion when it is moved in the Assembly because it might help us all to understand where the tidy $50 million for hospital maintenance came from and what it will be spent on, among other things.
I would like to move on to a few specific areas. I will kick it off by talking about the AUKUS readiness plans for Western Australia. AUKUS represents the most significant growth and development opportunity that our state has seen in a generation. AUKUS is to 2025 what the mining and oil and gas opportunities were during the governments of Sir David Brand and Sir Charles Court. As alarming as the deterioration of global and regional security is, and we know that that comes with its own risks and challenges, the opportunity to grow and diversify the WA state economy is enormous. The opportunity, however, will not materialise without the sense of urgency required to achieve it. The target work milestones for HMAS Stirling and the Henderson supporting infrastructure construction projects require clear plans and a road map to achieve them in a timely fashion in order to be ready for the Submarine Rotational Force—West (SRF–West) to be ready by 2027. The snail's pace of things for major projects like Metronet will not cut it and stand to jeopardise not only the confidence of Australia's AUKUS partners, but also the ability to support the submarine maintenance and naval shipbuilding sustainment programs we are about to see. Recognising that the AUKUS program requires action from both state and federal governments, the Western Australian government still has a critical role to play. The June Lowy Institute article "AUKUS: Building confidence in Australia's submarine pathway" by Jennifer Parker noted:
Worries are growing in Canberra, and Washington, that upgrades at HMAS Stirling and the new Henderson defence precinct are drifting off-schedule.
Parker went on to state:
From the outside it is impossible to judge progress, and partners are openly sceptical, hardly surprising given Australia’s patchy record on recent naval projects. Repeating that we are “doing enough” no longer cuts it. If Canberra wants to shore up confidence, it should publish a detailed schedule for the Stirling and Henderson works. Transparency, not talking points, will keep AUKUS on track.
Again, recognising that this is not entirely on the WA government and the federal government is certainly guilty of dragging its heels and creating delays to numerous projects, the lack of clarity on the Western Australian planning and lack of detailed milestones continues to make industry and our AUKUS defence partners nervous. I am not filled with confidence that the necessary focus to ensure the critical Henderson Defence Precinct and other supporting infrastructure like roads and housing will be adequately addressed in the time frames required when the Treasurer's budget speech contains limited mention of any of the works required to support the precinct and the Western Trade Coast Infrastructure Strategy.
I want to point out that as part of the cooperation agreement between the Commonwealth of Australia and the state of Western Australia, the WA government is expected to:
Lead the planning and delivery of new State-owned Common User Facilities, infrastructure, and capabilities that can support current and future non-defence industries, activities and projects.
This is on the state government, not on the federal government. From what I can see, the project is currently all strategy and no plan. Apart from $700 million in the budget to widen Kwinana Freeway, which I am sure will be welcomed by all those who commute between Rockingham or Mandurah and the city, it is difficult to see a clear plan reflected in the budget, given the massive road power and other services required to support the precinct.
In his recent comments in The Australian, federal shadow Minister for Home Affairs, Andrew Hastie, expressed his concerns and that of our AUKUS partners that the initial stages of the AUKUS implementation were at risk "because (WA Premier) Roger Cook and the WA Labor state government has gone so slow on it". I share those concerns.
With all that said, I was glad to read of the measures being undertaken in this budget to support AUKUS readiness, including the AUKUS SME Readiness Fund, the defence industry initiative scheme and the Defence Industry Skills Centre of Excellence. I note that alongside of this, investment in fee-free TAFE will contribute somewhat to the provision of a qualified defence workforce, provided people get through it. However, I have some serious questions as a result of that. As far as I am aware, the criteria for the SME Readiness Fund remains to be finalised and it is unclear how many small to medium-sized enterprises will benefit from this funding. That was also reflected in my discussions with people in the defence industry at various events.
During budget estimates in July, Hon Paul Papalia said that the funding for SMEs will be somewhere in the order of $100,000 or half of the project value, assuming the lesser value of the two. When asked about his response and the exact criteria to be eligible for those funds, he stated that it was being worked on right now. Again, at the late stage of the game, when the time of execution to critical projects is very short, it seems that there has been a lack of planning and clear foresight when it comes to required time frames. With 238 SMEs identified, according to Labor's own press release, I have to question how many of those SMEs will really benefit from this funding. As I said, we are still waiting for the criteria to be released, which will doubtless reveal the actual efficacy of this measure.
In late 2024, the Economics and Industry Standing Committee of the WA Parliament published a discussion paper on the growing defence industry in WA, which revealed that many SMEs struggle to stay afloat between major defence contracts in WA and are confronted by many challenges due to the ebb and flow of these defence contracts. Again, in my meeting with many people—many small businesses in particular—through some of the defence networking that I have been doing over the past four or five years, that is very much reflected. In fact, quite a few have decided that it is just too hard in defence, it is too risky and they cannot sustain their business so they are looking elsewhere. It is also something we have heard from larger primes, who, for the first time in their history, have actually had to start laying off workforce waiting for these decisions to be made. Again, many of these are federal issues but state decisions are also tied to these things.
The delays and cancellations drive uncertainty for the SMEs. I think there is sometimes a lack of understanding from the government of just how tight the margins are and just how vulnerable these companies are. Moreover, some major defence primes prefer internationally made parts over WA-made ones. The economics and industry committee's paper stated:
… without local content requirements, local SMEs will likely be relegated to IKEA-type assembly activities rather than manufacturing critical components to service Defence contracts.
Strangely enough, that statement reminded me a little of the Metronet trains and the Lego-type assembly arrangement we have out in Midvale. We are left to question how much of an assurance the SME Readiness Fund really is for SMEs in WA but I look forward to seeing this eventuate.
The concluding remarks of the economics and industry committee chair, Hon Peter Tinley AM MLA, are quite telling and perhaps a warning to the current government that a greater sense of urgency is required to ensure the success of WA's defence industry, and I believe it is worth quoting. He stated:
The Committee has formed the view following this brief investigation that governance and coordination challenges threaten to hinder the growth and success of WA's defence industry. Addressing these challenges will require a commitment from both State and Commonwealth governments to establish a more centralised and streamlined governance structure, improve communication and information sharing, and adopt a coordinated and timely approach to infrastructure development and workforce planning.
I noticed in the budget that additional funding is going to Defence West, which will hopefully help to speed up some of these decisions and get some of these projects moving.
Moving on to the AUKUS Defence Industry Incentive, we sort of talked a bit about vocational training today. I have some questions that I am sure will be duly answered in estimates. In its "Election Commitments" section on page 375 of budget paper No 2, the government said that it would allocate $11.5 million to a Defence Industry Skills Centre of Excellence, which is more or less reflected in the spending changes over a four-year period on the table on the previous page. It is actually $11.85 million, but close enough. We are informed on page 375 that the initiative will provide employers with a $20,000 incentive for 435 apprentices to grow WA's AUKUS defence workforce, which will prioritise apprenticeships for engineering, fabrication, trade, mechanical trade, industrial electrician and electrotechnology electrician.
Leaving aside questions of the efficacy of incentive payments such as these, we have additional questions about retention. I refer to Hon Dr Steve Thomas's earlier graph that showed that we have a significant problem there. Furthermore, estimates about the number of people we need to fill the positions generated by defence vary pretty widely. Some estimates show that we will need to grow our defence workforce by 2,500 people for defence shipbuilding. Later estimates indicate that we will need 10,000, which would require a 230% growth in the WA defence workforce. So we have a big discrepancy between what we even really need. This is from one of the reports that was tabled. I do not have the date on which it was tabled. I suggest we may need some more clarity on those numbers, particularly with the recent decision to purchase and build Japanese Mogami-class frigates in Western Australia. I suspect we will need a much bigger bucket of cash. Although I do not have visibility of the cost–benefit analysis on the investment decisions that have been made around the examples I just gave, I have a much higher level of confidence that the Western Australian taxpayer is getting reasonable value for money in this spend than many other budget line items.
Drilling down a bit more into the details of the road situation around the ongoing ramp-up for AUKUS, I want to mention a particular road in the City of Rockingham. A number of members of the Rockingham council approached me when they heard that I had been elected. They were pleased to hear that someone who had a long association with HMAS Stirling on Garden Island could access issues and perhaps cared enough to do something about it was now in Parliament. My staff arranged a visit to meet with them as requested. I was told by residents that they had been troubled for some time by the passage of heavy trucks through their quiet streets. One of the places in particular is across a roundabout. The type of truck that was going through on a daily basis could not fit through the roundabout so it was being driven over its edges on both sides of the road. That roundabout receives regular maintenance because the curbs and the bricks around it are being smashed up and the ground is subsiding away from the weight of the trucks coming through. One of the people I met had to get compensated because the damage to his house was so extensive from the trucks going past. They had to do some fairly major repairs to his house.
Sitting suspended from 1:00:21 pm to 2:00:00 pm
Hon Phil Twiss: I will just recap where I was before lunch, in case members have all forgotten the riveting details I was giving them about Rockingham! I was talking about drilling down into the detail of the roads around Rockingham. I have been asked by a number of local residents and a couple of members of the City of Rockingham to come down there, have a look at what is happening and get a bit more detail on the roads there and the problems they have with AUKUS. I was talking about heavy trucks travelling on unsuitable roads.
Hon Kate Doust: Are you talking about Parkin Street?
Hon Phil Twiss: I am getting to that, honourable member.
Hon Kate Doust: The issues with Parkin Street were there long before AUKUS arrived.
Hon Phil Twiss: I am getting to that. I will resume.
There are heavy trucks travelling on a road that is wholly inadequate to take them, and some of those trucks are actually carrying explosives and ordnance to and from HMAS Stirling. Local residents advised me of an inquiry that had been done by the City of Rockingham into projected future traffic flows, especially relating to AUKUS and the impending arrival of nuclear submarines at HMAS Stirling as part of Submarine Rotational Force–West. The calculations are actually pretty concerning. The study indicates that by 2030 there will be a queue length of 2.3 kilometres, from the intersection of Safety Bay Road and Parkin Street to HMAS Stirling, and that by 2040 the queue length will be 3.5 kilometres. With the first of the nuclear submarines due to arrive by 2027 and the massive expansion of HMAS Stirling, those figures are likely to be conservative because the study was done a bit before some of those things were actually fully in place.
As I mentioned a few minutes ago, some of the trucks driving through Rockingham, along Parkin Street in particular, are placarded as transporting explosives. We were given some photographs of a number of the trucks coming through. We were able to clearly see—well, mostly see—the placarded loads; a resident who lives within a couple of metres of this road says that sometimes they seem to be partially obscured. Whether that is intentional or because the signs need replacing is another question. According to the placards, the trucks are carrying class 1 explosives. For members who do not know what class 1 explosives are, they can include blank or live ammunition, torpedoes, missiles and warheads et cetera, which makes sense for HMAS Stirling, and they are passing within several metres of this person's house; in fact, I have a photo that looks like they are two to three metres from the house.
As I said before, those roads are wholly inadequate for this traffic, and they are becoming damaged over time. There is the potential that, if a truck comes across one of those pieces of broken kerb and blows a tyre, there could be an accident or rollover. The effect of that would be that there would pretty much have to be an evacuation across a very wide area because of the potential for a catastrophic explosion. I have attempted to ask a couple of questions on notice on this topic, but despite the road being a local and state matter, and emergency response being the responsibility of the Department of Fire and Emergency Services, I was advised that the transport of explosives to HMAS Stirling is a Commonwealth issue. I understand that, but the roads are local and state roads.
With that in mind, I was pleased to learn about three studies being undertaken by the Commonwealth government into the feasibility of Garden Island highway. If that were to be actioned, it would alleviate the traffic burden that is looming over those streets. I was less pleased to hear the response to Hon Steven Martin's questions without notice about the study to the Minister for Transport on Tuesday, 24 June 2025. If members will indulge me, I will read that out now. Hon Steven Martin asked:
I refer to the AUKUS-linked Garden Island Highway feasibility study to be conducted by Main Roads Western Australia, announced by the member for Rockingham.
(1) Has the study officially commenced; and, if so, on what date?
(2) Have the Commonwealth and Western Australian Governments completed a formal agreement outlining the cost-sharing or funding arrangements for the study, including the $2 million annual budget allocation?
(3) Which consulting firm or contractor has been appointed to conduct the environmental, heritage, constraint mapping and road infrastructure components of the study?
(4) According to the member for Rockingham, the study was to begin in early 2025, with completion expected around late 2025; is the project still on track to meet that timeline?
(5) If any delays have occurred, what are the causes and revised expected completion dates?
Hon Samantha Rowe replied with the following answer, on behalf of the Minister for Transport:
(1)–(5) Main Roads Western Australia, as requested by the federal government, is undertaking preliminary assessments of the road network in Rockingham and is currently liaising with the commonwealth Department of Defence and providing input, as required, to the studies relating to the future access requirements for HMAS Stirling.
I suspect members may agree with me that that was hardly an answer to the honourable member's question. It failed to advise him of the study's commencement date, the cost of the funding agreement for the study, the project timeline or any delays. In my conversations during my time down in Rockingham, I believe the people of Rockingham actually expect and deserve better than that.
I go back to my first remarks about my long association with Garden Island access issues. It was back in the mid-90s, when I was posted to ships based out of HMAS Stirling, that I first heard about the Garden Island highway proposal. I remember very clearly that when I was going to or leaving the base it was congested, even back then. It is staggering to me that, 30 years later, the situation still has not been resolved, and the people of Rockingham still live with not only the inconvenience of an inadequate critical road, but also the much-elevated risk of heavy trucks carrying explosives on their doorstep. It frustrated me then, when I lived in Rockingham, that the people of Rockingham were taken for granted by Labor members simply because it was a safe Labor seat.
I think now that if anything should have been on a budget line item, that should have been one of them. Before I leave the topic of WA defence issues, I wish to point out another line item that I would have expected to start showing up in the budget papers and forward estimates: provision to prepare key hospitals for the specific requirements of AUKUS—and in particular, for dealing with nuclear medical incidents. I have asked questions on this topic as well. I understand that the current hazmat response, based on visiting nuclear ships, has been signed off by the Australian Naval Nuclear Power Safety Regulator, which is newly formed. Its powers will come into force on 1 November this year. That has been signed off on as an interim measure until SRF–West arrives in 2027. I asked a local nuclear expert, who is deeply involved in the plans for rolling out the safety requirements under the act, about this. He was surprised that that had been allowed for, but he said that is what it is. I understand that it is not until 2027 that the hospitals and our emergency response system will need to be updated to that. We are still using the visiting nuclear ships protocols. I will have more questions to follow on this issue in due course in the coming year or so. I think this is of particular note, given the loss of confidence that is now emerging through the government's management of the hospital system and infrastructure.
I will briefly touch upon housing, because housing touches on the lives of so many of us. In 1996, my wife and I built our first house in Warnbro for under $100,000. In today's money, it would be roughly $200,000. It took us three months to complete construction and move into our home from the time the first slab was put down. Today, the average build time of a home is around 17 months, according to Master Builders Australia. Embarrassingly for Western Australians, this is two months longer than South Australia, which is the next worst state in the nation. It is an inglorious title that we have held since 2022. It is perhaps incidental, but this was around the same time that the Metronet project started furiously laying track across the metro area. In July 2024, a Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre report stated that between 2016 and 2021, the residential construction industry in WA had shrunk, while in the rest of Australia it had grown by 14.5%. From 2016 to 2021, Western Australia had an average build time that hovered around nine months, and it has kept close enough to that since around 2010. The problem is that, in the context of a shrinking construction workforce, the Labor government embarked on the massive and ever-expanding construction exercise of Metronet. This drew skilled workers out of other industries—I know this because I was working in other industries that were struggling to get the types of people they needed, which drove up their wages and created severe stress on businesses. Not only did it draw skilled workers out of the industry, including housing, it also artificially inflated construction wages through that time in order to meet their already horrendously late deadlines and politically driven completion dates. I know that as well because I was working for a company prior to entering Parliament, which was under that pressure to complete projects that were awarded very late. The award values were so high that companies were happy to take them on, but it created extreme stress, even to the point at which we had a medical issue in which someone had to quit work for six weeks and ended up leaving the company—it was actually the founder's son—because of mental health issues as a result of working on one of those projects. No, I am not saying that is necessarily the government's fault, but that was the sort of pressure that was being put on these local government infrastructure projects prior to the 2025 election.
The budgeted fee-free TAFE courses for trades and group training organisation wage subsidies will potentially improve the pipeline. We had an interesting discussion on that earlier saying that maybe that is not going to be the case, but the reality is that it is still a pipeline. It is a pipeline that will have a limited impact for several years when what we have now is a housing crisis right on our doorstep today. Again, it is another program that the government is late to the party on. The quick fix solution to the government's budget is to incentivise trades from other states and overseas. According to an article by Jon Davies from the Australian Constructions Association, the incentive scheme is an unsustainable quick fix that does not really add any new workers to the overall Australian economy, but it does add to already significant inflationary pressures. This year in June, the Bankwest Curtin Economics Centre report, Housing Affordability in Western Australia 2025: A long way from home, was released. It raised some serious concerns about the ongoing state of the housing market in WA. Despite the government being anxious to celebrate WA delivering 20,000 housing completions in 2024, it is still well short of the 4,000 required, according to the implied housing accord target. With 2.4% population growth in the past year, housing is likely to remain heavily constrained. Even with the 45% increase in building approvals, it will take quite some time to catch up due to the exceptionally long build times. Yes, WA has a great big shiny new rail system and, yes, many people will be pleased to see the improvements that it brings—including me. It has improved some of the roads that I travel down—it is great. But again, what is the cost benefit of such an encompassing project and, perhaps more importantly, what has been the opportunity cost, especially for our younger generation and the less advantaged who now struggle to find their own home?
I will very briefly move on to the household energy items mentioned in the Treasurer's budget speech. One thing that always intrigues me is that, in the same breath, Labor governments in particular—federal and state—were able to say such things as:
Working together with the Albanese Government, our combined policies will see tens of thousands of Western Australian families having access to cheaper batteries and therefore permanently lower energy bills.
—at the same time as announcing cash and power bill credits. This is state and federal. Renewable policies are either lowering energy bills or they are not. With plans to shut down coal and replace it with renewables at a time of volatile and uncertain local gas markets, Western Australia could be in for a rough ride. Numerous businesses and individuals are already investing in their own backup power generation to avoid blackouts. I live in the Perth hills and we know there are already quite a few people out there doing this, and have been for quite some time. This should be unthinkable in a nation like ours. According to Tim Gregory in his new book Going Nuclear—this guy is arguing from an environmental perspective and if members can pick up the book and have a read, it is very useful and helpful—energy use and national wealth are tightly correlated. Developed nations with low energy needs do not exist. Human progress and energy consumption are lines drawn in parallel. If we are going to change the way that we generate electricity in this state, we need to be able to generate sufficient energy to keep growing. If we cannot, we have to really rethink that. We need to be careful to not sabotage our security, economy and way of life for the sake of arbitrarily drawn lines in the sand when it comes to energy.
I will leave it at that and move on to firearms. Given my focus of the past year or more, it would be remiss of me to not touch on the firearms buyback and the rollout of the Firearms Act 2024 and the regulations. It is on that topic that I particularly want to talk about the cost benefit and opportunity cost of government policy. Over the past months, I have had the opportunity to speak to many people, most of whom were very upset that they were being singled out by the government simply for the hobby they chose, the interest they had, the tools they needed for their job or their chosen sporting community. People would often ask why it was that the police minister at the time and the Labor government were so adamant to take the guns away. The official answer was, and is, "We are keeping you safe." It is a fair answer if true, but even being kept safe has a cost benefit attached to it. I know I will probably cop heat at some point for this, but the reality is, after all, we take part in a very risky business of driving around almost every day, but we do not find ourselves banned from doing so except in extremely controlled circumstances.
Let us look at firearms. In October 2023, the WA Police Union produced the Firearm trends in WA report, which included figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics and a number of other sources. One of the data sets includes a number of victims of crime in which a crime was committed that did not involve homicide. The rate of assault—including just threatening behaviour—and robbery victims has declined significantly since 2008. Assaults fell to 21% of the 2008 levels—essentially one-fifth. Robbery has fallen by about one-third, which is 31%, from 2008 to 2022. Firearms deaths are a relatively small component of deaths from other causes. It is 0.25 out of 100,000, and the data indicates that licensed firearms owners themselves are only responsible for a small minority of those homicides. The vast majority of firearms deaths—around 80%—are suicides, and many are linked to mental health issues and substance abuse. The government says that it has prioritised mental health support in this budget, and, commendably, $1 million is allocated to support mental health through the Western Australian Suicide Prevention Grants Program. There is also $12.4 million committed to establishing a residential alcohol and other drugs low medical withdrawal and adult rehabilitation service in the Great Southern. In the Kimberley, a further $10.8 million, including $6 million in capital funding, has been allocated for Derby wellness centre and $2 million has been allocated to progress a withdrawal service in Broome.
These investments into mental health and drug rehabilitation are important, especially in the regions, where most of the suicides actually happen. But when we compare them with the $44.9 million allocated over five years to the firearms licensing and registry system—that is not counting the number of buyback schemes along the way—a clear question starts to emerge: Are we investing in the right areas to save lives? Even if a small portion of that $44.9 million were redirected to expanding suicide prevention, mental health care and drug rehab services, especially in the regions, the impact would be tangible, lasting and lifesaving. It will be interesting to see what happens—whether this massive amount of money spent on firearms is actually going to give us tangible, lasting and lifesaving results. We must ask ourselves: Is it more effective to compensate law-abiding citizens for surrendering firearms, or to invest directly into support systems that prevent people from reaching the crisis in the first place?
Finally, I raise the curious issue of police priorities on illegally manufactured firearms. I refer to the recent sentencing of Taylor Michael Gorzkos with drug, cash and firearms offences following the freeway money incident last December, which people will remember. Gorzkos was convicted of possession of prohibited drugs with intent to supply. He was caught with 50.8 grams of cocaine, which is a pretty significant amount. He was also convicted of possession of stolen or unlawfully obtained properties, with $8,000 cash being found, and participation in a firearms activity not authorised by a licence. According to The West Australian:
Police found two 3D printers, in the kitchen and garage, and printing parts for a semiautomatic pistol-calibre carbine …
Whatever that is. These things were discovered in his house when it was searched over a month later. On 5 December 2023, The West Australian reported that Police Commissioner Col Blanch said on talkback radio about the Gorzkos arrest:
… the fact that we’ve found drugs, and the fact that we’ve found lots of drugs, would lead most reasonable human beings to suspect there was some type of transaction going on on the side of the freeway …
Fair enough. It clearly indicates that even the police considered this to be a fairly significant drug transaction. It makes it even more curious why they did not act earlier in searching Gorzkos' house. Less than two months earlier, the police had raided the house of a 36-year-old Duncraig man. He was later charged with drug and cash offences. Along with that, he was charged with 21 counts of illegal firearms possession, including 14 fully operational 3D-printed guns, 3D-printed parts and ammunition. There are some big questions there.
I have had conversations with and heard numerous accounts from police, including sometime from the tactical response group, about turning up in large numbers to the houses of licensed firearms owners who have fallen foul of a technicality within the overly complicated and confusing firearms regulations. It causes me to question again the cost benefit of the heavy-handed and extremely expensive implementation of the Firearms Act 2024. What real value have the people of Western Australia received from the many tens of millions of dollars spent?
I conclude by saying that government budgets are about investments. The return on investments is not necessarily easily defined, but we at least owe it to taxpayers to do our best. We also owe it to taxpayers to be honest. No matter how tempting it may be to allocate funds for vanity projects, performative spending or good old-fashioned pork-barrelling, we must resist. I hope that the Cook government in good faith throws its support behind the shadow Treasurer's private member's bill for an independent parliamentary budget office.
My parting thought is one that many of my colleagues have already stated before: the Cook government has been the recipient of incredibly good fortune, but it should be preparing for the future and for a state in which fortune is not so great. As Joseph Stiglitz said about the economic crisis of 2008, which I am sure most people in this room remember: the only surprise about it was that it came as a surprise to so many.
Hon Michelle Boylan (2:24 pm): I rise today to contribute to the debate on the 2025–26 estimates of review and expenditure, which we call the budget reply debate. Before I begin and talk about volumes, line items and the specifics, I want to start with something slightly confronting that demonstrate that under this government, behind the charts and funding allocations, hardworking people have fallen through the gaps. Right now across our state, school chaplains, who dedicate their lives and service to supporting the mental health and wellbeing of our children and young people, are lining up at Foodbank to put meals on the table for their own families. This is not just a minority. In one outer metro area, it is 67% of YouthCARE school chaplains. I will give members a moment to consider that.
Let us take some time to understand the weight of that. Our school chaplains do important work within our schools so that children can be the best they can be and have the best chance to be able to learn. School chaplains open the school gates early to run breakfast clubs, often using food donated by Foodbank, for children who might otherwise go without. They are the ones who sit beside students and families going through challenges—some are in crisis—pick up the pieces when things fall apart, refer and connect children to the help they need and work with their school team and community to quietly build a sense of safety and care in our schools. This is not just for students; it is also for parents and teachers. These are the same chaplains who are filing up to 40 mandatory child protection reports every single week, which is an astonishing figure, that our children's schools and school leaders have to navigate. A school chaplain has the opportunity to spend extra time with a student and build a relationship, and, as a result, a student will often share the things that are happening in their life—some happy, but, unfortunately, mostly sad struggles. This is a key and often heartbreaking responsibility of a chaplain's role. School chaplains are mandatory reporters, while education assistants are not. Despite the gravity of their role, and the fact that chaplains are more qualified—importantly, it is a government requirement that school chaplains have a certificate IV qualification or higher while education assistants are required to have only a cert III—they are paid less than their education assistant colleagues, and the gap will only get bigger in the future. By January next year, the difference between these two vital roles is projected to grow to $10,500 a year per person due to new enterprise bargaining agreements. That is a gap YouthCARE will be unable to bridge without government funding. This government overlooked a pay increase for chaplains in the most recent round of election commitments, with no indexed wage increases and no plan for sustainability. Currently, across our state, chaplaincy roles are being held up by school fundraising, and short-term community donors and fundraisers.
Chaplains' salaries are not the only place we see a need for change. Over 650 schools in the metropolitan area received $26,011 each in funding for chaplains and it was up to $31,213 for schools in remote areas. That is enough for one chaplain for only 1.5 days of service per week. Schools are having to top up the shortfall through their own budgets and fundraising. Chaplaincy funding is not needs based, so the same funding is applied to larger schools with more students. Some schools must take it into their own hands. One Perth metropolitan high school has over 2,800 students and requires at least three full-time chaplains, putting constant strain on P&Cs and community groups to maintain an equal level of service for their students.
The reality of the matter is that the government is not doing enough in this area to support everyday Australians who support our students, teachers and families. Let us look at past commitments. The Better and Fairer Schools Agreement was meant to bring WA public schools 100% of their standard funding, and is worth $1.6 billion. The first agreement signed committed to only 96% of that, without the 4% depreciation experienced. A second bilateral agreement was signed later that included that 4%, but most of the estimated $72 million has already been spent. It looks as though spending has gone to behaviour coordinators and teacher support, with little transparency available on wellbeing or chaplaincy programs. In this budget, the government has committed $37 million over five years for national student wellbeing programs, which include chaplaincy. Let us be clear. Chaplains make the programs work. Across the state, they are leading the coordination of breakfast clubs in hundreds of schools. The government now wants to carve off a portion of that to centrally coordinate the school breakfast program via YouthCARE. Meanwhile, chaplains are expected to keep delivering the service without any increase in pay or time.
I would like to give members an example of some of the feedback that YouthCARE has received from families. The name of the family has been changed for confidentiality. The Jones family was facing significant challenges raising four young children, with one in pre-primary, one in kindergarten and two still at home. Each child presented with complex needs, and the pressure on the parents was immense. The mum was isolated and overwhelmed while the dad was working tirelessly to support the family. Recognising the strain, the chaplain stepped in with warmth and dedication. She began visiting the mum regularly, offering emotional support and practical guidance. The chaplain worked closely with the family to connect them to essential services and resources to help ease their burden. Thanks to the chaplain's consistent care and advocacy, the children are now thriving in their learning and development. The mum has regained confidence and independence and has even been able to return to work, a milestone that she once felt was very much out of reach. This story is a powerful testament to the life-changing impact of compassionate community-based support and the people who help and guide our children in our schools. If the government is serious about the wellbeing of children, reducing pressure on the workforce and retaining those who care for our children, chaplaincy needs to be part of the solution. Our chaplains are doing more with less, picking up the pieces, showing up and turning to programs they coordinate themselves to get by.
I also need to talk about the principal chaplaincy pilot program. This is a simple, effective and initiative program to support the wellbeing of our regional, especially isolated, school principals. The program worked and became an important part of support to principals in the regions, with 279 schools participating. The feedback has been overwhelmingly positive but funding was cut and reinstated only after a public campaign. Even now, that funding runs out again in December 2026, with no continuation plan for the Pilbara or the Kimberley. These are vital areas, and those principals need that vital support. This program currently provides essential support to school principals across regional Western Australia. Principals rarely have the ability to chat to a person in confidence about their role and the struggle of their job. In the first half of this year, engagement and frequency of contact from principals in this program has increased. This upward trend has continued to highlight the growing value of the program and the rising demand for emotional, pastoral and professional support among our school leaders in regional areas. The recurring themes that the principals are sharing with their principal chaplains are administrative workloads, workplace stress and complexity, their personal wellbeing, professional development and the isolation of their positions in their communities due to the remote role they hold. The program is continually hearing feedback from the principals about how important the support is for principals in the regions who are rarely able to chat confidentially about their role with an independent person who turns up just for them. This program needs funding to continue; otherwise, we will see the fallout in our regional schools and communities as the principals struggle without this support.
I want to broaden my reply by speaking a little about regional Western Australia and where I live in Harvey, which is a community I care deeply about. Some of the things I see there reflect the impact of this government's decisions. Despite the region driving a majority of this resource-rich state's economic growth and providing mining royalties, funding remains heavily concentrated in the metropolitan area and is disproportionately lower for people in the regions. I would particularly like to mention the lack of tailored and targeted commitments to local challenges. Programs like the student assistance payments and the Patient Assisted Travel Scheme subsidies are applied in a uniform measure throughout the state without considering the unique challenges in regional towns like Harvey, Collie, Manjimup and many more. A child from a low income household in one of these towns receives the same $150 as a child in an affluent Perth suburb. How is that equal? There is no weighting or scaling for household income, Indigenous status, disability, out-of-home care or access to limited uniform suppliers. These are not targeted long-term solutions; they are one-size-fits-all blanket approaches that treat people everywhere the same. Furthermore, much of this funding is aggregated under vague headings such as regional infrastructure. This government pats itself on the back for having gold-level transparency but will not say how much is going where and leaves those living in the regions wondering where its share is and what the plan is.
This budget was meant to be a chance for the government to define itself, and turn revenues into real relief for families, communities, small businesses and the most vulnerable and disadvantaged in our state. However, it has provided a generic budget that does little to address the serious issues of housing, health and education, and does not provide certainty for organisations in the space of family and domestic violence, reinforcing this government's focus on its wrong priorities. Before the election, the Premier said that the cost of living would be his top priority. I just do not see that. Free entry to VacSwim has gone, KidSport funding has been slashed and the $14 million for women's health centres has been forgotten or lost somewhere in the budget. This government has turned its back on its promises and hopes no-one will notice. The people who notice, the vulnerable and struggling, can least afford this budget; namely, the people for whom this government claims to a hero.
Western Australians will be forced to pay more overall for essential services they cannot go without—water, power, car rego and emergency services levies. The average Western Australian household will be required to find an extra $328 a year to keep up. This does not allow for regional disadvantages like distance, fuel and struggling infrastructure. The $328 includes a 2.5% increase in electricity and water alone when families are already facing pressures of rising rents and grocery prices, and now possibly having to jeopardise their child's safety, as the government has cut the free pool entry for children learning how to swim, which is vital in the regions. As a parent and grandparent, I believe that the government should not be making cuts in those areas. We should allow children access to those pools so that parents can get in there and have their kids do swimming lessons, especially in a cost-of-living crisis.
Despite being flushed with cash, the government is on track to rack up $42.5 billion of debt. That is $10.6 billion more than the McGowan government inherited in 2017. In short, this budget does not deliver. It keeps money for itself, makes no real changes, forgets the regions and quietly lets down the very people Labor claims to stand for.
I would now like to draw members' attention to several areas in which this government's inaction has been particularly concerning. At the start, I would like to point out the ongoing issue of barriers to mental health services in the regions, especially for older patients. In the South West, there is a lack of dedicated older inpatient mental health units, and older adults are accommodated in general hospitals and at multipurpose sites, not in purpose-built regional wards. This quietly confirms what people living in the regions experience daily. There is a systemic gap between the services and quality of care in the regions compared with those in Perth. There are few dedicated older adult mental health units outside the metro region and our seniors deserve better than being shipped to the city or placed in general hospitals. An older person suffering from dementia will enter a hospital, and they and their family will struggle. The health system's response is to pick up that older person, take them away from the core group of people who love them and put them in a hospital in the city. How does that help the family who loves and cares for that person? It does not. This government claims to have delivered a budget with major infrastructure and services in the South West, but it has forgotten to address seniors once again.
I would like to address an issue that is incredibly close to my heart. It is something I have seen as a friend and a family member but also when I was on the frontline during my time in police. It is family and domestic violence, which members have already heard me talk about. More specifically, I want to address the safety of women in WA. At the last election, this government promised $14 million for WA's community health centres for women. It is something Dr Alison Evans, CEO of the Centre for Women's Safety and Wellbeing, stated is very urgent. Our system in Western Australia is backlogged, overwhelmed and stretched beyond capacity by women trying to flee domestic violence. The issue is not something that any government should turn a blind eye to, and I know a lot of work is being done in this area, but as I have said before, I believe we can do more, especially when Western Australia is the most dangerous state in the country to be a woman. As members would have heard me say, WA has the highest reported rate of FDV assaults against women. This is shameful and demands action over empty commitments. It also involves collaboration, with all of us working together towards fixing it.
Despite that, there is a growing gap between what the government promises and what it delivers. Libby Mettam from the other place and I have both repeatedly asked this government in question time, "Where is the $14 million?" What have we received in response? Nothing—no direct answers, no comment and no clear commitment. If the government cannot even say where this critical funding has gone, what does it say about its priorities? If it cannot deliver on a basic promise to women who need to escape violence, how can it govern with credibility? The funding is missing, the promise is broken and the women who depend on these essential government services are being left behind.
I will go to an area I have not touched on—that is, child protection. Yes, the government has committed to an additional 31 new child protection workers in this budget, but that is not enough in the face of well-documented chronic workforce strain and burnout. The treatment of vulnerable children is inadequate, with some still placed in hostels due to a lack of appropriate care options, and it remains true that our state has the highest rate of Aboriginal children in out-of-home care in the nation. More critically, Aboriginal children are more than 20 times more likely to be living in out-of-home care than their peers. Instead of addressing this, Labor has allowed the number of Aboriginal children in out-of-home care to jump to over 3,000 today. The government has failed to tackle the root cause of a lot of cases of removal—that is, family and domestic violence. The government continues to punish victims by removing their children instead of assisting them in finding accommodation. Western Australia is now experiencing a victim-blame culture in which victims avoid seeking help from caseworkers, avoid medical advice and avoid leaving abusive relationships after incidents of domestic violence because they are afraid they will lose their children. Sadly, I have been involved in this firsthand.
Back on family and domestic violence, we all know the promise of $14 million has been broken and the funding does not appear in the budget. To compound that, there is also a drop of 22% in funding for FDV in the forward estimates. Amidst high demand, the government is not clear on which services are being funded or how the needs of culturally diverse and regional women are being met.
The government has also turned its back on police and frontline workers. Despite the Treasurer highlighting the addition of 863 officers in her budget speech, that figure falls short of the government's 2021 promise of 950 new police by June 2024. No new overall recruitment targets have been set since then, while high resignation rates continue, and the original commitment has yet to deliver real workforce growth. As mentioned in my speech yesterday, every station should have the right number of police officers and no station should be unable to fill a shift and have to rely on other stations to cover its area. The community safety package lacks transparency from a government that claims its transparency is gold standard, and appears more focused on technology over meaningful support.
It seems only fitting to end this speech by tying it back to my home in the South West. The Cook Labor government has announced investment in the key pillars of mental health, community and generic health services for the region. Whilst this sounds promising, in real terms this budget falls short on meeting the nuanced needs of residents in the area. On mental health, we cannot see how workforce shortages will be addressed in recruitment or retention. What is even worse, the funding to be given to departments and not-for-profit agencies will often be for only 12 months or two years. On top of that, we have to try to attract someone to the regions to take up a 12-month contract when we cannot offer them a house and we cannot guarantee them ongoing employment after that contract. Why would anyone want to take on that level of risk? Why would they come down to the regions and work to support our vulnerable people? In housing, we cannot see a concrete plan to increase affordability despite the statewide cost-of-living crisis. Finally on community safety, the budget fails to address the forever increasing policing needs, unique regional safety challenges and the lack of youth justice services. We need to do better.
Today I have spoken not just about numbers and statistics but about people. These figures represent women fleeing domestic violence, workers who want to help and support children and families without support in a cost-of-living crisis. This government has the wrong priorities, finding $217 million for a racetrack but little ongoing support for women's centres, frontline services and communities. We are not seeing underinvestment from the Cook Labor government; we are seeing a pattern of empty promises and, sadly, misplaced values for its people.
Hon Jess Beckerling (2:49 pm): I rise to give my contribution to the budget debate, and I am grateful for the opportunity. Every new term of Parliament comes with a new opportunity to develop and communicate a vision. It is an opportunity for the government of the day to demonstrate it has heard and understood what the community wants and needs, and one key mechanism for doing this and delivering essential funding to essential services is the annual budget. In her budget speech in the other place WA's Treasurer, Hon Rita Saffioti, focused closely on WA's position as an economic powerhouse. Many Western Australians overwhelmed by the climate and biodiversity crises and increasing inequality and out-of-control violence against women and children were listening intently, hoping to hear of key measures that would start turning the tide on these and other fundamental matters. While there were of course some welcome areas of investment that the Cook government can be commended for, there are also whole policy areas, themes and areas of investment whose absence is quite extraordinary.
To me, and as the research shows to the majority of Western Australians, protection of the natural environment, water, biodiversity and climate is essential—a top priority. Investment in specialist services, programs and infrastructure that proactively uplift people who for multiple reasons are disadvantaged and vulnerable is critical, not only for those communities but also for the maintenance of social cohesion and a resilient WA community. A question arises in reading this budget: Why is this not considered essential to the Cook Labor government? The thing that unfortunately makes this budget memorable is its lack of ambition to tackle many of WA's biggest issues and set us on a course that resembles one based on the core, as described, Labor values of compassion, fairness and environmental sustainability.
It is a budget that finds money for things that most Western Australians would consider a low priority but not for things that most of us consider essential. I will give a few examples of what that looks like in this budget. I agree strongly with my colleague Hon Michelle Boylan, who said that allocating $217.5 million to a racetrack around Burswood seems absurd and we cannot find any money for an updated state of the environment report, remembering that every other state carries out these every two to five years and we have not had one since 2007. We are spending over $20 million on greyhound and horse racing, but we cannot find enough money to meaningfully address the increased rates of sexual violence reporting. The budget does not mention nature once other than this line: "That's why we are continuing to invest in unlocking our natural environment so more people can access and enjoy it." The government looks like spending $100 million to improve the infrastructure of Rottnest Island to accommodate increasing visitor numbers, but it does not find any money to ensure the survival of mainland quokkas in the northern jarrah forest.
The Greens are often accused of being anti-industry and not understanding the economy. In fact, Hon Dr Steve Thomas, who I note is out of the chamber on urgent parliamentary business, said it repeatedly in his lengthy contribution during one of the Greens—one of only four—non-government business sessions last week. I am sorry to the honourable member, but it is a tired and lazy jibe and one that is worth addressing on the record. There is one industry that we are most certainly opposed to, and not idly or inexplicably but actively, because the science demands it of us, and that is the fossil fuel industry. It is an industry that is on its way out. Whether it is over the next decade or the next two decades, it is well understood that we are coming to the end of the fossil fuel era and that clean energy will and must take its place. It is as much in the interests of the 10,600 people employed in this industry—that is 0.7% of WA's workforce—as it is in the interests of the rest of us that this transition is rapid. The Greens have a longstanding commitment to fair and just transitions that take care of the people most impacted. Executing a just and timely transition away from fossil fuels secures the future of so many other WA sectors that employ far more Western Australians—industries like tourism, agriculture and fisheries. The extraordinary thing is that even with the known risks that climate change presents to these sectors and to every other sector and to our whole economy there appears to have been no modelling whatsoever of the risk factors or economic cost of rising temperatures, drought or extreme weather in this year's budget. This kind of wilful ignorance and failure to plan ahead serves only one industry at the expense of all others. Is it really the Greens who are anti-industry? A more accurate assessment is that we are anti the oil and gas industry, absolutely, and simultaneously far better allies to a long-term sustainable, equitable and well-considered future WA than those who are making the accusation.
I will today focus my contribution on the parts of this budget that relate to my portfolio areas, and where I point out the missed opportunities in this budget, I do so in the constructive spirit of looking ahead to the next opportunity to better resource essential services and programs.
The first issue that I will speak to is family and domestic violence. I commend the government on the work that it has done thus far to ensure that family and domestic violence responses are informed by both victim-survivors and advocate experts in the sector. This is clear in the strategies and system reform plans that have been developed and delivered by the Labor government in the last five years. Where there seems to have been a breakdown, though, is in following through on that work and adequately funding community-based response and prevention initiatives and services. Despite the numbers of FDV incident reports continuing to climb, Labor's investment in community-based prevention and response measures is in fact decreasing, with some programs apparently being defunded altogether—and this honestly came as a shock to me. I want to acknowledge again Hon Michelle Boylan, who has repeatedly raised these issues and has just done so in her budget contribution.
Last year in 2024–25, we saw almost $44.5 million invested in prevention and response initiatives, including things like the Aboriginal Family Safety Grants. But in this budget, we see that spend actually decreased by almost $15 million and funding for entire programs has been discontinued altogether. The funding showing in the budget papers by 2028–29 is just $4.7 million. That is about 10% of last year's allocation. I understand that my Labor colleagues might argue that that funding has not been allocated over the forward estimates yet, but funding certainty for community service organisations is critical to so many aspects of high-quality service delivery, and many other budget forecasts are clear, probably in recognition of the need for this kind of funding certainty.
The next four years will see some $15 million spent on the rollout of expanded e-monitoring that we know does not work outside the Perth metro area with any reliability, while first responder coercive control training, together with expansions to respectful relationship education programs, are not funded beyond 2027. The sector laid out very clearly for the government in its budget submissions that there is an urgent need for an immediate boost to funding so that refuges and frontline services do not have to turn women and children away. The number that it said was needed was nearly $263 million. I remind you, although I am sure no-one needs reminding of this anymore, that the Cook government found about $217 million for a racetrack nobody wants. The FDV sector said just under $263 million in community prevention and response funding was needed, but, as the numbers of women killed by partners and former partners adds up, it got less than $98 million. That is just 37% of what the sector said was required. Investments in this budget will provide increased refuge capacity, support for women and children to stay safe in their homes, and expanded monitoring of perpetrators. Of course, this is very welcome, but to prevent family and domestic violence investment is required across the entire system of prevention and support. Without a comprehensive program of long-term sustained investment we will continue to see family and domestic violence being perpetrated, leaving women and children living with violence and continuing to be murdered, and an increasingly unmanageable strain on support services. Thanks to the tireless work of FDV services, victim-survivors, advocates and researchers we actually have a pretty good idea of how we can pave a pathway towards making WA safer for women and children, but it requires the political will to make the full investment.
I will now turn to sexual violence, which is obviously an issue that has a large overlap with FDV but that requires its own fully funded and integrated response—an integrated response that involves prevention, early intervention, perpetrator accountability and evidence-based therapeutic support for victim-survivors. Some outstanding work is being done in the sexual violence space in Western Australia, but there are far too few specialist sexual assault services in WA and threadbare funding for sexual violence prevention work. Given the prevalence of sexual violence in this state and disturbing community attitudes to sexual violence reported in the latest The National Community Attitudes towards Violence against Women Survey, a high-level strategic response and resource commitment to preventing sexual violence is critical. I am pleased to see that in the last two years some steps have been taken by this government towards developing WA's first strategy to respond to and prevent the concerningly high rates of sexual violence in WA, but, despite this, there is very little mention of sexual violence in the budget papers. They do acknowledge that matters involving offences of a sexual nature continue to represent the highest complex case load numbers in Western Australian courts and that an increase in funding from government is essential to meet those continuing demands. Additionally, the government has allocated a one-off amount of just over $1 million for the child sexual abuse and harmful sexual behaviours pilot, which is welcome, together with its $570,000 investment in child sexual abuse therapeutic services and Indigenous healing services.
I note that there is set to be a drop of $125,000 in the next financial year and then no funding allocated whatsoever thereafter. Similarly, funding for the prevention of child sexual abuse at the Department of Communities will drop from $1.1 million this year to less than $500,000 next year. Even though sexual violence reporting is on the rise, little has been done to adequately fund specialist support services for victim-survivors, particularly if they are adults. There are incredible organisations doing what they can to support Western Australia's sexual violence victims on a shoestring budget. They deliver critical services, do important research and advocate on behalf of victim-survivors to increase funding for prevention and specialist responses. However, many of them are Perth-based, leaving victim-survivors in the regions with very few options. In the most recent round of budget submissions the sector said $70 million is needed over the next four years. This was largely to fund equal access for sexual violence victims across Western Australia, including forensic and medical examinations; independent sexual assault advocates in every region; three new services in black spot areas; funding for existing services to a more effective, holistic model; outreach to remote and high-risk locations; and the rollout of early evidence kits.
This government managed to find $80 million to ensure the entry of a Perth-based team in the men's NRL competition, but could not find $70 million for essential community-based sexual violence response measures. Ironically, we have plenty of data showing that incidents of gendered violence increase during Rugby League and AFL games. I acknowledge that many members of this house are equally determined to see an increase in funding and resourcing of specialist services and preventive programs to deal with sexual violence in Western Australia. I urge the Cook government to ensure that the next budget sees a radical improvement in this area.
I will now turn to the environment. Western Australia's native species and ecosystems face multiple and compounding threats, as we all know. But the truth is we do not know the extent of the biodiversity crisis because we are not investing in studies and monitoring. What we do know is that experts all agree our natural environment is in decline, climate change is having unprecedented impacts on all ecosystems, and we have increasing numbers of threatened species that are becoming more threatened—not less—with time. Recently, three major Office of the Auditor General reports have found that our environment is not being adequately protected and particularly that key agencies are not adequately resourced. In 2022, the Office of the Auditor General found that while the scale of mining has increased, monitoring of compliance has decreased with both regulating agencies—the Department of Water and Environmental Regulation and the then Department of Energy, Mines, Industry Regulation and Safety—relying heavily on companies self-reporting, with reduced inspections and a lack of rigorous assessment program. The Auditor General said that despite growth in the mining sector, planned inspection programs have shrunk by 60% or more over the last five years and agencies have a limited understanding of operator compliance. It is a common theme over the past few years that we have seen resources shifted from compliance to approvals, speeding up the process of granting approval to new projects and away from compliance monitoring so that we have increasing extraction and know less about what is going on out there. We are leaving the health of the environment and the sustainability of this extraction of publicly owned and vital resources to luck.
One major area that I am sure everyone agrees should absolutely not be left to chance is water. In June this year, the Office of the Auditor General reported that 12,000 water licences for the extraction of four trillion litres of water are not being effectively monitored to safeguard and fairly manage our critical resource. Only 5% of licence holders were visited during the audit period from 21 July to 24 June and 87% of potential non-compliances were never even assigned to a staff member to investigate. I am not being hyperbolic, Acting President, when I say that we are effectively telling companies that they can take whatever volume of water they like because no-one is watching. This was the third Auditor General's report on water use in Western Australia and all have found that there are critical planning and monitoring problems and that regulators' efforts are not sufficient to ensure that water is not being taken unlawfully. Why is this? It makes no sense to me. Surely we recognise the value of water to people and the environment. Why are we speeding up the process of giving out new licences but not making sure that the water that is taken is lawful and sustainable? This has been the theme of the Cook Labor government and it flies in the face of its reported commitment to environmental sustainability. There are clear recommendations put forward by the Auditor General and environmental and water management experts to address this problem. I urge the Cook government to engage closely with this issue and fully fund monitoring and compliance programs in the next budget.
The final report I will mention is the Auditor General's most recent report considering the environment, published in June this year titled Conservation of Threatened Ecological Communities. It found that DBCA cannot effectively track nor demonstrate the impact of its practical conservation activities on the condition of threatened ecological communities. Another 390 priority ecological communities may meet the criteria for the higher level of protection that is meant to be afforded to TECs, but at its current pace, the department would take 100 years to assess and list those ecosystems. Perhaps by then it will not need to bother. To make matters worse, answers to questions on notice have recently revealed that DBCA has not requested additional funding or resources for TECs or priority ecological communities despite these findings, and there is no funding stream for section 50 notices under the Biodiversity Conservation Act. The law has been made to provide for the protection of those ecological communities on land not managed by DBCA, but there is no funding to give that law effect. If this situation is going to change, it will require leadership from the minister—leadership that would be enthusiastically welcomed.
Threatened ecological communities of ecosystems need our greatest and most urgent care. They are unique, at risk and, once destroyed, are unlikely to recover. If we want to safeguard biodiversity and the overall health of our natural environment, we start by ensuring that those most rare and threatened ecosystems have what they need to recover to a stable state. For example, if we lose the banksia woodlands, we lose the Carnaby's cockatoos. They are critical ecosystems that are in the ICU, but there are no doctors in the building. We are dramatically underfunding their management and we are allowing the most threatening processes to continue impacting them, like approving further clearing of banksia woodlands for sand mines when obvious alternatives exist. The vast majority of Australians want to see more action to look after the natural environment and 86% have expressed concern in the 2024 Biodiversity Council survey of the decline of native plants and animals in their local areas. A total of 95% of Australians believe that more of the federal budget should be dedicated to nature protection and Western Australians are no different to people across the continent. We have shown time and again how willing we are to stand up for nature and people expect more of the state Labor government in this area.
With this backdrop, it was distressing to see how little funding has been allocated to nature conservation and compliance monitoring of the extraction of natural resources. A quick search of the word "nature" in the budget shows that the only thing the Cook government was thinking about was biosecurity, which is well worth investing in but totally insufficient to deal with the suite of issues we are facing and increasing people's access to Western Australia's beautiful natural places. Answers to questions on notice have revealed there has been no increase in DBCA's budget for conserving habitat, species and ecological communities in the past five years, despite the recent forest and woodlands collapse and associated starvation of Carnaby's. DBCA does not conduct regular population assessments for threatened species and does not have a target for reviewing recovery plans. It has only reviewed three recovery plans in the past 10 years. Again, these are the species in the ICU, particularly for the critically endangered species on the brink of extinction. If we are to avert their extinction, we need to actually make the effort and resource the necessary programs.
Prescribed burning gets $64.5 million in the budget. There has been a significant increase in spending on prescribed burning and other fire management from $50.5 million in 2023–24 to $64.3 million in 2024–25. This is a very complex and significant issue. Fire has been a part of the Australian landscape for time immemorial and First Nations people across Western Australia have used fire and developed detailed, sophisticated fire methodologies over tens of thousands of years. There is no argument that fire has a role to play in ecosystem maintenance and in bushfire mitigation. The argument is that fire management has lost the sophistication that the country is accustomed to after millennia of First Nations management. With a focus on KPIs of target area covered and cost per hectare, we are seeing significant perverse outcomes both for conservation and risk management. Fire application should be as varied as the ecosystems that it is applied to, and bushfire mitigation should be keeping up with the latest science, especially in the context of a warming and drying climate. But we are spending far more on starting fires than on putting them out. Lighting fires in some ecosystems, especially tall, wet forests, is now shown to be increasing their flammability, not reducing it.
Acting President, I have two or three other areas that I want to turn to. The next one is First Nations in the regions. I want to start by acknowledging the notable dedicated investment into Aboriginal wellbeing in this budget, including more than $80 million in targeted housing initiatives, a $20 million expansion of the Aboriginal ranger program, and several investments into Aboriginal health services in the regions. I note also that there are many other measures in this state budget that have the potential to positively impact on the wellbeing of Aboriginal people living in the regions, which I commend.
I found it particularly promising to see a gradual but much-needed move towards Aboriginal community-controlled organisations delivering services for Aboriginal people. I hope the government continues to invest in and adequately fund ACCOs statewide, not only because this approach is best practice for ensuring maximum accessibility and cultural appropriateness in service delivery, but also because it acknowledges the right to self-determination, and that Aboriginal people have long traditions of self-government, independent decision-making and institutional self-reliance. I also note, however, that $22 million is wholly inadequate for the scale of investment required and for the incredible number of ACCOs that exist across the state, delivering essential services to Aboriginal community members. It is a similar situation with ranger program funding. This funding should have been significantly higher, and secured over a longer period. I was also disappointed to see that no explicit effort has been made by this government to invest in Aboriginal employment pathways beyond the ranger program, and that there has been a decrease in funding for the Custody Notification Service. This service has proven to be life-saving for Aboriginal people in custody, which should be a priority for this government if it is serious about addressing the disproportionate numbers of Aboriginal people dying in custody.
Next, I will turn to women. I really hoped that this would be a budget for women. After all, it is a budget that was delivered by a woman, and Labor is proud to tell us that it is the party for women. But sadly, this budget disappoints in this regard. There is no shortage of money for infrastructure—a male-dominated industry in which only 13% of employees are women—but there is a real failure to recognise the enormous pay gap between male and female-dominated industries. Women do not just need easier pathways into typically male-dominated industries; what we need is to value the work that women do in our hospitals, our aged-care facilities, our childcare centres and our schools. I find it extraordinary that someone holding a sign on a mine site is being paid more than someone taking care of a whole classroom of our children. Many women in these places of work are public sector employees. The government could decide tomorrow to pay them adequately and equitably, but instead it insists, year after year, budget after budget, on propping up and rewarding the efforts and labour of mostly men. It is all huge infrastructure spending and expanded jobs in construction—no raising of women's wages, or adequate fiscal acknowledgement of the invaluable contribution that we make to WA, every single day. This links strongly to the increasing rates of women over 55 becoming homeless, something I have spoken about before. A key way to address this would be by closing the pay and superannuation gaps.
I want to finish my contribution today by bringing attention to an area of the budget that received almost no attention or investment at all: animal welfare. My contribution will not take long, because that is reflective of how few animal welfare initiatives feature in the 2025–26 budget papers. But I think it is important to share a couple of observations stemming from this government's continued investment in WA's racing industry. In doing so, I want to remind members of this chamber that the Cook Labor government could not find $70 million to adequately fund essential specialist community-based sexual support services, but has found more than $25 million to support facility upgrades at 24 regional thoroughbred and harness racing clubs, along with an allocation of some $5 million to upgrading the Cannington and Mandurah greyhound racing tracks. It is widely accepted and acknowledged that gambling and excessive alcohol consumption are linked to many social harms, including increases in family and domestic violence and sexual violence offending. There is also irrefutable evidence of shocking and distressing outcomes for the horses and greyhounds that continue to be exploited in WA's racing industries. There are huge social costs in maintaining these industries—particularly, the burdens placed on rescue organisations; treating vets; and community members who donate their time, energy, love and money to house and care for discarded racing animals when they can no longer generate a profit for their owners. I cannot articulate this any more clearly: it should not be incumbent on taxpayers to fund the gambling industry. We must stop propping up a deeply unpopular greyhound racing industry. We must stop investing in animal cruelty for the entertainment of a few, and we must acknowledge this spending for what it is: investment in gambling and all its associated harms.
As I said at the outset, each budget provides a new opportunity to demonstrate that the government has heard and understood what is needed by the community. As soon as one budget is delivered, I am sure another one needs to start being considered. This opportunity that we all have to present budget replies is a good and important one. It means that the government has the opportunity to hear considered responses directly from representatives of the WA community, across the political spectrum. In doing so, in the constructive spirit of continuing to meet needs and address shortfalls, I hope that we will see a substantial increase in next year's budget for the environment; for community-based family and domestic violence and sexual violence response and prevention programs; for closing the gender pay gap; for First Nations people; and for animal welfare.
Hon Pierre Yang (Parliamentary Secretary) (3:15 pm): I thank the Acting President for the opportunity to continue my contribution from yesterday. I wish to recap where I got to yesterday. I spent a bit of time refreshing members' minds and memories about our state's history, and the mismanagement of the state's finances and economy by the Barnett Liberal–National government between 2008 and 2017. I think it is always important to remember history, because otherwise how we can learn from the mistakes of our state and avoid them in future? How can we continue to ensure that our state is in the best possible state into the future?
I spent a bit of time talking about the unfortunate spending of Royalties for Regions—the singing toilets in Bunbury and the plastic cows in the South West.
Hon Neil Thomson: Oh, come on.
Hon Pierre Yang: The honourable member may laugh, but $250,000 was spent on a singing toilet.
Hon Neil Thomson: That was 10 years ago. You can't keep a hospital running. You've got a crisis at the moment.
Hon Dan Caddy: You couldn't even get a hospital started! I mean, seriously!
Several members interjected.
Hon Pierre Yang: Acting President, the attitude to the wasteful spending by the former Liberal–National government—
Several members interjected.
The Acting President: Order, please, members!
Hon Pierre Yang: Thank you, Acting President, for your protection from the other side and my own side!
The attitude demonstrated by the interjection from the member opposite really baffles me. An amount of $250,000 was spent on a singing toilet that had no benefit for the state of Western Australia.
Several members interjected.
Hon Pierre Yang: That was totally dismissed by the honourable member.
Hon Neil Thomson: I'm interested in what people are suffering from now.
Several members interjected.
The Acting President: Order!
Hon Pierre Yang: We will get to the content of the budget in due course. I am yet to reach that point. I am spending some time on the history of the mismanagement by the member's former government. I understand that the honourable member was an adviser in that government. He cannot avoid his responsibility either, because he shares part of the blame; he is to blame, as well.
I refer again to the same article I referred to yesterday. It states:
One critic, Australian Medical Association WA president Gary Geelhoed, said he understood there was "more to life than health", but if regional areas were getting a "very big chunk of money" for political reasons,—
For political reasons, honourable member—
lots of it should go towards the "very great health needs in the country".
The Barnett government could not provide inducements and support to keep more doctors in the country. This government has been spending a huge amount of effort in attracting doctors and nurses that would put you guys and your record to shame.
It is really important for this house and for the entire community to remember the mismanagement of the state's finances by members on the other side. If we do not, we will be bound to repeat the mistakes that the other lot made when they were in government. Because the mistakes were so tremendous and monumental, we have been trying to avoid that. One of the first things that we did was to have an inquiry—the special inquiry into government programs and projects—led by Mr John Langoulant. Volume 1 of the final report of that special inquiry was published in February 2018. If I may, I wish to quote a few passages. In referencing the Royalties for Regions program, the report states:
It is very clear that this program had a profound impact on the operations of the government and the public service. The program was advocated by the National Party in the 2008 election and it formed the centrepiece in the partnership that was negotiated between Colin Barnett and Brendan Grylls …
The program itself led to one of the most profound changes ever to occur in regional development across Western Australia. Many good programs and projects have occurred under the umbrella of this policy. Conversely, it has also given rise to waste in expenditure, seen programs being implemented without sound planning – and in some cases, none at all – which has led to developments which don’t deliver their intended objectives and left liabilities for government at the State and Local government levels.
…
The focus of the following analysis is to identify the main features and characteristics of the Royalties for Regions program. This is achieved through analysing:
the governance arrangements;
how were the funds spent;
how were the projects selected to be funded;
has the program influenced economic and social outcomes in regional WA; and
what are the lessons learned.
I do not intend to spend too much time on the Langoulant report, suffice to say that it was found—
Several members interjected.
The Acting President (Hon Dr Parwinder Kaur): Order, members!
Hon Pierre Yang: Thank you, Acting President. Later in the report—I refer to one more passage on page 139—it states:
It is unclear to the Special Inquirer as to why the new Cabinet in 2008 did not place conditions, in the form of expenditure caps, on the allocation of funds to this program. It is understood that this was due to the nature of the bargain between the Liberal and National political parties and the insistence of the National Party leader at the time that the election commitment was sacrosanct. The lack of setting such conditions was a mistake. It created many difficulties in ensuring high standards across the program for which both parties must take responsibility.
With the remaining time I have, I wish to delve into the details of the budget a little more. Having talked about the history and the pathetic record set by members on the other side when they were in office, today's WA is a huge contrast. We are in a much better space than nine years ago. The results can speak for themselves. The Cook Labor government has achieved its seventh consecutive operating budget with a robust $2.5 billion surplus recorded for the last financial year. This achievement underscores our commitment to prudent fiscal management, ensuring that we live within our means, unlike the other lot when they were in power, and that we are able to deliver on our election commitments and infrastructure that we desperately need. There is one fact members must know. Since the start of COVID, the Western Australian population has increased by around 300,000 people. That is almost like having the entire population of the Northern Territory added to ours in the space of three or four years. Members can imagine the amount of pressure put on our transport infrastructure, our health infrastructure, our education system and everything. Talking about the former government's record, if the opposition were in office, it would mess it up again, without a doubt, so the honourable member should stop pontificating about his government's record and take that smirk off his face. This is no laughing matter. I do not understand. This is no laughing matter.
Hon Rod Caddies interjected.
Hon Pierre Yang: I do not know how to answer that, honourable member. Immigration is a federal issue, so he may have to speak to his federal colleagues. I know she is working tirelessly and has been advocating on certain positions since 1996, and she continues to do that. In any event, today's debate is on the 2025–26 budget, and I shall continue. The turnaround that we have achieved is not accidental. It is the result of deliberate, collaborated and well-planned policies that prioritised what is most important for our state so that we can have long-term stability and growth. Through disciplined spending and targeted investment, we have built an economic foundation that benefits every Western Australian. That is the result that we have been able to achieve.
As I have mentioned, our state's growing population means that we need to allocate more funding for infrastructure, and that is why this budget has allocated $38 billion over the forward estimates, including $12 billion in the current financial year alone. Those investments are not just mere numbers or digits; they represent tangible improvements to the daily lives of Western Australians. I will give a few highlights.
The Metronet project will continue to transform our transport system and the public transport network, which is a great achievement. Again, we can look at the transport record of members opposite. It was so pathetic that they could not even build a few kilometres of rail the last time they were in government. We could talk about the time they were in government 30 or 40 years ago when they shut down the Fremantle line. The Liberal Party has in its DNA something against the public transport and railway system. It is almost pathological.
We have committed $13 billion to energy and water infrastructure to support WA's transition to a renewable energy powerhouse, while ensuring a reliable water supply to Western Australians and future generations of Western Australians. We are also committed to regional WA, with significant investments in roads, hospitals and community facilities that underpin vibrant regional economies, avoiding the mistakes of the previous government.
Infrastructure is the backbone of our economy. It connects communities, supports businesses and drives innovation. By investing in those critical projects, we are not only addressing the immediate needs but also laying the groundwork for a prosperous and sustainable future. Talking about job creation and economic growth, which this Labor government has a very proud track record on, our Plan for Jobs was designed to diversify our economy and create more meaningful jobs with decent conditions. Since 2017, some 340,000 jobs have been created under the watch of this government—the most in our state's history. Our unemployment rate has remained at around 4% for more than three years. It is a testament to the strength of our economic policies. In contrast with the domestic recession that we had in 2016–17, our domestic economy has grown by more than 26% since pre-pandemic levels, far outpacing our national average of 16%. These figures are not abstract. They are not just numbers or digits on a whiteboard. They represent real-life changes for Western Australians when we compare the time we took office with where we are today as a state.
Our efforts extend beyond the traditional sectors. Through targeted programs, we have supported emerging industries such as technology, renewable energy, advanced manufacturing and the like. Initiatives like the WA innovation fund are empowering start-ups and small businesses to have that meaningful boost at a very critical stage of their business, with an aim to create high-value jobs. It has been demonstrated that this Labor government's policy for job creation is holistic and inclusive. We have introduced tailored employment pathways for Indigenous Australians, people with disabilities and other under-represented groups, ensuring that economic growth benefits everyone in our state and our communities. These programs are complemented by partnerships with industry and educational institutions to align training with market demands.
We have been supporting Western Australians with cost-of-living relief. We understand that many people out there are doing it tough in this high cost-of-living environment. The government understands it and has taken action. The government has committed $152 million to establish a new suburban flat fare across the Transperth and Transregional public transport networks, $89 million to deliver on the second round of the WA student assistance payment and $10 million to extend free public transport for school students to the 2026 school year. For six consecutive years, we have kept power and water price increases below the rate of inflation. We are also delivering $150 in energy bill relief on behalf of the federal government, $4 million for the $300 KidSport voucher, $3 million to roll out Kids Access All Areas passes so that more kids can access Scitech and arts and cultural events, $28 million to expand the school breakfast program, $29 million to pilot full-time kindy for four-year-olds and much more.
The government is tackling housing affordability issues. This budget allocates $1.4 billion to various housing initiatives, including expanding the construction workforce to meet demand, unlocking land for 33,000 new homes and providing stamp duty relief for first home buyers. We are investing in social and affordable housing programs to support vulnerable members of our community. This includes the construction of new public housing and units and refurbishment of existing properties to ensure that they meet modern standards. We are collaborating with the private sector to develop mixed-use housing programs and projects to integrate affordable and market rate units, fostering inclusive communities. By leveraging innovative financing models, we are ensuring that these initiatives are both sustainable and impactful.
This budget has seen an additional $1.4 billion boost to health services. Health is the largest part of the budget and we are committing an additional $1.4 billion to health services, to hospital upgrades and to more strong mental health programs. In the health sector, we are pioneering initiatives to improve access to care in rural and remote areas, including the deployment of mobile health clinics and telehealth services. These efforts are bridging the gap for communities that have historically faced barriers to accessing quality health care.
The 2025–26 budget underscores the government's commitment to strengthening WA's health and mental health systems with an investment of an additional $1.4 billion, as I talked about earlier. The government's long-term vision for health care is evident in the $3.2 billion in funding over the next four years for health infrastructure, which will unlock more hospital beds and modernise facilities to meet the needs of our growing population. Since 2017, the state has expanded its health workforce by nearly 5,600 nurses and 2,300 doctors. It is the growth in numbers we needed. At the very beginning of my contribution I talked about the former Liberal–National government wasting so much taxpayers' money on stuff that no-one really needed. This government has spent taxpayers' hard-earned money on projects and programs that are really important and to the benefit of Western Australia.
I may talk about the environment in a few minutes—hopefully, I will have enough time—but I want to talk more about investment in health before I move on to the next subject. The government has committed $47 million to expand access to Ngala's residential parenting services; $61 million for WA's virtual ED program and to establish three older adult care hubs; $62 million to modernise medical and imaging equipment; $24 million to unlock 60 new beds at Joondalup Health Campus; and $20 million for the Bunbury Regional Hospital redevelopment, which will include a helipad and an acute psychiatric unit. Regional health remains a priority for this government, with $2.9 billion allocated to regional health services annually and $944 million for regional infrastructure over the next four years. This includes a $121 million boost to regional health and mental health services, with an additional $90 million for the Patient Assisted Travel Scheme. This government's comprehensive approach to health care will see more hospital beds in the pipeline and deliver more meaningful programs to ensure we take care of Western Australians' wellbeing.
I will now jump to say just a little about the environment space. My good friend and colleague Hon Jess Beckerling talked about the entrenched mistaken view of members on the other side that the Greens are opposed to industry. I think that is wrong. I agree with her that the Greens want to see the environment looked after but are not against industry. I one hundred per cent agree with that. At the same time, I want to say that the Labor Party can be very proud of its track record on looking after the environment, and that is reflected in this budget. Sustainability is at the heart of our vision for Western Australia, and the budget includes substantial investment in renewable energy projects, conservation initiatives and climate resilience programs. Members will remember that I talked about the Labor Party's history and track record on looking after and protecting the environment before the winter break. I think the Labor Party is the natural party for environmental protection. In the 1980s, we protected the forests in Tasmania. When we were in power between 2001 and 2008, under the leadership of Hon Geoff Gallop and Hon Alan Carpenter, we protected the old-growth forests.
Hon Sophie McNeill interjected.
Hon Pierre Yang: We are saving Ningaloo. That is right. Thank you, very much.
All those environmental policies mean that the Labor Party is the natural party for environmental protection, and we have not stopped there. Since coming to power in 2017, we have done much more for the environment in this state than any other party. The Labor Party has a very proud track record, and we have to remind everyone about what we have done. We are the natural party for environmental protection, and we should speak loudly and clearly about that often.
I think it is important that we talk about protecting our environment as often as we can. In this budget, we are spending $63 million for additional resources to prevent and respond to biosecurity threats; $8 million for the Peel–Harvey estuary protection plan; $17 million to deliver rebates for trees and urban canopy programs; $5 million for the Healthy Oceans Fund; $20 million to further expand the Aboriginal rangers program; and $750,000 to support Plastic Free July. We are investing $84 million to unlock wind generation north of Perth and to expand renewable generation, enabling the shutdown of coal-fired power stations by 2030; $333 million for the WA Residential Battery Scheme, allowing tens of thousands of households to store renewable power and help to secure WA energy future; and $50 million to support local battery manufacturing here in WA.
Having discussed the environment, I want to talk about something else that is close to my heart, and that is training. This government has a very proud record on supporting training and supporting Western Australians who want to take on a new career or get new skills, and those who want to start their career after school, as they start their adult life. Who could forget the complete and shameful management of the TAFE sector by the last Liberal–National government? Some of the fees for TAFE courses ballooned by 500%, removing the chance for young Western Australians to gain a new skill. As soon as we came to power, we took action. We changed that immediately. We froze TAFE fees and a few years later we worked with the federal government and introduced fee-free TAFE for TAFE courses. We are expanding so that more TAFE courses can be free for Western Australians or at a reduced cost. TAFE and training is an area in which this government has achieved outstanding outcomes for Western Australians. I was the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Training, Hon Simone McGurk, in 2023 when she was the Minister for Training. I had the privilege of engaging with many industry stakeholders and I am continually inspired by the dedication and passion demonstrated by stakeholders in the industry. As I mentioned, this government has introduced significant fee reduction for existing work traineeships. We established 19 jobs and skills centres all around WA. We rebranded the institutions back to TAFE and we are working tirelessly to ensure every Western Australian who wants to learn a new skill can afford to learn it.
The 2025–26 budget reinforces our commitment with a $331 million investment in TAFE and training programs. Key initiatives include $100 million to sustain low-fee and fee-free TAFE courses; $75 million to support more apprenticeships and traineeships via the Construction Training Fund; $25 million to subsidise wages for 1,000 additional construction trade apprentices; $22 million to expand fee-free TAFE courses in construction and training for more plumbers, bricklayers and plasterers; $17 million for the expansion of heavy vehicle driver training facilities and programs; $12 million to prepare new apprentices for AUKUS-related opportunities; $8 million to incentivise employers to hire mature-age apprentices; and $34 million for modernising TAFE equipment, ensuring the highest training standard. These initiatives underscore the government's commitment and effort for TAFE and training and we are doing everything we can to bridge skill gaps and foster a more inclusive and skill-ready workforce in Western Australia.
In the space of the past 40 minutes or so, I talked about the history of Western Australia, the completely disgraceful mismanagement by the former Liberal–National government and the unparalleled achievement of the Labor government since 2017. This budget is another testament of the Labor Party's commitment to disciplined, fiscally responsible management of our state's finance. We need to remember that we have to continually work very hard for Western Australians and ensure that all spending for any government initiative is with the highest standard and governance requirements that we have set. This budget reflects the values of fairness, opportunity and resilience that defines our great state. As we look to the future, we do so with confidence because of the 2025–26 budget. The government will continue to deliver for Western Australians and it will bring our state to the next stage.
Hon Dr Parwinder Kaur (3:56 pm): I am really excited to talk about the 2025–26 budget today. Maybe it is my training that means I look at the possibilities and opportunities before I see problems, and in a few debates we have seen a lot of problems raised, but the more I read the budget and the more I go through the details and look at the history of me living in this gorgeous part of the of the world for the last 20 years, the more I see that we are absolutely going in the direction where we need to go. I have chosen to speak about a few of my favourite topics today. We have had a lot of debate on them, specifically on climate action; economic diversification; strategic investments into many areas, but particularly I will touch on science, technology and innovation; and capacity building and workforce development, because we can be investing in amazing infrastructure. We could be building white elephants but if there are no people and there is no capacity built today to deliver it 10 years later, it will not be of any use to any of us. What makes me really excited about this budget is that it has a growth mindset at the heart of the policy, and practice that it would like to bring into action.
This budget is investing in people and infrastructure, and creating possibilities. The best part of the budget that I am most excited about is the vision of Made in WA. Specifically, if we look around and hear the news on a daily basis that America is busy making America great again, I am hearing a lot of news that a huge protest is coming up next week in all Australian major cities to "make Australia white again". I do not know how many members have seen that, but it is a shame. Yesterday, my colleague Hon Maryka Groenewald talked about how we need to take a little bit more responsibility as members and as representatives for Western Australians when we talk about issues. Being a migrant, can I please request to my fellow colleagues that when we talk about issues like immigration, it is very important that we take a little bit more responsibility, because that is what fuels things like "make Australia white again". These things are all over social media at this moment and impact us on a daily basis. If I may give members an example, somebody threw a pizza on my face while my little child was watching. Those people said, "Go back to where you come from. You're stealing our jobs." So, can we please take a little bit more responsibility when we talk about things and the consequences they could have for different people who are as Australian and as passionate about Western Australia and building a better country for tomorrow as anybody else in this chamber?
Coming back to the budget, before we go into the nitty-gritty of different things, I would like to take a moment to reflect. We all manage our households on a daily basis. If we have $100 in our pocket, what are the very basic things that we make we cover for ourselves and our families before we start to talk about all the luxuries that we can afford in this very beautiful part of the country? The very first thing that comes to mind is putting two, or, if you are lucky, three meals a day on a plate. The second thing that comes to mind is health. We have a saying in India that if your health is on your side, you have 1,000 problems in this world, but the day your health leaves you, all the problems go away because you will have only one thing that you will be focusing on. We are very lucky that the government has invested in a long-term vision for a healthy Western Australia. My colleague Hon Pierre Yang just mentioned an investment of $1.8 billion.
I would also like to bring to members' attention the long-term vision and bipartisan situation in this case. As a researcher, there are a lot of things that research fuels. Research is able to bring possibilities for a healthier tomorrow. We are today celebrating Daffodil Day. It is a day for hope, which the Cancer Council is celebrating. There are some really positive stats if we look at how many people are surviving cancer today as compared with the 1980s. There are a lot of ways to prevent it and awareness has been raised. There is a lot of amazing research into deadly diseases that we could have never imagined to be cured. I just heard from one of my colleagues in America this morning that they have a vaccine for Alzheimer's disease that is ready to be released next year. This makes me very hopeful that if we invest in these solutions today, we are going to have a better tomorrow.
I would like to give a big shout-out to the Cook Labor government because it put in the Future Health Research and Innovation Fund, which we also call FHRI, in place. It was established in 2020. This fund is fuelling most of the incredible research that we are leading globally right here in Western Australia. It is a long-term investment. It is not a short-term vision of two, three or four years; it is an investment that is going to make Western Australia healthier and happier on a daily basis.
Let us start with the first topic that I would like to share a little bit more on. I worked on the biodiversity and conservation estate from a genetics point of view. One of the biggest inventions of my career was to bring down the cost of DNA mapping from $2.7 billion to $1,000. We could have used that technology in many different ways because it applies across the globe and across the tree of life. However, that was the time I learned that one species goes extinct every 20 minutes. We lose three species every hour, and there is a lot of work that needs to be done. That is what my colleagues and I dedicated our technology towards. We have been working for the last several years to try to bring the very basic foundational resources into place so that the research done by organisations like the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, which I worked very closely with, are able to use that towards not just the mapping and collection of data on the problem, but to do some action to solve it.
Yes, if we look at this budget, it is not making big headlines when it comes to climate action, but climate action is a blueprint of this entire budget. I will give members some examples to explain that. It is not just about talking about climate action anymore; we are actually doing the work. We are building, delivering and leading right now as we speak. This budget commits $259 million this year and another $250 million next year through the Climate Action Fund. This is not just numbers on a spreadsheet; this is investment in real and transformative action. For example—
Hon Sophie McNeill interjected.
Hon Dr Parwinder Kaur: Can I please focus on delivering my speech?
The Acting President (Hon Simon Ehrenfeld): Yes. Even in interjections, you should still address honourable members by their title. Thank you.
Hon Dr Parwinder Kaur: I would like to bring members' attention to Synergy's King Rocks wind farm project and the Collie battery energy storage project. These are not just abstract; they are proven ideas. On the path to net zero that we are talking about, how do we achieve those emissions? I myself worked on reducing methane emissions into the environment for 10 years right here in Western Australia as my first postdoctoral position. Methane is 28 times more important than carbon dioxide—not 80 times, as it was mentioned in the chamber earlier. I learned at the very beginning of my research into that area, which was very interesting, that 40% of our methane emissions actually come from our agriculture. On an average daily basis, a cow releases 200 to 300 litres of methane into the environment. Sheep, which are a big industry here, release 20 to 30 litres of methane into the environment
We are very lucky that we have the biggest resources to tackle that problem right here in Western Australia because for many decades, scientists at the University of Western Australia and the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development have collected germ plasms across the planet. We had more than 10,000 accessions of key Australian pasture species, which was one of the most effective ways to solve this problem. That is the path that I took. I worked on that for five years. We identified the suite of the genes that we could use to identify the best global varieties to solve that problem for our livestock industry. This pasture species is grown across Western Australia as one of the key food ingredients for livestock.
In 2013, I received the Science and Innovation Award by the Prime Minister for this solution. Guess what happened after that? In 2014, the Barnett government shipped all our gene bank resources from DPIRD to the South Australian Research and Development Institute. I never imagined that I would get to share this in the chamber here at this level, but that impacted not just the solution that we were about to deliver to the livestock industry, funded through Meat and Livestock Australia, but it made a huge impact on my career as a scientist. I dedicated five years day and night to find that solution, and at the moment we were about to deliver the solution, all our genetic resources were shipped to South Australia. Then every time I needed just one gram of seeds, I had to write to South Australia and wait for three months. I lost all the corporate knowledge that existed right here in Western Australia in our own Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development, which was absolutely critical. All those technicians and people lost their jobs following all our resources being sent to South Australia. This is the reality on the ground when we decide what we would like to see moving forward and what we would not like to see.
Coming back to Collie and net zero emissions, that is one of the most important ways Western Australians can do their bit for net zero emissions. It is also a huge opportunity we have as a state when it comes to building a clean energy pathway. Building that infrastructure will also bring more opportunities to our state. Just imagine if we were able to build the world's biggest battery in Collie and what that would do for the future of our state. We have all heard about data centres. We are all generating a lot of data these days. Every moment that we are on social media, taking photographs or doing research or analysing anything, we are creating data. Data centres are becoming one of the highest consumers of energy at this moment. Imagine if we had the biggest battery built here in Collie. We would be able to attract the biggest investments happening in the data industry. We could be building the greenest data centres right here in Western Australia. Imagine how that would translate into jobs now and future job opportunities for our kids tomorrow. That is what makes me excited. I am really happy to see that we are backing that vision with $584 million to unlock wind generation north of Perth and expanding renewable generation, enabling the planned shut down of coal-fired power stations by 2030. There is $337 million for the residential battery scheme, helping tens of thousands of households to store solar power and secure WA's energy future. We are providing $50 million to support local battery manufacturing, making the energy technologies of tomorrow right here in Western Australia. In addition, this budget allocates $179 million for decarbonisation works, $102 million to expand the number of wind farms and $32 million to help Collie transition from emissions-intensive industries. This will ensure that no-one is left behind. This is a very thought-through budget.
I did some calculations on the back of an envelope just to share with members the impact Western Australia can make. For example, in 2022, the iron and steel sector contributed approximately 8% of national carbon emissions. Adopting green manufacturing processes could reduce our emissions by 80% in that sector. With Australia's total emissions at approximately 500 million tonnes of carbon dioxide annually, and the steel sector contributing 40 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, green manufacturing alone could reduce emissions by 32 million tonnes of carbon dioxide. This prediction equates to a 6.4% decrease in Australia's total emissions, or about 1.6 times the total emissions from the iron and steel sector currently. That is a huge impact that Western Australia can make, and it is quite within reach with the investments that I can see in this budget.
We are on the verge of a transformative shift in the energy sector and are poised to become a global leader in clean energy innovation. But for that we need to embrace a bold vision and set ambitious goals in deploying innovative technologies to spearhead the energy transition. That is why we are also fast-tracking environmental approvals, because good policy backed by good science must be met with urgency. Although we often speak about climate action in the context of emissions and megawatts, let me bring it back to the land. While studying and serving in agricultural communities, I have seen throughout my career very closely and at firsthand how droughts can hollow out towns, how changing weather patterns disrupt harvests and how water scarcity reshapes entire regions. That is why this budget invests in critical natural resources production, which includes $8.5 million for the Peel–Harvey estuary protection plan, $5 million for the Kalgoorlie–Boulder Water Bank project, $4.2 million to update water plants in the Pilbara and $63 million to prevent and respond to biosecurity threats. That is really important. It is lovely to see a fruit fly-free Western Australia, because that impacts a lot of industries. It impacts our farmers and where we can and cannot export. Huge kudos to the Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development and Minister Jackie Jarvis for leading this and taking a lot of interest in this area. It is not about doing biosecurity the way we have always done it, because things are moving really fast. We are seeing climate change on a daily basis. Things are evolving and so are the variety of insects and pests that are currently in the fields. Biosecurity needs to catch up. We need to be able to deploy all the latest technologies to do things more efficiently, whether it is about money, resources or timing. We saw throughout COVID how we can fast-track innovative technologies and how much that can save us in not only monetary terms, but also in efficiency and the time that is required. We are investing in biosecurity to bring it up to speed so that we will not be behind in those areas. That is why there is a huge allocation to biosecurity.
Through the $350 million softwood plantation expansion fund we are creating carbon sinks, supporting jobs in the regions and backing a more sustainable timber industry. That is important because somehow governments all around the globe have taken a lot of time to realise that climate change is real. Although it has happened and the debate on it finally stopped about a decade ago, it is very hard to move a ship that is going in one direction to another direction without sinking it. Matters of this complexity and depth cannot be solved in one day. I know that everybody in this chamber, whichever side they are on, would agree with that. I will tell members something that I found really frustrating. I heard so many replies from everyone who has had a chance to speak in this house of review. I have reviewed scientific work all my life, and when we reviewed something, we would always give solutions. We would give reasons for why we did not agree with something and say what could be done to improve the work so that we could build on what we had made and make it even better. I am sorry to say, but I did not hear many solutions, despite the level of intellect and wisdom in this room. I would love to challenge us all to use our time in debate to come up with solutions rather than speak only about the problems.
Hon Nick Goiran interjected.
Hon Dr Parwinder Kaur: This budget also supports the health of our oceans and ecosystems.
Hon Nick Goiran interjected.
Hon Dr Parwinder Kaur: Member, I am not taking interjections at this moment.
The budget provides $5 million for the Healthy Oceans Fund, backing seagrass restoration and marine research. That work is absolutely amazing and is happening at our universities here in Western Australia. I would like to give a shout-out to the Seeds for Snapper project. Professor Gary Kendrick has been leading that for several years and the project has made a significant improvement in the health of our oceans. We are providing $17 million to expand the Treebate and urban canopy programs, creating cooler and greening suburbs, and $20 million to expand the Aboriginal ranger program to support cultural land and sea management. It is an absolute requirement that we do not talk about the First Nations knowledge separately; it is at the heart of the things that we do.
I would like to share a small story with members regarding the richness of Aboriginal and First Nations knowledge. Five years back, I was doing the world's first DNA map for quokkas—specifically, from the point of view of why we have a problem with the survival of our mainland quokkas versus the Rottnest quokkas. I spent a day with Ranger Dave on Rottnest Island, just trying to understand the very foundation of why the quokka populations are declining and what the biggest threat is. When I went to Rottnest Island, the first thing in my mind was that we are the biggest enemies of the quokkas. It is humans—everything to do with humans. But I learnt from Ranger Dave that day that it is not so much humans as ravens; they are the biggest threat to the quokkas on Rottnest Island, and have also been one of the key factors on the mainland. That is on top of some of the diseases they face on the mainland that they do not face on Rottnest Island. Bacteria have evolved in quokkas on Rottnest Island, whereas the mainland species has not had that opportunity.
To cut a long story short, it was really interesting to see Ranger Dave recognising the quokkas. He had names for them and he could even tell me which joey belonged to which mum. That is another problem for quokkas: as soon as they sense a threat, the mothers cannot run fast enough to save themselves, so they drop the joey and run. However, the poor joey cannot go into any other mum's pouch. That was a huge problem that I saw as another threat to the quokkas—that the joeys would not survive. When I went to Ranger Dave's office, he had six or seven joeys that he was trying to feed with a milk bottle, but it was not working. He told me that he actually recognises them; he takes the joeys back in the evening and he is able to give them back to their mums. That was when I developed an AI face recognition program for quokkas, but I can tell members that AI is not able to do it as well as Ranger Dave can!
Hon Dr Steve Thomas: Every parent feels like that every once in a while!
Hon Dr Parwinder Kaur: That day I learnt how amazing and rich that knowledge is, and why we need to learn more from the traditional owners of this country. That is why I am really excited to see this investment into programs like the Aboriginal ranger program.
There is $750,000 for Plastic Free July, turning community enthusiasm into real environmental outcomes. That is really, really important, because programs like this raise awareness to a level that our kids can connect with, and they can actually meaningfully contribute to programs like this. We need to not just contribute but also raise awareness in ways that will enable our next generation to better connect with the environment. What better way to do that than to invest in those infrastructures that can enable us to enjoy this most beautiful part of the planet and better connect with it. There is an investment of $100 million for essential infrastructure upgrades on Rottnest Island and the revitalisation of the B Shed ferry terminal in Fremantle, to improve access to one of WA's most loved destinations. There is $21 million to enhance boating infrastructure, campgrounds, trails and maritime facilities, building on last year's $165 million outdoor adventure packages.
Since 2017, the Cook Labor government has created over 6.5 million hectares of new national parks, marine parks and nature reserves—a legacy of conservation for generations to come. The work that has been achieved on Dirk Hartog Island is absolutely phenomenal. I have had the opportunity to work with the native marsupials there and to help the Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions develop a better plan of action when it comes to their survival on that island. Through the Containers for Change program, more than three billion containers have been diverted from landfill since 2020. We are now preparing to expand the scheme to wine and spirit bottles, because it is Australia and because progress never stops. This is not just climate action; it is regional resilience, it is economic renewal, and it is a vision for a greener, fairer, more prosperous Western Australia, and this budget is a step forward towards building it.
It is always a good idea to have a strong economic base, because we can only evolve and manage situations when problems come our way, like COVID did, if we have some resources and money saved for that rainy day. Western Australia's economic diversification and building of a resilient future is a step forward that I welcome with open arms. We are very lucky to have an economy that has always drawn strength from its natural resources, but we know that the future demands more than digging and shipping.
The next chapter of WA's story must be about building innovation and manufacturing a more resilient, future-focused economy. That is why we are going to need the best and the brightest in the world to come and help us on this journey. That is also why I request, when we talk about immigration issues, that we pay a little more attention to that, because we are not creating a very good perception about Western Australia welcoming the best and brightest to come and help us on this journey. I am glad to see that this budget recognises that truth, and rises to meet it. At the heart of this plan is a bold, visionary commitment to double the Strategic Industries Fund to $1 billion. For me, that is a game-changer, because it has the ambition to deliver on the vision for Made in WA. That may not look very fancy or appealing at the moment, because it is a lot of wires and poles and that kind of infrastructure; but this is something we absolutely are going to require. If we want people to settle in Collie and work there, we are going to have to make it possible for them to be able to access technology, in the same way we can access it right here, in the urban areas.
The $1 billion Strategic Industries Fund will unlock critical infrastructure across our state's most important industrial zones, from the Pilbara to the Mid West, from the Goldfields to the South West, and to the Western Trade Coast. These areas will become the launchpads for the clean energy we have just talked about, advanced manufacturing, defence industries and downstream processing. These are the industries that will define the next generation of Western Australian jobs. This investment will make us globally competitive and will ensure that WA is not just a resources economy, but a smart, sustainable and sovereign one. The fund is already delivering support for new developments in Bunbury, Kwinana and other regions, with investments in road upgrades and enabling infrastructures to attract innovative businesses. There is also the establishment of the Advanced Manufacturing and Technology Hub in Picton, which will house one of Western Power's key poles and wires manufacturing facilities, decentralising opportunity and bringing high-skilled jobs to regional Western Australia.
This is not just a theory; it is proven practice, and I have a number of examples from around the world that I would like to share with members, in which governments are leveraging special economic zones, free economic zones and targeted industrial precincts to drive transformative economic growth. These zones, underpinned by supportive infrastructure incentives and coordinated policy, are attracting billions in foreign direct investments, creating skilled jobs and attracting the best and brightest in the world to their regions to help them build their economies, fostering innovation and enhancing national economic resilience.
Debate interrupted, pursuant to standing orders.
(Continued at a later stage of the sitting.)
