Page 3638 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 21 November 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
might have received it on the Wednesday. I received it perhaps on the Tuesday or the Wednesday of last week. I cannot quite recall the day on which I received—
Opposition members interjecting—
MR STANHOPE: I just want to be specific; I do not want to mislead the Assembly. So I received the formal September quarterly report last week and I tabled it last week.
Mr Pratt: What about the advice?
MR STANHOPE: That is what I am going to now. But to the extent that I received advice I of course have weekly meetings with the head of Treasury and I have a weekly regular meeting and many other meetings with the head of Treasury and numerous Treasury officials, and I think it is fair to say that over the last six weeks in discussion and conversation I received advice that the economy was performing strongly, but at that stage without anybody knowing what the final numbers would be. I receive advice on a weekly basis about a full range of issues around the economy—the strength, the level of activity. So to answer the question fully, Mr Pratt, I receive weekly advice from Treasury through the head of Treasury and through numerous other officials. We always have broad-ranging discussions. During those discussions I have received regular—
Mr Pratt: Okay, which week? Let’s try and narrow it down.
MR STANHOPE: Every week—every week since 1 July I have received advice. In the context of when was I advised that the September quarter had returned the numbers that it did, it was probably one day last week. But, for the sake of absolute certainty, if that is not right—if I received it on the Friday a week ago rather than last Monday—I will come back and let you know.
MR SPEAKER: Supplementary question, Mr Pratt?
MR PRATT: A supplementary to you, Treasurer. Why does your department continually fail to predict taxation revenue as accurately as organisations such as the Property Council?
MR STANHOPE: If you are referring to the evidence by the Property Council—was it to estimates?—then it was not evident at all. It refers specifically to the—I will have to get this, because it is a matter of such significant moment, but from memory I believe that the evidence goes specifically to QE II when QE II is in the budget. It goes specifically to section 63, I believe—I will have to check this—when section 63, because it is an auction, will not actually assist the bottom line in the same way as, for instance, QE II does. And I am sure that it referred specifically to one other proposed—I cannot quite recall, but I will go to that.
So the evidence or the position put by the Property Council was seriously flawed. It was simply based on a misunderstanding—a lack of appreciation of what was in the budget and what was not and of what could be counted towards the bottom line and
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .