Cynics often complain that government is much the same whichever party wins office, but this state election campaign has thrown up stark differences between the two major parties.
Cynics often complain that government is much the same whichever party wins office, but this state election campaign has thrown up stark differences between the two major parties.
Labor Premier Geoff Gallop has painted himself as the responsible, steady-as-she-goes leader with an experienced team of ministers behind him.
In contrast, Coalition leader Colin Barnett has put forward bold ideas for change but in the process left himself open to the charge of being “reckless and irresponsible”, to borrow a phrase from Dr Gallop.
The contrast was highlighted by two statements issued this week.
Mr Barnett pledged his commitment to the Kimberley water canal – “I am going to stand up for WA and I will build this canal” – on the back of economic analysis that found the project would generate 3,868 jobs during construction and contribute $1.2 billion in turnover a year to the state economy.
It all sounds very impressive, but the analysis was only partial, focusing on the gross benefits without assessing the opportunities forgone.
And, fundamentally, Mr Barnett did nothing to address the widespread concern about committing to the water canal despite uncertainty over the cost.
Project proponent Tenix estimates it will cost $2 billion, and the Government has publicised several competing estimates, all of which lack credibility, but the fact remains the cost is not known.
As Chamber of Commerce and Industry chief executive John Langoulant said earlier this month: “It would be rash of any government to commit to such a project before the practical issues and the financial feasibility have been properly assessed”.
Dr Gallop’s big announcement this week was a Treasury analysis which found the Government’s election promises, worth $1.1 billion over four years, were affordable.
Treasury found the Government would be able to maintain a budget surplus, but it would be just more than $100 million a year, meaning the Government would have virtually no margin for error, and certainly no room for tax cuts.
Like the Government’s fiscal record over the past four years, when big tax increases were used to offset higher spending, the fiscal outlook is not inspiring but it should enable WA to keep its AAA credit rating.
The Government issued the Treasury costings to try and throw the spotlight onto Mr Barnett, who is relying on some aggressive savings targets to offset the impact of his spending and tax cut promises.
The single largest saving Mr Barnett has identified is a proposal to cut 3 per cent, or $180 million a year, from government purchasing costs by reversing the Gallop Government’s centralised procurement model.
Mr Barnett claims he can achieve a win-win, cutting government costs and boosting local businesses by decentralising procurement.
It would be a remarkable feat if he could pull it off, but his claim defies commercial logic and flies in the face of best practice in the private sector.
Mr Barnett is on much stronger ground on the issue of industrial relations.
This is a black mark against the Gallop government, which has moved the state back to a more regulated and inflexible wage setting system and presided over a worrying increase in industrial disputes.
Mr Barnett has pledged to reverse the Government’s reforms and bring WA into line with the rest of the country, changes that will be welcomed throughout the business community.
While the shortage of skilled labour has been raised by most business groups as one of the state’s key issues it has not featured strongly in the election campaign.
Both sides have committed funds for extra training, including upskilling programs and ‘rapid response’ training, and have also sought to bring more flexibility to the apprentice system, but neither side has given the issue the attention it needs.
Energy reform is another key issue for WA business but after all of the intensive debate over the past four years, this issue has been reduced to point scoring over short-term power cuts.
In many respects, that sums election campaigns – a lot of noise, but little clarity.
