This parliamentary question highlights a significant discrepancy between the election commitment costing for the Patient Assisted Travel Scheme (PATS) provided by the Under Treasurer in 2025 and the figures presented in the 2026-27 Budget Papers, raising concerns about transparency and financial management.

⏳ Awaiting AnswerQoN 2437Legislative Assembly
Asked
9 June 2026
Portfolio
Health

QuestionView source ↗

The 2026-27 Budget Papers confirm that in total from 2025-26 to 2029-30 there is an amount of $15.5m shown for the Patient Assisted Travel Scheme increase (page 293), and clearly notes this as an election commitment. However, in the election costing
documentation provided by the Under Treasurer on 12 February, 2025 a
figure of $25.2m is shown for this commitment to 2027-28. Can the Minister advise:
(a) Why is this expenditure at least $15m less as at 2027-28 and $10m less over the forward estimates;
(b) Did the Government give one set of figures to the public and another set to the Under Treasurer;
(c) Did the Under Treasurer simply get his assessment of the commitment wrong;
(d) What has changed between the official Treasury costing in 2025 and the Budget Papers in 2026.; and
(e) Are similar discrepancies also to be found between what was officially costed by Treasury and what is now being shown in the 2026-27 Budget Papers?
Answered on

AnswerView source ↗

This question is awaiting a response from the Minister.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more