Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 6 Hansard (15 May) . . Page.. 1624..
MRS DUNNE (continuing):
We should be encouraging architects. We should be mandating that architects put these things in. We know that they create energy efficiency and that the embedded energy in the production of a solar hot water system, taken over the life of the system, means that it is far more efficient than any alternative means. You have to look at the big picture, not just at tomorrow's budget.
What I am most concerned about is that Mr Wood is saying, "I am happy about it in principle, but I want to wash my hands of the needs of housing tenants." I am also concerned about the blase approach of the party of social justice. I was encouraged to join a party of social justice. Look at them here.
As far as the solar hot water scheme goes, it is an admirable scheme. My point is that it does not go far enough, it is visionless and it does not lead by example. It says that you can spend money but the ACT government are not prepared to put their hand into their pocket in the same way as they want you to.
Mr Corbell said, "We want to assist those who cannot afford to buy a hot water system." That is fair enough, but in the same breath he is also saying that he could not care less about the people who cannot afford to build a house or own a house on which they could put a solar hot water system. He said it was not viable. This is a Labor government abandoning the people most in need. They agree with it in principle, but it is not viable. They do not want to go ahead with it.
This is a sad day for the ACT and a sad day for a party that used to be a social justice party but has now abandoned government renters.
Motion, as amended, agreed to.
Sitting suspended from 12.32 to 2.30 pm.
Questions without notice
Commission of audit
MR HUMPHRIES: My question is to the Treasurer, Mr Quinlan. Mr Quinlan, in its editorial on 10 May, the Canberra Times said:
It is in this transitional context and the context of setting the measuring dogs out in the middle of a fiscal year that Labor's commission of audit must be read. The reading was a misreading. The commission took a snapshot of the cash position on returns on investment as at October 31. That should not have been done in the context of an accrual system. If it had not been done, the return would have been substantially high-but perhaps not as high as the Liberal's suggest.
The truth probably lies somewhere between Labor's estimate of a deficit of $5 million and the Liberal's estimate of a surplus of $58 million. Suffice to say that the Liberals left Labor with an operating surplus. After six years of government, the Liberals turned the finances of the territory around from chronic deficits to projected surpluses to reduce outstanding debt.