Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1993 Week 08 Hansard (Wednesday, 18 August 1993) . . Page.. 2465 ..
MRS GRASSBY: Madam Speaker, I seek leave under standing order 46 to make a personal explanation in order to clarify an article which appeared in today's Canberra Times.
MADAM SPEAKER: Proceed, Mrs Grassby.
MRS GRASSBY: I wish to clarify what was said in my press release and what was reported in the newspaper. In my press release I said that, as was indicated in the chamber yesterday, over half of the subordinate legislation coming forward was defective; that is, legislation made under the Acts of this Assembly was defective and deficient, not the Acts themselves. At no stage have I indicated that half, or any level near this, of the Bills coming into this chamber or passed by this chamber are defective. I do, however, thank the journalist concerned for making ACT government officers more acutely aware of the problem and of what the committee is doing to redress the deficiencies and defects in subordinate legislation, such as the seminar planned for late October and the guidelines for the preparation of instruments.
MR BERRY (Deputy Chief Minister): Madam Speaker, for the information of members, I present, pursuant to the Audit Act 1989, the ACT Fleet Trust Account financial statements, including the Auditor-General's report, for 1991-92; and the ACT Institute of Technical and Further Education and ACTAID Pty Ltd financial statements, including the Auditor-General's report, for the year ended 31 December 1992.
FEDERAL BUDGET - A.C.T. CONSEQUENCES
Discussion of Matter of Public Importance
MADAM SPEAKER: I have received a letter from Mr Kaine proposing that a matter of public importance be submitted to the Assembly for discussion, namely:
The consequences for the ACT of the Federal budget.
Mr Lamont: Thank you for writing Mrs Carnell's question today, Mr Kaine.
MR KAINE (3.18): I did not write any questions for Mrs Carnell. Madam Speaker, the Chief Minister during question time made a couple of references to being positive about the budget, that we should not look at the negative side of it. In opening my remarks, I would like to refer to a couple of the newspapers to which we have easy access: First of all, the Canberra Times headline, "Treasurer's Backhander"; the Australian front page, "Labor's $3.6bn tax crunch"; over further in the Australian, "Indirect tax slug to raise $3.2bn"; further over again, "Budget axe falls on postgraduates"; over yet again, "Strategy sparks inflation fear".