Page 1645 - Week 08 - Thursday, 28 September 1989

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


"unallocated borrowings" - that is, it was unused borrowing potential; it was never intended to be borrowed, according to the Government. A further $4.1m of extra borrowing is not required this year because a similar amount has been carried forward from 1988-89. It was money the ACT did not need to borrow last year so it has carried it forward to this year. Budget paper No. 7 at page 20 clearly sets out that new ACT semigovernment borrowings for 1988-89 were $25m whilst $28.7m is proposed for 1989-90. Even though this $10.8m is some $10.8m below the level which the Commonwealth will allow the ACT Government to borrow, it is, in fact, an increase of 14.8 per cent on last year's borrowings. For the Treasurer to claim that her Government has decided to reduce its borrowings by $10.8m is clearly misleading.

Some of the Treasurer's figures are decidedly rubbery. Another interesting set of figures to come out of the budget appear in budget paper No. 2 at page 51 under the heading of "Summary of Capital Expenditure". The figure relates to a provision of $76m for payment to the Commonwealth for serviced land, a figure which the ACT Government claims to be continuing to negotiate. This figure was $50m in April of this year: it became $67.7m in the Government's initial budget statement in July; and now it appears as $76m in the budget. At the current rate of growth, Mr Speaker, the figure will hit $100m in about February 1990.

Another interesting figure is the amount provided in the budget for debt servicing from the consolidated fund. In June this year the forward estimate for 1989-90 was $82.6m. The figure is now shown in budget paper No. 4, page 25, as $91.1m, an increase of almost 10 per cent in less than 10 weeks. Is this also going to continue to grow like the previous figure that I talked about?

Mr Duby raised the question a minute ago of the amount of money retained by the Commonwealth in a trust fund, reduced from $22.7m to $21.3m. It is a good question. When does $22.7m cease being $22.7m? According to the Treasurer, it has something to do with CPI. Is this figure going to continue to shrink while all our other figures continue to increase?

A hint about this Government's intentions concerning individual taxpayers and householders was recently given by the Treasurer's deputy, Mr Whalan, who was reported in an article in the Canberra Times on 14 September as saying that Labor's promise made earlier this year - that is, that rates and taxes for individuals would not increase for this year at least - quite obviously did not necessarily apply to next year. Since the Government has not honoured its election promises on this point in this first budget, one can question whether it can be trusted in the next one in dealing with this issue.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .