Page 4542 - Week 15 - Thursday, 22 November 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
it; and that these circumstances are, in fact, responses to a complex series of forces at work in our hospital system which cannot be laid entirely at the door of any government.
The $12m blow-out Mr Berry continues to refer to is untrue. It is false, false, false - and people should be reminded of how false that assertion is. Mr Berry ought to prove that there is any blow-out in the hospital budget, and point out what figure he relies upon to reach that conclusion.
Of course, we all know that the figure he is looking at is the adjustment for inflation - $166m over $154m in the June 1989 values. What a false, hypocritical kind of statement to make! It is typical of the contributions Mr Berry has made in this area up to date. The fact is, Mr Speaker, that if people are relying on Mr Berry for information in this area they really are joining in the ship of fools.
Proposed expenditure agreed to.
Proposed expenditure - Division 320 - Public and Community Health Services, $49,583,500 - agreed to.
Advance to the Minister Administering the Audit Act 1989
Proposed expenditure - Division 330 - Treasurer's Advance, $13,840,000
MR MOORE (5.22): I am delighted to have the opportunity to speak to this particular item. It is probably a quite unusual thing, I imagine, to speak to the Treasurer's Advance, but I think it illustrates quite clearly exactly where this Government is. This Government of restraint has, of course, realised that they are probably going to have to blow out somewhat, so what we see is an increase of, by a quick calculation, approximately 20 per cent over last year. It is the same sort of increase that we see coming from this Government across a whole range of things, and I think it aptly illustrates the lack of restraint that is shown by the Treasurer and Chief Minister, and also the lack of restraint that is shown across the portfolio areas.
With regard to last year's Appropriation Bill, in fact the Supply Bill provided $10m and the appropriation was for $10m, so we have almost another $4m involved across the system. It seems to me that what we have here is a Treasurer who is aware that he is going to need a 20 per cent increase because he is going to have an extra 20 per cent blow-out on his own budget, and he certainly feels that it is not appropriate for him to retain a sensible increase on the Treasurer's Advance by holding it to a real terms increase. Instead, the lack of restraint shown in this area is just the same as the lack of restraint that we have seen across almost all areas of the budget.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .