Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 4 Hansard (2 April) . . Page.. 1253..
MR QUINLAN (continuing):
I can confidently state that this territory could stand a $30 or $40 million deficit every year, have a capital budget of about $100 million a year and still be absolutely solvent and be virtually staying up to a standard mark, but it is just the way we account for every last matter.
So there are a number of pressures on the budget. As I said, I appreciate the assistance we have received from the Leader of the Opposition in clearly pointing up the external pressures that apply, pressures about which this government may take action but nevertheless cannot necessarily influence.
I notice that, in a couple of questions today we were talking about it being all financial mismanagement-oversimplistic. I hope the media are objective, as they have been, and recognise that the simplistic claims of the opposition are really ill-founded and that there are genuine external pressures on the budget of today.
Mr Stanhope: Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the notice paper.
Loss of noise credit allocation
MR STANHOPE: On 13 March, Mr Stefaniak asked:
... is it true that the Fairbairn Park Control Council will lose several of the very limited noise credits allocated for local motor sport owing to the use, by the Rally of Canberra, of the hill climb track there between 25 and 27 April?
I have been advised that, as a special stage of the Subaru Rally of Canberra, CTEC is proposing to use the motorcycle flat track on 25 and 26 April 2003, in agreement with Fairbairn Park Control Council. Noise tests conducted by CTEC's acoustic consultant at the motorcycle flat track indicate that the rally is unlikely to require event credits, as the noise was below the limit of 45 dBA when measured at the Ridgeway compliance location. I present the following paper:
Fairbairn Park Control Council-Answer to question without notice asked of the Chief Minister by Mr Stefaniak and taken on notice on 13 March 2003.
Community facilities needs assessment
MR WOOD: Mr Speaker, yesterday Ms Dundas asked me a question without notice regarding the progress of the community facilities needs assessment. She asked a supplementary question about whether or not the needs assessment is looking at the requirement for public liability insurance.
As the question was directed to me specifically, as minister for community services, I understood it to refer to the assessment of the condition of the community facilities managed by my department, and I responded accordingly. There is a large number of those facilities.
In respect of that, as I indicated, a building condition assessment was undertaken of those buildings in 2002, and I believe that has been completed. However, the community needs assessment to which I believe Ms Dundas refers is a broader needs assessment across all