Page 216 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 12 May 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
Budgetary Options
MR KAINE: I would like to address a question to the Chief Minister and Treasurer. I refer her to a statement made by the Premier of Victoria yesterday, specifically that the state of the economy meant that she was faced with three options: Raising taxes and charges, increasing debt levels or making massive cuts in services - her words, not mine. Does the Chief Minister agree that the lack of any outcome from the Special Premiers Conference yesterday leaves her with only the same three options? If she does not agree with that, what does she see as any additional option that she might have available to her?
MS FOLLETT: I thank Mr Kaine for the question. At the outset, Madam Speaker, I would like to say that at the conclusion of question time I will be making a statement to the Assembly on the heads of government meeting which took place yesterday, and at that time I will be relating that to the outcomes for the ACT.
But I would like to say also that I think Mr Kaine might be somewhat mistaken if he believes that the heads of government meeting yesterday was to address the funding by the Commonwealth to the States. That meeting was not set up to address those issues. In fact, the heads of government meeting that took place yesterday was designed to address issues that were of mutual concern to governments and of national concern. If it makes it easier for members, I should say that that meeting related to the Special Premiers Conference rounds that have been ongoing since, I think, about December 1990. I repeat that that meeting was not held to address the issue of funding to specific States. That issue remains to be addressed.
Mr Kaine has asked me in particular about a comment attributed to Mrs Kirner about the state of the economy and the way in which State governments might go about addressing that position. Could I say, first of all, that the ACT's economy, and indeed the ACT's budget situation, is in a very much healthier position than that of Victoria - and long may it remain so. So, Mr Kaine, I think, in equating our position to that of Victoria, does us less than a service. It is quite clear to me that even in Mr Kaine's single budget he did not attempt to put us on a level with Victoria - and thank heavens for that.
Nevertheless, Madam Speaker, Mrs Kirner is quoted as saying that she is faced with the options of raising taxes and charges, borrowing more or making massive cutbacks in services. I presume that she is intending to go for a balanced budget in doing that. But I do not really think that comment is of any constructive use to us. It is quite clear that in attempting to balance the budget - I have said it many times - you look at a range of options, including revenue options, reduction in outlays, and, of course, a review of services available to the community and ways in which those services might be delivered most efficiently. So, it is a generalised statement that is difficult to attack without knowing on what basis it was made and, in particular, the exact details of the Victorian situation to which, I presume, it relates.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .