Page 1174 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 24 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Kaine has raised matters such as a $73m deficit, which is nothing compared to what it will be in the future. That perhaps epitomises what Canberra has become in this unconstitutional attempt to increase the sovereign status of the ACT. We should be doing everything we can to reduce the sovereign status of the ACT and to get the Federal Government to accept their responsibility in looking after the State-type functions of the ACT. Most people in Canberra agree with having a local municipal council. Anything that recognises the sovereign status of this unsovereign, very large country town or small city would not be recommended.
MR KAINE (Leader of the Opposition) (12.10), in reply: I do not think anybody, including Mr Stevenson, has put forward any real argument against the adoption of this proposal. I think the predominant feeling is in favour of it, and I will leave it to the good sense of the members of the Assembly to decide.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
MR LAMONT (12.11): I seek to have this matter adjourned, Madam Speaker.
Mr Humphries: Why? You are not ashamed of it, are you?
MR LAMONT: No, Madam Speaker, I am certainly not ashamed of the proposition appearing in my name.
MADAM SPEAKER: Mr Lamont, I refer you to standing order 128. We have to note the time to which you want to adjourn it.
MR LAMONT: I fix a later hour this day for the moving of notice No. 4.
URBAN RENEWAL
MR LAMONT (12.12): Pursuant to standing order 128, I fix the next day of sitting for the presentation of notice No. 5.
Sitting suspended from 12.12 to 2.30 pm
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
Government Service - Salaries and Staffing Reductions
MR KAINE: I would like to address a question to the Chief Minister. I go back to the budget overview statement and the budget speech of approximately a year ago. In the budget speech the Chief Minister said:
Progress has been made towards implementing the crucial decision to make targeted reductions in salary expenditure of $6m in 1991-92 and $10m in a full year.
In the budget overview, at page 49, it is said that, consistent with some statistics that preceded it:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .