Page 1972 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 15 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Likewise, the biggest porky pie about the budget is the claim that the police budget has been slashed. In fact, the law and order budget faces a $1.76m or 3.3 per cent reduction. To say that, Mr Humphries, when you fully know, as you indeed acknowledge in your question, that the bulk of that is $1.5m by way of a twenty-seventh pay, is dishonour of an extraordinarily breathtaking level. I am disappointed in you, Mr Humphries, because I expected better of you, and I am sure that the public of Canberra did as well.
Madam Speaker, on page 182 of the budget papers of 1993-94, which I referred Mr Humphries to last year, there is a significant range of one-offs for 1993-94 which, it was clearly identified would not occur in the next financial year. Included in those was $50,000 we spent last year on a one-off project - a consultancy for a review of ACT policing - which we are not spending this year. There was also $700,000 for fit-out, which we are not spending this year, and so it goes on. You cannot add the one-off add-ons for one year to another year and compare them; you have to do that offsetting. It is a complex process, but I will give it all to you in writing.
Last night, as you know, although you did not say so in your question, I concluded my explanation of the $1.5m by saying, as always, that I am happy to offer you a briefing on the details of the budget. Mr Dawson's office will be happy to cooperate in finding a mutually convenient time. But, no; you do not accept that it was a $1.5m one-off for the twenty-seventh pay. You do not pursue the offer of a briefing to explain the complexities of all the single year one-offs, which give you a net budget effect. Instead, you put out a grubby little press release saying that I have slashed the budget by $1.76m, when you know full well that the bulk of that is the $1.5m for the twenty-seventh pay. If you are right now, Mr Humphries, you have been wrong for the last 12 months, because you should have been congratulating us last year on a 3 per cent increase in the police budget, because that is what the raw figures show. I was not dishonest enough to try to claim that last year we increased the police budget. Although on paper we did, in practice we did not. This year, on paper and in practice, we did. Mr Humphries, try as you might, you cannot alter that reality. Again, the briefing that I offered you in writing I offer you here again. I hope that you take up the offer.
Telecommunications Towers
MRS GRASSBY: My question is addressed to the Minister for the Environment, Land and Planning. I understand from press reports that the Minister recently met with senior managers from three telecommunications carriers about the proliferation of cellular phone towers around Canberra. Can the Minister advise the Assembly of the outcome of these discussions, as I have had lots of complaints about the towers?
MR WOOD: Madam Speaker, I think I have said in this Assembly before that there is concern among States, Territories and local governments about the proliferation of telecommunications towers. A couple of things have happened. I did see representatives of each of the three current carriers, and I thought we had a satisfactory meeting. We have agreed to draw up a communications plan so that what happens in the future in Canberra is coordinated and is understood; we get to say what we believe should happen, as do the carriers and - as is my wish - the ACT community.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .