Page 3044 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 September 1994

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


We know that already. We know that companies will not operate in a city where they are not sure what the Government is going to do and how they are going to have their investment dollar affected by totally arbitrary - to use the Minister's own words - political decisions.

The Minister has said and said again that he does not care that small business operators have had to foot the bill; that he does not care that the people who have invested in the ACT - and we know this - are predominantly ACT residents.

Mr De Domenico: Local investors; that is right.

MRS CARNELL: They are local investors; they bought sites in the ACT on the rules that existed at the time - rules actually put in place by this Government. They put in the rules. They were very happy to take the dollars for the sites and then introduce a policy which cuts the guts out of that investment. Somehow, Mr Connolly and Ms Follett believe that these investors will say, "Oh, dear, what a pity; but it will not stop us investing in the future". That is wrong.

The Industry Commission says that it is wrong and they are saying that it is wrong as well. Also, the Government is expecting other small businesses in Canberra - and this report speaks about that as well; what will be the impact, the flow-on effect, to smaller shopping centres, to neighbourhood centres, of this sort of approach - to say, "Oh, dear, what a pity! The Government has sent our service station broke, but we think that is all right because petrol is cheaper". That means that most people, even business people, possibly are saving $2.40 a week if they use 80 litres. That is a lot of petrol to use, but we assume that small businesses do use a lot. If you believe for one moment that $2.40 a week is worth sending potentially 20 small businesses broke, dramatically undercutting the bottom line of all of the rest of them and upsetting investment in this city, then, really, your priorities are all wrong. That is what the report says.

MRS GRASSBY (4.51): Mr Deputy Speaker, I am quite happy with my comments in the dissenting report on petrol supply arrangements. I would like to add a few comments. I find incredible some of the things that Mrs Carnell would like to see. Mrs Carnell would like the Government to take $9m from the ratepayers of this city and give it to the oil companies. I think the oil companies are rich enough without giving them $9m. I find it absolutely incredible that she would want to do this. At the hearing we all learnt exactly what the oil companies were up to. Anybody who sat in on that public hearing would understand, as I said at the hearing, that if Ned Kelly was alive his mother would not let him play with these people, the way they carried on.

As for the comment that Mr Kaine made about my not knowing anything about business, let me tell you: If Mrs Carnell abolishes the petrol levy, if she gives the $9m back to the ratepayers, and if she then goes on to do all these things, she will virtually become the Demtel of politics, because, as they say in the Demtel ad, "Wait; there is more". She will also throw in a hospital in Tuggeranong and a decompression chamber in Woden. "No, no, wait; there is more". A medivac-cum-bushfire helicopter. "No, no; there is more". A long stay convalescent unit and a cardio-thoracic unit. "No, no, that is not enough; there is more". She will also throw in a paediatric ward and a hospice at Calvary.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .