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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 3 Hansard (8 April) . . Page.. 701 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

a direct consequence of Commonwealth Government fiscal policies, the required contribution for the ACT of $10.8m in 1997-98 was cut in half. The payment of the remaining $5.4m has been deferred until 1998-99. Whether or not these payments will be required will be considered in light of the Commonwealth's fiscal position at next year's Premiers Conference and, of course, the ACT's fiscal position.

Thirdly, prior to the conference, I was also successful in convincing the Commonwealth to review their decision to charge the ACT $27.6m for a longstanding claim relating to ACT forests. This issue has been outstanding since the time of self-government. The ACT has debated this issue with the Commonwealth over the last seven years; in fact, every year over the last seven years. Last year the Commonwealth requested that the ACT pay approximately $6.7m per annum for four years. After significant negotiation and other work as well, the Commonwealth has finally agreed that the ACT does not owe them anything for these assets. The matter is now settled; the forests now belong to the ACT.

Fourthly, after being nominated by State and Territory leaders at the States and Territories meeting, which I hosted prior to the Premiers Conference, to lead the debate on Commonwealth funding for housing, I am happy to announce that the Federal Government is committed to the restoration of full-year CSHA funding for 1997-98, unless a Commonwealth-State Housing Agreement is negotiated by 31 December 1997. Indeed, if all jurisdictions have not signed a new agreement by Christmas, a further full year's funding should be provided for 1998-99. This will ensure that housing for the needy is not cut and will allow for the continuation of the public and community housing program in the ACT.

All in all, these wins have reduced the financial burden on the ACT by some $26.1m in 1997-98 and by $53.7m in total when the forestry cuts are taken into account. As an overall result, total Commonwealth funding to the ACT in 1997-98, after allowing for increases in transitional funding partially offset by reductions in SPPs, will be $9.4m less than this year - a reduction of 3.5 per cent in real terms. All States and Territories went to the Premiers Conference unsure of the cuts the Commonwealth had planned for specific purpose payments. Indeed, SPP allocations turned out to be the major point of contention.

As a consequence, the States and Territories sought urgent clarification of SPPs and other payments, to enable all jurisdictions to complete their budget processes with some certainty. I, along with other Premiers and Chief Ministers, had expected the Commonwealth to abide by their foreshadowed SPP reductions outlined at the 1996 Premiers Conference, subsequently in the 1996-97 budget, and again in a letter sent to all Premiers and Chief Ministers in August last year. The reductions totalled $260.3m in 1997-98, equivalent to a reduction in funding of 1.4 per cent. However, the offer document suggested additional reductions of up to 1.3 per cent, equivalent to $236.5m. This further imposition was unacceptable to all State and Territory heads. As a result, the conference wound up without a satisfactory resolution.

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