Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 13 Hansard (2 December) . . Page.. 4269 ..
MRS CARNELL (continuing):
Mr Speaker, it gets worse. Not only was there no commitment from the Labor Party to leave the money in ACTEW; but the working capital manifesto actually uses the ACTEW money to fund the whole bloody thing. Does Mr Berry realise why there is an increase in the amount of cash in the current assets over a couple of years, the cash that he said many times in the document was reserves? It goes up for a couple of years because of the ACTEW money. Not only has Mr Berry not understood that you cannot use cash-in-bank twice, that the money is already committed; but he also did not understand that the $100m from ACTEW was in there for two years - this year and next year. Mr Berry has just funded his whole election approach not only on money that has already been allocated, but on money that supposedly has been ripped out of ACTEW - something which, according to Mr Quinlan, Mr Berry and Mr Whitecross, simply should never have happened. Well, why in heaven's name, Mr Speaker, did they go and fund their election commitments out of something that they do not agree with?
Mr Berry: You said the money was not there, but all of a sudden it is.
MRS CARNELL: It is not there.
MR MOORE: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Chief Minister. Chief Minister, you are responsible for the formulation of Government policy on the allowance and distribution of poker machines in our community. In doing so, the community would expect that you would serve the public interest, and uphold policies, laws and things such as the national competition policy. Given that responsibility, what obligations have you entered into which bind you or your Government to interest groups and lobbies, especially the Licensed Clubs Association of the ACT and its members, in regard to the making of policy on poker machines? Why, and in whose interests, have you entered into such obligations? How can you explain the very different approach you have taken to the Licensed Clubs Association compared to the treatment of, say, the Australian Hotels Association and its members?
MRS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, in regard to the next election, there are no undertakings in place with regard to either the AHA or the Licensed Clubs Association. It is on the record that the ACT Government made a commitment to the Licensed Clubs Association that we would not extend poker machines to other venues in the life of this parliament. The reason that that was done, Mr Speaker, was - - -
Mr Berry: What about tax levels? Did you make any promise about tax levels?
MR SPEAKER: Would you be quiet, Mr Berry. I have already reminded you of the two days' suspension.
MRS CARNELL: Mr Speaker, with regard to the number of poker machines, the Liberal Party determined before the last election that the community benefit that the clubs gave back to the people of Canberra was worth maintaining the monopoly for at least another term. Certainly, this is an issue that does need to be addressed from time to time, but the licensed clubs do put a lot of money back into the Canberra community.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .