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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 7 Hansard (2 July) . . Page.. 2202 ..

MS TUCKER: Mr Rugendyke did not know either, Mr Liberal Whip, if you are listening upstairs.

MR SPEAKER: We might have to check on this, Ms Tucker. You begin your comments.

MS TUCKER: My first comment is on outsourcing and job cuts. I am disappointed that the Government chose to ignore the Estimates Committee concerns regarding the market testing of many Urban Services functions and the subsequent staffing cuts in the department as functions are outsourced. The savings expected by the department are based on flimsy evidence and we have no guarantee that the level of service delivery will be maintained. The problems within CityScape Services in relation to the mishandling of weed and pest control activities indicate that expertise is being lost and standards are not being maintained in the move to contracting out of Urban Services functions.

On the environment budget, I am disappointed that the Government does not accept the committee's recommendation that the section in Budget Paper No. 3 on the environment include expenditure details. Otherwise, this section is just propaganda from the Government to attempt to convince us how good it is on environmental issues rather than a clear expression of the Government's expenditure priorities.

The avoidance of giving expenditure detail makes it much easier for the Government to hide the real expenditure on the environment. For example, it was only through questioning during the Estimates Committee hearings that we found out that, while there are some new environmental initiatives in the Environment ACT budget, these have not been equally matched by increased funding, so that Environment ACT has to find $322,000 in savings in its budget this year.

MR SPEAKER: Excuse me, Ms Tucker, the debate is interrupted. I do believe that information has been sent to staff that we are going to dinner from six till 7.30. I suggest that as the staff have been informed accordingly we should suspend the sitting now and resume at 7.30, when you may resume your comments.

Sitting suspended from 6.01 to 7.30 pm.

MS TUCKER: Mr Speaker, I am just trying to recall where I was at the suspension of the sitting. Mr Smyth would probably love to hear me talk again about what is wrong with the environment budget.

Mr Smyth: Go for your life. I would be delighted to hear it all again, Ms Tucker.

MS TUCKER: I think I had covered my concerns about the lack of specific information on expenditure in the environment budget in particular. I was saying how I was concerned that Environment ACT had to find savings of $322,000 in its budget this year and that these savings would come from contracting out the management of the horse holding paddocks, the contracting out of maintenance in the Murrumbidgee corridor and reduced staff numbers. We heard in estimates that this will result in the loss of 16 positions over the next two years.

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