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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 5 Hansard (3 May) . . Page.. 1449 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

management of parks and reserves, and implementation of endangered ecosystems and species action plans.

In short, sustainability, environmental management and planning have been further undermined. They are key policy areas for the future of Canberra, and this government chooses to ignore them.

Mr Speaker, this government says it has listened to the community. Mr Humphries says his government has heard the outcry over the Floriade fee and responded. The Floriade fee is gone, with great embarrassment to the government. But the fence stays. Either the government is hard of hearing or it hears with only one ear in an election year. It must be hard of hearing, because it has taken so many years to catch the outcry over the fee. And it still does not get the point about the fence. This is not genuine consultation, and Canberrans will understand that. This is just desperation.

Mr Speaker, I spoke earlier about the economic assumptions that underlie this budget-the optimistic growth forecasts that Mr Humphries so vigorously defends against what we regard as the better judgment of the Melbourne Institute, the International Monetary Fund and Access Economics. The fact remains that even the Treasurer concedes they are optimistic. Yet the budget relies on them.

If gross state product is slower than forecast, ACT revenue collections will reduce. It is as simple as that. Mr Humphries says we will achieve 4.6 per cent growth in 2001-02. Access Economics says it will be closer to 2.7 per cent. That is a discrepancy causes some concern. It suggests this budget is on something of a knife edge. But don't worry. Mr Humphries has a fallback plan if the forecasts prove unachievable. He will simply put his expenditure initiative on the backburner, he told the Business Council budget breakfast yesterday. He will simply reallocate.

This is an election year budget. It is a budget on which Mr Humphries asks electors to judge him and his party. He has an obligation to come clean with the electorate before the election on October 20. The Auditor-General dealt with this issue in his report No 1 of 2001. As the Auditor points out, the Financial Management Act requires financial statements certified by the Treasurer and relevant chief executive to be provided to the Auditor by the end of October. The current legislative timetable means that audited financial statements will not be publicly available until December this year. Yet as the Auditor points out:

The timetable operative now was set when Assembly elections were held every third February. With the move to an October electoral cycle, the opportunity is there for a government to go to an election on a fundamental promise. It is not good enough, particularly in a year when the budget is concocted on questionable assumptions. Mr Humphries should commit to releasing audited statements before the election, as his federal colleagues have committed to in their charter for budget honesty. If he will not do it , then Labor will, even if it means that there have to be legislative changes.

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