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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 7 Hansard (19 June) . . Page.. 2079 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

health of our society, but I cannot see in this budget any evidence that the government exercises any discrimination in the kind of support or the particular qualities of business it supports, other than that it appears to have the interests of some people close to its heart, rather than those of the community or even the business community as a whole.

The ongoing investment of many millions of dollars in the V8 supercar race is a case in point. The argument appears to be that the presence of such a race creates significant custom for accommodation and entertainment businesses in Canberra. It is direct government support to private business. That, in itself, is not justification for an expenditure of $23 million over five years. It is particularly questionable when you see that every request for additional funds is immediately met. If one belonged to a community organisation or an arts or cultural group, one would be very delighted to be shown the same flexibility and understanding.

An equivalent expenditure on the Canberra National Multicultural Festival, or any other arts or cultural event, could make an extraordinary impact on Canberra's and Australia's cultural landscape and lead to increased business to an equal or greater extent over time. It could reshape the world's view of Canberra and, indeed, how we work together as a community and how we see ourselves. Unfortunately, this budget shows no vision for the kind of Canberra we might be trying to build. It is an illustration of this government's undeniable commitment to supporting events and activities that can attract immediate support from business colleagues. The general increase in promotional funding for CTEC will go on promoting more overnight packages. The benefit will flow directly to accommodation and related services and to advertising agencies. The additional funds for CTEC for event development are really for that organisation to buy in more events. It has nothing to do with what can be created here in Canberra, or to what might have some more complex value to our society.

The government's impulsive investment in business at the Canberra Airport highlights again that it sees its primary responsibility as lying not in meeting the needs of Canberra people, despite its plethora of small programs and initiatives, but in embracing superficially attractive business ideas. With Impulse Airlines now a thing of the past, all those extra jobs and all those extra cheap air flights are fading dreams. Through the Estimates Committee we learned that the ACT government supports the development of the Brindabella Business Park, despite the fact that it will have a massive impact on the commercial property market in the city and the town centres and that it will undermine employment in areas such as Gungahlin which, in turn, adds to the problem of transport in this city.

We have a government that is overexcited about the idea of new technology and is encouraging the development of business parks, to the extent that an ACT government community facility has been handed over to a private training business to sublet to its own advantage. If we really were in an expanding, dynamic market, there just might be a case for such an approach. In point of fact, however, the Fern Hill Technology Park has been so successful with that approach that it is now translating some of its business space to residential purposes.

This government is not a government that is concerned with supporting ethical or purposeful investment. It is committed to indiscriminate and random business support. The Prime news story is a good illustration. I understand the importance of keeping

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