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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 4 Hansard (11 April) . . Page.. 1013 ..

MR SPEAKER: Order, Mr Quinlan! Withdraw the imputation.

MR QUINLAN: What-that he is a fool?


MR QUINLAN: Is that the one?

MR SPEAKER: Yes, that is the one.

MR QUINLAN: I withdraw the imputation that the Leader of the Opposition is a fool.

MR SPEAKER: Thank you, Mr Quinlan.

MR QUINLAN: I am making a general statement. Am I to infer, from the question, that you are asking me to list precisely 10 per cent of the ACT budget that is discretionary? Under how many headings would you like it?

Mr Humphries: In general. Give us a clue.

MR QUINLAN: The question is a nonsense.

MR CORNWELL: Perhaps I could assist the Treasurer with a supplementary question. You mentioned that you had this problem with this money, and you spoke about the edge.

MR SPEAKER: You seem to have a problem coming to your supplementary question.

MR CORNWELL: I stand corrected, Mr Speaker. I ask a supplementary question. Why do you consider seeking to cut 2 per cent efficiencies from key areas like health, education and the police, when you speak about an edge with regard to expenditures in government in your overall budget? Why aren't you cutting them?

Mr Humphries: That is right. Why put cuts in the edge, rather than the other 90 per cent?

MR SPEAKER: Would you like to take further instructions from Mr Humphries on that question?

MR CORNWELL: That was addressed to the Treasurer, was it not, Mr Speaker?

MR QUINLAN: The reason we asked agencies to look for 2 per cent savings in their overall budget was that we believe that this is going to be-it has to be-a tight budget. I have read out some of the reasons why it might have to be a tight budget. If you like, I will read them out in a different order, so there is a little variety in your life. I can add to that.

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