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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 7 Hansard (25 June) . . Page.. 2507 ..

MR TEMPORARY DEPUTY SPEAKER: In the interests of transparency and openness, Treasurer.

MR QUINLAN

: Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, with the greatest of respect, this one ain't a joke.

I do this with trepidation. Some of the work on the table on the front-as the documents are being handed out-was done by my own fair hand, and done this afternoon. What this paper demonstrates and what it shows-we want to do it a little slowly-is the operating result, the movement in figures from the original budget through to the estimate that was included in the following year's budget and the actual.

I direct your eyes to the year 1999-2000, when Mr Smyth was in this parliament, when the estimate included for the budget purposes and budget debate was a $63.7 million deficit. The actual result was an $81.3 million surplus. The difference between the original budget and the final actual was $145 million. This is not atypical. Remember. Get it in perspective, for heaven's sake. We're turning over the best part of $21/2 billion.

Even Mr Smyth recognised, probably pre-emptively, that if the land at Harrison is withdrawn and re-auctioned it will be re-auctioned next year. There was a $38 million bid for it, which should have been paid. We will score a million out of the deposit. There will be a $37 million turnaround from that one event. So it's not unusual. These figures bear out that, year in year out, there is fluctuation.

I just pulled out the Commonwealth grants figures because they come towards the end of the year. I pulled out gross expenditures to show that, in 2000-2001, the last full year of government by the Liberals, between the estimate they put in their budget in May and the end of the year, the final report, there is a difference of $125 million. Mr Smyth was part of that government. Does that mean Mr Smyth can't be trusted? Or does it mean that the best estimates of Treasury are exactly that-they are estimates.

We've had, I think, some acceptance during the last year or so that things are relatively fluid. But every now and then we return to the anal: "You said it was $53 million and it's not $53 million; you can't be trusted."What's been provided from time to time is the best estimates that have been available.

What is clearly demonstrated to you is that this is not an atypical event; that over time there have been such years with fluctuations; that there have been such years with fluctuations from a government that you were involved in, Mr Smyth. I know that it was run mainly by Mrs Carnell and, latterly, by Mr Humphries and that you didn't have a lot of say; nevertheless, you're connected to it. So can you be trusted, Mr Smyth, because of these figures?

I don't care if you move a motion like this; that's fair enough. But the language that you stoop to from time to time is just getting close to the edge. You've demonstrated, as I said yesterday, that you don't know the difference between a budget and an

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