Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2005 Week 03 Hansard (Tuesday, 8 March 2005) . . Page.. 711 ..
Humphries—we have quoted these figures in this chamber a number of times—when they had a five per cent wage increase over three years when the CPI increased over the same time by 10.9 per cent. So that was an actual wage cut for those workers. I can see that that is where the opposition are heading. So beware, everyone, if this mob ever gets in, because that is what will happen to the public sector again—one per cent per annum wages increases to public sector workers.
Actually, it is a change in position from the federal opposition, because we had that left-wing shadow minister, Mr Pratt, who was constantly harping on every time there was a wage dispute. He was saying, “Oh, just pay it. Pay the firefighters.” He criticised me for not paying the teachers what he believed they should get paid. I miss Mr Pratt in his role as shadow industrial relations minister, because he was a little left wing compared with the other members over there; he is a little bit of a socialist; he wanted to see all the money shared around. We can see where things are heading under Mr Mulcahy. But I do think it is important that the federal government’s contribution to wage increases—the only ones used in that August data—is correctly attributed where it belongs.
MR STANHOPE: Mr Speaker, I ask that further questions be placed on the notice paper.
MR MULCAHY (Molonglo): Mr Speaker, I wish to make a personal explanation under standing order 46.
MR SPEAKER: Proceed, Mr Mulcahy.
MR MULCAHY: During question time, the Acting Treasurer said, I believe, “Mr Mulcahy has made up these statements. I never said that we had the choice of increasing taxes or reducing services.” Mr Speaker, it is not my practice to mislead the Assembly. The basis of my remarks was a direct quote of the Chief Minister on the front page of the Canberra Times on Saturday in which he said, “The range of options is limited, we are faced with either charging more or doing less … [and] this year we will have to make some very hard decisions.” It seems to me that the dispute is between the Chief Minister and the Canberra Times, Mr Speaker—not in relation to remarks I may have made. I want to make it very clear that that is where the material came from.
MR STANHOPE (Ginninderra—Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment and Minister for Arts, Heritage and Indigenous Affairs): I need to make a personal explanation in response to that. I think the record will show that Mr Mulcahy used the word “significant”—not a word I used. We will check the Hansard and I will respond tomorrow. We will check the Hansard with interest to see whether Mr Mulcahy is in the practice of misleading the Assembly.
Papers and statement by minister
MR STANHOPE (Ginninderra—Chief Minister, Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment and Minister for Arts, Heritage and Indigenous Affairs): For the