Page 155 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 15 February 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
territory’s finances and despite all the huffing and puffing and claims by the Chief Minister that all is wonderful, the fact of the matter is that the territory cannot afford these ideas. The territory cannot afford ministerial memorials and indulgent expenditure.
Mr Corbell: It can’t afford light rail either.
MR MULCAHY: Mr Corbell says, “It cannot afford light rail.” I do not recall being an advocate of the light rail network, but I certainly know that Mr Corbell, amongst his grand spending plan, has such ambitions. We see him saying here, and when he appeared before estimates earlier in the year saying, that the government has put together in its policy work the development of busways as the first stage towards an ultimate light rail network for Canberra. He goes on and on about the role of busways. You have to give him 11 out of 10; he is very determined.
You have got the Treasurer, who of course is now departing and is leaving the scene after he delivered that bombshell of mid-term financial figures yesterday showing that we are heading towards an abyss, saying on 2CC:
Let us get one thing straight on a busway. It is very far-sighted on the part of the government to do planning to ensure that in the future, there is a corridor for a busway or light rail to run on. So that even if we do not build it now, we have ensured the route for a busway or light rail will not be built over, and the whole thing will not become impossible. However, the decision to actually build it is a secondary decision.
Of course what he is saying there—and I recall hearing it in another interview which I do not have the transcript for; and I know his sensitivity at being quoted by me—is something to the effect that it was unlikely this would be constructed within the current term. And of course he is correct. Capital works, first of all, should only be undertaken if there is a very demonstrated business case. That does not necessarily mean all public capital investments have to run at a profit but, if they do not, there must be a well-explained public benefit. The government is already delaying capital works.
It was extraordinary today to hear the Chief Minister talk about the unencumbered cash for this year. He said, “We are doing all right; we have got this money here.” I do not think he reads these documents in great depth. If you read page 6 of the Mid year review, it is all there, even for those who are not economic geniuses, to see. It says:
The Territory’s unencumbered cash balance … is now forecast to be $234.9m at 30 June 2006, an increase of $80.6m from the 2005-06 Budget estimate of $153.4m.
You might assume we have won the lottery or those people whom this government are so fond of up on the hill have thrown some more money our way. But, no, that is not really the case. What it says, however, is:
… this movement mainly relates to delays in capital works expenditure to the forward years, rather than an underlying improvement in cash flows.
Mr Corbell: On a point of order: I do not see anywhere in Mr Seselja’s motion, Madam Temporary Deputy Speaker, issues to do with the government’s cash position, as it
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .