Page 2221 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 28 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Humphries wanted to make some tough decisions, he was stopped by the Labor Party. The Carnell government was stopped by the Labor Party. Mr Stanhope constantly laments that he is the only one with the courage to make the tough decisions. This is his self-fulfilling, self-delusional view of the world that he goes on with constantly to justify his ineptitude at getting the balance right.
As has been pointed out by the shadow Treasurer so many times, by the business council, by the property council, by Save Our Schools and by so many segments of the budget, the $5,439,000 we are spending on our executive is poorly spent. If a cost-benefit analysis were done on it, it would be a shocker, I tell you.
Mr Mulcahy: You would ask for a refund.
MR SMYTH: We would ask for a refund; Mr Mulcahy is right. There is no basis for this argument. The windfall $200 million extra that they have received has not come from their reforms or their savings because they are still carrying out reforms, particularly in schools, and the schools closures will only save something like $9 million. So $200 million equals $9 million in reforms. It does not add up. If we add up the $4 million or $5 million cut in tourism, the $15 million cutback in business and the couple of million dollars in sport, it does not come to anywhere near $200 million in extra revenue. Apart from that, it is not extra revenue.
This furphy, this absolutely hairy-chested “I am a man of great courage and great conviction; I do not care how much pain I cause in my community” attitude will not be accepted by the community—
Mr Mulcahy: If you say it long enough, they will believe it.
MR SMYTH: because they are awake to it. Mr Mulcahy is dead right: if you say it long enough, they will believe it. Mr Stanhope can continue to delude himself, but the public is not deluded at all. The Chief Minister simply wants to avoid scrutiny. When we challenged him to prove where Mr Howard had acted in a racist manner, to point out what he had done that was racist, he could not. He wanted to bolt. He wanted to run away. He said, “No more questions? I’m out of here. No further questions? Good. I’m busy. I’ve got to go.” He could not point to one single act of racism by the Prime Minister and he should withdraw that comment. He should have the courage and the dignity to say that he was wrong. The Prime Minister has backed up his proposal with resources, with cash and with the endorsement of cabinet and the federal parliament, representing the people of Australia. He has said, “Enough is enough. Let’s get on with it.” But no, we will not hear the Chief Minister acknowledge that.
Of course, when somebody criticises the glass jawed one, he calls them a whinger. He says, “The business community cannot have it both ways. They are whingers.” He says, “If anybody criticises me, I will get them.” We know that, and more and more people talk of retribution. We have seen it with the whistleblowers. People who have spoken to Mrs Burke and others and blown the whistle on projects like FireLink or anything else are targeted. They are warned and marginalised and victimised by the Stanhope Labor government. So we have a pattern here.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .