Page 2455 - Week 08 - Thursday, 30 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We have this ridiculous notion in the budget papers this year, on page 285 of budget paper No 4, of funding for tourism this year going from $6.2 million to $24.8 million, an increase of $18.6 million. That is absolute nonsense. The notion that you can wrap in things like sporting facilities and say that it relates to tourism just goes to show how desperate the minister and the government are.
The industry needs to have a good look at page 324 of budget paper No 4, because that is the last lot of financial data on tourism that this government will produce. No operating statement for tourism in 2007-08 will be published in the budget papers. So from this point on, again under a Stanhope government that promised to be more honest, more open and more accountable, we will not be able to identify the details of spending by this government on tourism. It is yet another example of the Stanhope government reducing opportunities for ordinary citizens, industry and the Assembly to scrutinise its activities. It is reducing openness and accountability.
We know the figures are not correct. We know that $24.8 million is not being spent directly on tourism. It took some weeks of questioning in the estimates committee before the minister set out the correct situation, with the changes to funding from last year to this year. So this industry, tourism, which in April 1998 the Chief Minister, as Leader of the Opposition, identified as one of the industries that deserved to be supported, one of the industries that was ideally suited to this city, is now just the poor cousin.
Industry and the economic base of the ACT will continue to be the poor cousin until the government realises how integral this industry is to the ACT; indeed, how easy it is to monitor the effect of tourism spending. Access Economics did it for you in 2003-04, Mr Barr, if you have not read the report. It was a great report that showed the industry returned about $6 for every dollar that you invest. So if the government is cash strapped, it should invest some money in tourism and get a return.
We see the continual chipping away at tourism after the major funding cuts in 2006-07. We are now incorporating tourism with other functions, so that the capacity to evaluate it is diminished. We are reducing capacity to assess, and this is all happening at a time when funding for promotion and marketing has been cut by about $4 million, staffing has been cut by 50 per cent, we have lost our corporate memory on tourism, and we have lost our focus on key sources of tourists.
The minister has said we are not going to go after tourists from, for instance, China. We have just given up on the China market—that small country to the north of Australia with a billion people. This is really sad, because in the March quarter 2003-04 there were 170,000 international visitors to the ACT. In the March quarter 2006-07 there were 153,000 international visitors to the ACT. Yes, that is right, Mr Speaker: a reduction of 17,000 people. And this is the minister who says the numbers are doing well. Well, they are not doing well. They are not back to the 2001 level. He will say, “Yes, but that was the effect of the Olympics.” The Olympics were in 2000; 2001 was a good year and the numbers since this government came to office have gone down. They have bottomed; they are coming up a little bit but they are nowhere near as good as they were.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .