Page 3063 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 17 October 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Surveys indicate that people want social investment—in public health, education and community services. They want money spent on infrastructure to reduce greenhouse emissions—infrastructure such as rail, public transport, cycling and walking paths, renewable technologies and community amenities.
The Greens’ response to the federal government’s tax cuts is indicative of the Greens’ approach. The $34 billion should have gone to hospitals, schools, carers, housing and public transport. The Greens would have put Australia’s two million pensioners first, with a $30 a week rise, costing $3 billion per annum. Ten billion dollars a year could employ an extra 140,000 teachers, nurses and other professionals. Ten billion dollars a year could provide three million solar hot water systems. In three years all Australian households could have a free solar hot water system.
Ten billion dollars a year could make public transport free, with enough money left over to invest in a massive expansion of the existing public transport network, with a huge savings bonus in greenhouse gas emissions from Australia. Or $10 billion a year could pay for a $60 per fortnight increase in the age pension, with money left over to reintroduce the commonwealth dental scheme and invest significantly in improved aged care, including assistance to Australia’s forgotten carers. Doubling the carer allowance to $197 per fortnight—a measly $197 per fortnight—would cost $927 million, but it could make a big difference. And $10 billion a year could raise Australia’s spending on education to the top of OECD rankings and allow for the abolishment of the HECS fees which at the moment confront the nation’s tertiary education students.
What is required is a partnership between governments. The Greens believe that a rich society like Australia can afford to maintain services which will benefit everyone and that, if we do not do that, we will have to spend a larger amount on policing, courts and prisons. That is the sum. People are our greatest resource and cultural asset. Every ACT child should have access to the high-class public health and education services that they need to lift them out of disadvantage and provide the skills we will need if we are to remain a sustainable society.
Moving us out of poverty requires us to invest in our children. We can start there and we can move our skills base up as well. If each child was given access to the excellent education that we know we are capable of providing here and given access to excellent health services, we could mitigate the effects for disadvantaged families to some extent while also providing families with improved levels of housing and services.
Mr Stanhope referred to the poverty data that ACTCOSS has been able to procure. I went to the launch of that this week. The data can be used to assist in planning where Canberran services are targeted, including in health, public transport and education. But I am wondering why the ACT government did not take the initiative to acquire this data and why it was left to ACTCOSS to purchase it.
The ACT government appears to haphazardly publish ACT demographic profiles every few years, like the one provided to the Community Inclusion Board in May. But
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .