Page 2129 - Week 06 - Thursday, 26 June 2008

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


event support, a rugby world cup match, an events assistance program, Canberra Festival running and accommodation for the Australian Science Festival. Each of these events is interesting and there are lots of enjoyable activities there, but whether we need as taxpayers to fork out $6 million for these sorts of activities is something I would question. Bread and circuses was the old formula of the Roman Empire: get the people distracted with festivities while you squander their hard-earned money.

One of the major areas of this budget has been the provision for capital works. I have said that if the government must spend large amounts of money I would prefer to see it spent on infrastructure rather than on pet projects or recurrent initiatives that do not develop the ACT economy. In that sense, I am not opposed to this aspect of the budget and I hope that the capital works plan is able to be delivered, and on time and within budget.

I am, of course, as is well known, and I have not changed my view on this, opposed to the practice of allocating one per cent of all new capital works funding to arts projects. I think this is excessive and I think that it shows that the government has an unfortunate focus on peripheral projects which are not part of the core services of government.

Mr Barr: It would be a bit of a barren world, Richard, without—

MR MULCAHY: Oh, no. I guess where I come from is that I grew up in an era where we did not rely on the government to run our lives and fund every piece of enjoyment in our life. I actually do not need to go to an organised mothers day event put on by the taxpayer and the state. I do not need to go to a fathers day event put on by the state. I think people can organise some of these family activities themselves without us having to control them, direct them and have them underwritten by the taxpayer. There is nothing wrong with the enjoyment. But why all these events have to be stage managed is something that I am struggling to come to terms with.

My final comment is in relation to the project facilitation folks in the CMD. I, for one, think this was a great initiative. I said at a dinner of supporters the other night, of business people, that in fact I wish we had six David Daweses in this territory helping to facilitate business. Those who think that project facilitation is about micromanaging and running every aspect of business just do not get it. The biggest frustration for business often is not about getting handouts from government but working their way through the system and trying to get things expedited. It is done in other states; it has been done in years gone by in Queensland, and they still embrace this concept. They see it as a competitive feature in terms of dealing with their government versus others—and, if the ACT does not embrace this philosophy of having project facilitators that can help potential investors come into the territory, we will get left behind at the last post.

Yes, there may be issues and some information may not have been presented in the most appropriate fashion, but if we throw out the baby with the bathwater in this instance I think we will do the long-term economic development a lot of damage. I urge people to just step back a little bit and understand the important fundamental concept behind what this unit is about, rather than try to tear it down in its very early stages of operation.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .