Page 404 - Week 01 - Thursday, 11 December 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Smyth: No, we’ll get to you in the detail stage. You know what I mean.
MS GALLAGHER: No, not really. It came as quite a surprise that there were not other people wanting to speak at this stage of the debate, but I understand we are going to have quite a lengthy discussion in the detail stage. I guess I can understand it; I was expecting a bit more.
To begin with, I should say—I think I have said it in this place this week—this is not the normal way of doing an appropriation bill. We do not believe it is the ideal way to do an appropriation bill. As members who have been here before would know, we usually have a very lengthy estimates process, and ministers, including the Chief Minister, appear often for days at a time to stand before the Assembly committee and deal with questions on the appropriation. This will not be the normal way.
I guess the situation we find ourselves in is that we have had one sitting week. We were unaware of the Liberals’ very strong desire to recall the Assembly early. That was news to me tonight. Perhaps we could have looked at that had we been given that representation, but Mr Seselja said that they did not bother talking to us. I guess if you do not bother talking to us, it is hard to respond to an imaginary or a supposed request to recall the Assembly early.
What we find in this bill are, as I said, I think in my introductory speech, a range of initiatives. Some of them are election commitments; some of them are urgent initiatives; some of them are cost pressures; and some of them are things that we would normally have funded through a Treasurer’s advance had there not been an appropriation bill in development. They are some of the issues that, no doubt, we will hear from members about through the detail stage. Some of the payments in JACS, for example, had we not had an appropriation, would have been funded through a Treasurer’s advance but, in the interests of scrutiny, transparency and accountability, have been put into the appropriation bill and are subject to debate this evening.
There are a number of very important measures in this budget, a number of urgent measures, but we have not said from the beginning that all of the measures in this bill are urgent. There are a mix of initiatives. Some of them are urgent; some of them are election commitments; some of them are cost pressures that we would have managed, probably through a Treasurer’s advance had there not been another appropriation.
I would also say that I have never said that this is the ACT government’s response to the global financial crisis or the ACT Assembly’s response to our own local needs. I have never said that. Some people have picked that up, but the budget does have elements which we believe will support our local economy.
Mr Smyth: You said that in your speech.
MS GALLAGHER: No, Brendan; if I could just take you step by step through what I am saying—if you listen before you interject. I have never said, “This is the government’s response to the global financial crisis.” However, there are elements in it which we are happy to have in here to keep some cash and some commitments in the ACT Assembly going through to the economy.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .