Page 2369 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 16 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I do understand that my questions re sustainability and greenhouse may well have added to the question on notice burden the Chief Minister has complained about but it is an important matter. In my opinion, it is probably the most important matter that this government has to deal with, and the Assembly, the government and the community have a right and a need to know what is happening about greenhouse and sustainability issues.
Having gone through all of this budget process, I guess I am concerned that this budget is very much a business-as-usual budget and, to that extent, it is something of a lost year for sustainability. It does have some gains for climate change. I totally acknowledge and support this. There is increased funding for the switch your thinking program, for the bike paths, for increased energy efficiency for public housing, and these, of course, largely come from the ALP-Greens agreement. While I appreciate the current government targets and weathering the change are modest and less than I and others would like, talking to the departments has made it clear that they are really not even looking at implementing these modest targets. It just did not seem to be a major government priority.
I come back again to the need for accountability indicators as an integral part of the budget process. We do have plans—maybe not the best plans—but we do, at least, have plans. But the budget does not give us any indicator of how we are going against the plans and how we, in the government, could evaluate process. How can the government, the estimates committee, the community or the taxpayers work out where to put the funds without knowing the results of the programs? This is particularly relevant to greenhouse programs. We cannot see greenhouse gas emissions; so we do need a measurement process to work out the effect of our actions.
I am particularly concerned that the lion’s share, I believe $60 million out of $100 million of the climate change package that was announced in 2008, seems to be devoted to tree planting programs both at the arboretum and in the urban forest renewal program. It is not clear that either of these is actually going to lead to a net reduction in greenhouse gases and I am concerned that the urban tree program, which I agree is important, is in fact really just normal government expenditure being repackaged as greenhouse spending.
In conclusion, I would like to say that I found the estimates process very interesting and informative and a great overview of the ACT government’s activities. As a new member, it was particularly valuable. I was disappointed, however, to find so little emphasis or understanding of the climate change issues amongst the agencies that appeared before us. I do believe that it was a productive process. There are many useful recommendations in the estimates committee report and I look forward to the government responding positively to them.
MS BURCH (Brindabella) (5.06): I would like to talk to the report and make some comments on some key areas in which I dissent from members of the Select Committee on Estimates 2009-2010. But at the outset I also pay regard and convey thanks to the secretariat for a tremendous job, probably often under somewhat challenging circumstances.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .