Page 3030 - Week 08 - Thursday, 25 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
local Greens and from the ACT Liberals. In this context I commend the local Greens for at least having something of substance to say on the budget, some alternative views, some economic credibility.
When you go to the heart of the estimates committee report, which was essentially the work of the Leader of the Opposition, what do we get? We get calls for 29 new reviews, 27 new reports, 22 extensions of existing reporting requirements, six calls for new analysis or investigations, four calls for more resources for the opposition or the Greens, 24 calls for the rewrite of administrative processes, three calls for new government expenditure and one witch-hunt. That is the estimates committee report. That is all they came up with: more reviews, more reports—115 recommendations calling for more bureaucracy and more taxpayers’ expense.
The Liberal opposition want to walk both sides of the street. This is what we have consistently seen. Mr Doszpot in his contribution said that there is no plan, that we should go in harder and that we should go in this year. He then spent the second half of his speech criticising difficult decisions that were made in 2006-07 to fundamentally alter the structural position of the territory’s budget to better align service provision with revenue—a series of long-term decisions for this territory’s economic health. The Treasurer is to be commended for this year’s budget approach and for not adopting a slash and burn approach in an economic downturn. What that means is that the government can play a productive role in supporting the economy through these difficult times.
It is interesting that those opposite have, through the estimates committee report, sought more government expenditure in a range of areas. But they are yet to indicate any substantive and significant structural reform to the territory’s budget. If you are fair dinkum about contributing to the economic debate, let us hear your views on significant structural reform. Dare I say it, let us hear your views on some serious microeconomic reform, because you cannot even stomach the most simple of streamlining measures within the bureaucracy. We have all this emotive claptrap from Mr Doszpot about people living in fear. What utter rubbish! It is rhetoric in the place of any substance and it is what we get from this lazy and complacent opposition. It is unfortunate for the people of Canberra, but it is what we will continue to see. There is one party in this place that has an economic vision and a plan and that is Labor. There is another party that is trying and that is the Greens. And we have absolutely nothing from the opposition. The Greens are well intentioned. They miss the big picture a lot of the time but at least they are making an effort. Opposition for opposition’s sake is all we get from this lot.
Mr Speaker, we are all enjoying the enlightened views of Mr Harris and his comments to the estimates committee. I will close on a quote from Mr Harris:
The ACT general government has one of the strongest, if not the strongest, balance sheets of all Australian states and territories. Even though it is embarking on a large capital works and capital investment program, its budget suggested that it would emerge in four years time with no net debt.
Why is that so, Mr Speaker? It is because during periods of strong economic growth this government ran successive budget surpluses, something the Liberal Party has
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .