Page 1396 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 28 March 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
listen only to the elites. They do not have an understanding of what goes on in the suburbs, in the outer suburbs in particular. They do not have an understanding of the cost pressures that are placed on families, and they are dismissive of them.
We have heard that from Andrew Barr. We have heard it from Katy Gallagher when she suggested that maybe one way of fixing cost of living pressures is to cancel the Foxtel for a while. Those kinds of statements demonstrate the disdain that Katy Gallagher and Andrew Barr have for families in the suburbs. If anyone was in any doubt, they would only have to look at the pattern of Labor governments right around the country. They put cost pressures up and they do not deliver programs well. That is what people are waking up to right around the country.
In conclusion, I again commend Mr Smyth for this bill. I think it is important. It is important that we hold governments to account for their programs. It is particularly important that we hold governments to account for what kinds of burdens they are placing on family budgets. We look forward to the successful passage of this bill.
MS HUNTER (Ginninderra—Parliamentary Leader, ACT Greens) (11.53): Before I turn to the substance of the matter before us I would like to make a comment about the process. I only found out that the Liberal Party wanted to debate this bill today when I saw a copy of the Liberals’ media release at about lunchtime yesterday.
There has been a longstanding convention that if anyone wants to debate a bill they make that known in the government business meeting the Wednesday before, so that we can all be prepared and we can get on with debating the bill. It gives us an opportunity to make sure that we are ready and also that opportunity to fully evaluate whether or not it is an appropriate change in the law. We are going to be adjourning debate today to allow that to happen.
We want the opportunity to think about whether or not this is the most appropriate way to help those in need of assistance. As I said, we were not given that opportunity to have a briefing from the Liberals beforehand, which would have been very useful. We could have got on with this today if we had had that. It also would have allowed us that time to look at other models.
Mr Barr pointed out in his speech earlier a model in Western Australia that is in use and that the government were having a look at. We will look at that, as well as have a look around to see what other models might be put in place.
Turning to the substance of the bill, the Greens will support the bill in principle today because we agree that the government can do more to understand and evaluate the impacts government decisions are having or will have on the community. However, we are not convinced that this proposal is necessarily the best way to assist those who are in need of support and assistance. There are many substantive ways to ensure that the impacts of government decision making are properly evaluated and understood.
As everyone knows, for years the Greens have been talking, and have talked at great length, about the importance of a triple bottom line analysis and reporting. We see this as the best way to properly consider all the impacts of proposals and to evaluate
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video