Page 3589 - Week 08 - Friday, 24 August 2012

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

The community sector generally feel that they are a more efficient provider of services than government, but government is not going to be hit with these charges. It is the disability services sector that is looking at this 0.34 per cent, which is such a small amount for CSD that it will probably take more effort to organise the collection or the deduction than it is really worth to the department. But for the many small members of the community sector, and the larger ones for that matter, who will have to shave that amount off their budgets it will give them a great deal of headache as to how to cope with those missing funds.

I have not seen before the almost universal anger amongst the members of the community sector over such an announcement. When the minister was challenged at a forum as to why the contribution was imposed, she said in all seriousness that it was because the community sector had asked the minister how they could reform themselves. The answer did not make sense to the questioner, but then I think the sector has become very used to confusion—confusion often created by the very minister who is now telling the community sector that they need to reform themselves.

The telling point here is that this minister has once again not even consulted with the community services sector regarding this ridiculous surcharge or drawback on the grants—call it what you will. It is in fact in the form of another efficiency dividend, a budget cut that has been arbitrarily calculated and imposed. It is a sad reflection on the so-called open government and the Chief Minister’s much-vaunted lip-service to consultation. I listened to this sector and the answers I got would not fill this government with confidence, as the community has had enough—enough of 11 years of hard Labor.

Debate interrupted in accordance with standing order 74 and the resumption of the debate made an order of the day for a later hour.

Sitting suspended from 12.33 to 2 pm.


Mr Corbell, on behalf of Ms Gallagher, presented the following papers:

Public Sector Management Act, pursuant to sections 31A and 79—Copies of executive contracts or instruments—

Long-term contracts:

Alan Traves, dated 22 June 2012.

Andrew Cappie-Wood, dated 21 August 2012.

Andrew Kefford, dated 28 May 2012.

Andrew Stark, dated 8 December 2011.

Anthony Graham, dated 8 December 2011.

Baden McMaster, dated 10 January 2012.

Bernadette Mitcherson, dated 2 February 2012.

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