Page 3027 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 23 September 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The government will fund a number of key initiatives to revitalise the city centre through projects such as the City Plan, City to the Lake and the Australia Forum. The government’s implementation of these priority projects will be a key driver of economic growth and change in the city centre.
These initiatives have now been deferred for a number of years while funding for light rail has been retained. What economic analysis has the government done comparing the relative benefits of capital metro with city to the lake and the Australia forum?
MR BARR: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. It was an excellent press release. The Leader of the Opposition has indeed highlighted some very important elements of the government’s agenda. I would like to take the opportunity to reassure the Leader of the Opposition that all of the work that was funded in this year’s budget towards those important infrastructure priorities that he has highlighted is continuing and will continue throughout this fiscal year.
The government will make further decisions in relation to future appropriations for those projects in due course, in subsequent budgets. We will also continue to seek investment from the private sector, in partnership with the private sector, to deliver that infrastructure. The timetable for the delivery of that infrastructure will of course be impacted by the outcomes of negotiations with the commonwealth on Mr Fluffy asbestos remediation and the cost of that. That has to impact upon the timetable for infrastructure. I would, however, note that even with the most ambitious of timetables for the projects that the Leader of the Opposition has outlined, particularly the Australia forum, we were looking into the next decade anyway.
MADAM SPEAKER: A supplementary question, Mr Hanson.
MR HANSON: Treasurer, what impact will the deferment of these former high-priority projects have on economic growth?
MR BARR: None, because the government will instead be investing the money in another form of economic stimulus. So if we are engaged in a significant rebuild of more than a thousand houses that will have a significant impact upon the construction sector in the territory.
I think it is worth putting into perspective the scale of this challenge insomuch as the bushfires from more than 10 years ago impacted on a little over 500 homes, I understand. This is more than a thousand. It is a significant challenge. It is an unforeseen expense the full extent of which is yet to be determined. I think it was only prudent for the government to identify that, if the cost of this particular asbestos clean-up is significantly more than we are anticipating, it is going to have to have an impact on other infrastructure priorities, but it will not impact on economic activity because the money will still be being invested. In this instance, if it is a significant clean-up of a thousand properties and the construction of new properties which would ultimately come from such a process, that is a significant boost to the construction sector in the territory in and of itself.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video