Page 120 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 10 February 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
to get light rail is if you vote for Labor again”? They do not do that because they know it is not popular and it is not supported by the people who are going to have to pay for it. They figure they are going to have a better chance of re-election not if they promote light rail but if they promote the negativity of a termination cost. They think they are going to have a better chance of being re-elected if they promote holding Canberrans to ransom rather than the core issue itself.
It is very interesting that they do not want to have an election on this. It is very informative, just like this whole issue. Originally it was a transport solution and then they started to tone that down. Then it was all about a planning solution—it was going to revitalise things—and that started to get toned down as well. Now they are in the job space, but that is starting to get toned down as well because it is not really plausible. Finally, the last resort is bagging out the Liberals. That is all we ever hear about light rail from those opposite: bagging out the Liberals.
We simply say that the people of Canberra should be the arbiters of the future of light rail, not the backroom deal done between those opposite and the Greens. I think it is a reasonable position. Why do the government not simply put this on hold until October? If the government are so confident that it is popular, if they are so confident that it is in the best interests of Canberrans to go ahead with this project, why do they not put it to the election? By the way they talk, they will romp it in; they are so popular they will get 20 or 25 seats. Maybe they are not so popular.
We have a government that committed to $30 million of expenditure, yet now are going to bind generations of Canberrans to perhaps $2 billion of expenditure by way of construction, finance costs and operating expenses. The government said that they will only be paying through availability payments once the project is done. That is simply not true. The government have already spent $50 million on this project and they have said they are going to put a down payment of $375 million in capital. Where was that in the election promise? Where was the $375 million down payment? Mr Corbell just said, “We are only going to be paying through availability payments.” That is just not correct because the government have said there is going to be a down payment, a capital up-front payment of $375 million. Minister Corbell was wrong. He was wrong when he said that you only pay through availability payments because there is going to be a capital down payment. That was not in the election promise, nor was the $50 million of associated works which has already been done, let alone the additional $100 million of associated works which is going to be done.
There is still no talk about the operating cost of light rail. Why do the government not say how much it is going to cost to operate the tram? Why do they not say what the embedded interest rate is? In effect, the government are borrowing the cost of construction off the consortium, minus $375 million. The remainder is, in effect, being financed by the consortium and we will be paying interest to the consortium. What is that interest rate? What is the embedded finance rate in the contract and why will they not say what it is? Are we ever going to find out what this rate is? Or come June are they going to say, “It’s commercial-in-confidence and we’ll just let the next 20 or 25 years of Canberra ratepayers sort it out.” This is a travesty.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video