Page 121 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 14 December 2016

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


have cause for concern. We have to make sure that we are giving the teachers the resources but more importantly, I think, that we are empowering them to actually do what they do best.

Another area of government policy where the government refuses to look critically is land. High land prices, fuelled by government restrictions on the release of land, and in particular land for detached housing, are driving many productive Canberrans across the border, and that undermines our economy significantly. The latest HIA housing scorecard shows the ACT had almost four times the number of multi-unit dwelling starts compared with detached dwellings. In the ACT there were approximately 1,000 detached dwellings compared to 3,840 multi-unit dwelling starts. This figure clearly shows a poor mix of land supply in the territory when compared nationally.

We have to ask the question, as we have been asked by numerous people of late: what level of preparedness does the ACT have to actually manage this land price issue? We certainly cannot have policies that push people into negative equity. We do need to have a long-term strategy for this but at this stage the government have not given any indication that they do have a long-term strategy to manage the cost of land.

The Treasurer repeatedly claims that we are returning the budget to balance, that is, returning the budget to a surplus. But what this actually means is anybody’s guess, as has already been discussed today.

Unfortunately this motion seems to want to deflect attention from the budget to the economy as a whole, and it is the budget which is the primary control that the ACT government has. To that end we, as an Assembly, have a very important role—a special role in fact—in scrutinising this government when it comes to expenditure and revenue and the management thereof. It is worth repeating that, over the last four financial years under Treasurer Barr, the operating balance has been a combined deficit of $1.8 billion. In 2015-16 the territory was a net borrower of $631 million. The deterioration of the territory’s finances is primarily an expenditure problem, not a revenue problem.

The failure to control the budget is a risk to our economy. Good economic indicators for the ACT reflect the role of the commonwealth in the nation’s capital, the entrepreneurialism of business and the hard work of our people. Our government here in the ACT could certainly do more to get out of the way of businesses and allow more investment in the territory, especially in the residential construction sector.

Rather than trying to take credit for all commonwealth spending, yet then blaming the commonwealth whenever there is any detraction, we have to make sure that we have a much wiser and considered approach. We have to look at this as a broader system and the ACT government, rather than trying to pit us against the commonwealth, should in fact be trying to work more closely with the commonwealth so that we can ride this journey together.

The opposition welcomes the opportunity to discuss the budget and the economy, as we did earlier today. The opposition is keen to be constructive and work with the government to ensure economic prosperity for all Canberrans.


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