Page 3030 - Week 08 - Thursday, 15 August 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
we found that this actually meant that positions that provided translation services for non-English speakers in our courts were being cut. There were some word games during hearings when it was claimed that the measure merely “did not fund” the positions, but the effect is the same: those translation positions, just like those in Legal Aid, are being cut.
It got worse. A number of line items were stated as “cessations”. Under “Safer families—implementation of the Joint Australian Law Reform Commission and NSW Law Reform Commission Report on Family Violence”, there are cuts of $127,000 in the first year, $378,000 in the second, $387,000 in the third and $397,000 in the last outyear. There is another so-called “cessation” under the line item “Safer families—stronger criminal justice responses”. These so-called “cessations” total over $1 million in the forward estimates.
Then there are items called “reforming” by this government. “Reforming the safer families levy”, on page 64 of budget statement D, is actually a cut of $313,000 in the 2020-21 year. There is another reduction, or a cut, of $321,000 in the 2021-22 financial year, and another cut of $329,000 in the 2022-23 financial year. I have previously labelled these cuts as cruel, and I reiterate that they are cruel. They have been hidden using abstruse language like “reforming”, “re-profiling” or “repurposing”.
These cuts were exposed, and the government’s response has been, quite frankly, appalling. The government’s response was:
… the family safety levy was always intended to provide opportunities for innovation to respond to domestic and family violence in the ACT.
That was the government’s response during question time. But that is not the case. When this levy was introduced, it was not all about innovation. Let me quote the Chief Minister regarding what was actually said at the time that this levy was introduced. He said that the levy “protects the funding for the package”, ensuring that the money went directly to addressing family violence. Further, he said:
I reiterate that the funding raised through this levy will be legislated and locked in for the long term.
Not so much, as it turns out. Mr Barr, back in 2016, said:
The levy means the funds are locked in. The funds cannot be diverted without scrutiny by the Assembly, and this provides an important assurance to the community that the services that rely on the funding will continue.
Let me repeat that:
… the services that rely on the funding will continue.
He went on to say:
Also, by funding the measure in this way, through a levy, the revenue stream will grow …
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video