Page 1085 - Week 06 - Thursday, 27 July 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I note also that significant expenditure items, such as the Government's proposed $2.8m on upgrading the Bruce Stadium, cannot be identified in the budget, and the Deputy Chief Minister was unable to tell me yesterday where this provision has been made. This, most likely, should be found in the capital budget to which I now turn, but one wonders how many other such items lie hidden or have been omitted from this budget.
To turn specifically to capital expenditure, on the face of it, the capital expenditure program appears reasonable. I note the Chief Minister's proposal that the program be referred to the Standing Committee on Planning, Development and Infrastructure. This is sensible, and the program in detail can be reviewed there. I know that Mr Collaery will share my interest in doing that examination.
The program will go some way to providing continuity of work for the private sector and, subject to review, appears to consist of work that needs to be done. I have already commented upon the need to justify some of the ongoing projects, such as public housing and aged persons units. I commend the Government for confronting the issue of the Melba flats. There is a need to deal with this planning blunder urgently, and what is proposed is directly in accord with Liberal Party policy. Obviously it is a good initiative.
As to budget flexibility, I raised earlier in my remarks the question of the feasibility of the community consultation process, given the lack of cohesive and comprehensive information in the draft budget documents. The practicability of achieving any real result from the consultative process must also be questioned.
In my view there is very little likelihood that the content of the draft budget can be changed during the next two months, even if public sentiment is in favour of significant change. It is recognised by those regularly engaged in the budgetary process, whether public servant or politician, that major changes in direction cannot be easily effected in the short term. Resolute decision and action by government are essential in achieving this, and the reasons are, I think, obvious.
Current programs and projects can rarely be stopped in mid-stride without disruption and waste of public resources. Staff cannot readily be switched quickly from current activities to some new policy initiative if for no other reason than that most areas of government activity require some degree of expertise and qualification which may not be entirely relevant to new and different functions.
I submit, Mr Speaker, that more commitment than is currently displayed by this Government is necessary to achieve rapid short-term change. Furthermore, as I have pointed out already, the Government itself is proposing only marginal changes in its budget. The budget paper does
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .