Page 1450 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 1 May 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Today we heard a question from Mrs Nolan in relation to a very important issue in the budget; that was the provision of a second domestic violence shelter. That question by Mrs Nolan did not throw any credit on the former Chief Minister. It revealed that her budget, if she knew what she was doing, did not include the allocation of funds that she thought she was allocating. So, just by way of introductory comment - - -
Mr Berry: Are you not supposed to be selling the budget strategy?
MR COLLAERY: I set the stage for how the Labor left sees budgeting, Mr Speaker. We recently heard the new member's speech. Of course, in it the same message came over - the belief in miracles. There is still a belief in miracles in the ALP. Of course, it was very warming to see and to hear that wonderful speech, but the tragedy about the Labor Party and the way it does budgets is that it has left the proletariat behind. It does not know all about hard budgeting. It does not know a thing about running a budget. It is used to the hand-out life. It has no - - -
Mrs Grassby: He ought to speak - the NIMBYs of Canberra!
MR SPEAKER: Order!
MR COLLAERY: They are cackling, Mr Speaker. They are upset. They are on edge. The tragedy of the Labor Party is that it has left the proletariat miles behind. Those of us who did not have the somewhat interesting pleasure of growing up under Don Dunstan know that there is a move in this country that will change things for a long time. There is a very tired Labor Party out there that purports still to give us advice - recently through one of its sycophants over there near the pillar - on how to run - - -
MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Collaery, I ask you to withdraw that comment.
MR COLLAERY: Mr Speaker, I have never suggested that Mr Moore can play the violin. I withdraw the suggestion that he is a sycophant.
Mr Speaker, shortly after we heard a very straight Marxist ideological rendition of the Labor ambition - which, of course, denied the role of independents in the democratic process, and people should note that - Mr Moore stood up and launched into his enormous support for the very party that denies his existence beside the pillar.
The fact is that law is not an instrument of social control, nor is a budget an instrument of social control, and that is where the Labor Party has it wrong. Budgeting and lawyerising are not elements of social control. That is the whole thing about power in the Labor Party which is wrong, and it typifies its response to this excellent budget that the Alliance Government has put forward.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .