Page 2186 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 6 June 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
A large part of the Priorities Review Board report deals with the supposed advantages of contracting out of the provision of public services. In fact it recommends that more than 30 services should be contracted out. No specific arguments are given as to why particular services should be contracted out. There is only one reason: contracting out allows you to get around public sector award payments. It allows the Government the opportunity to participate in the exploitation of poorly organised elements of the private sector labour force.
We have come to expect this approach from Liberal governments. The Labor Party is opposed to such blatant exploitation. The disappointing thing is that the Priorities Review Board did not even attempt to do a financial analysis of contracting out. They blandly stated that a saving of 20 per cent could be achieved. However, this unsupported number was not simply pulled from the air. No, it came from a previously discredited CARD report.
The simple fact of the matter is that the most recent evidence casts significant doubt upon the cost-effectiveness of contracting out. It casts even greater doubt on the impact it has on both quality of service and accountability. So we have a very patchy analysis.
The major focus of the Priorities Review Board report appears to be the sell-off of ACT real estate. The report is a property developer's dream. Let me make it clear from the outset that I am not opposed to a government adjusting its property assets. There is no reason for a government to hold onto land it does not require. That is, indeed, a waste of resources. The Priorities Review Board report, however, reads more like a fire sale than anything else. It quite clearly sets out the property it believes should be sold. Included in the list are school sites, both those currently closed and those to be closed; community facilities; community health centres; the Queen Elizabeth II Home; child health centres; and specific areas within our pine forests.
The rationale offered for these sales is that they are either "underutilised" or "not being utilised in their highest use". Both of these rationales appear to be euphemisms for not earning a high enough financial rate of return. But what about the social rate of return? I would like to say that many of the properties flagged for sale by the Priorities Review Board do serve the people of Canberra well and they are well utilised.
Our position on school closures is quite clear. We believe that the neighbourhood school system serves the people of Canberra well. It should be retained and schools should not be sold off to property developers. I believe also that our public health system is a tremendous community asset. It should be retained and protected by any government interested in social justice.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .