Page 4652 - Week 16 - Tuesday, 27 November 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Collaery: Mr Berry claimed that I had made an admission about a sum of $1.8m. The allegation that he was making was not clear to me. I have never mentioned that sum - - -
Mr Berry: Mr Speaker, I will clarify it, if you wish.
MR SPEAKER: No, I do not wish, thank you, Mr Berry. No-one interrupted you. Please proceed, Mr Collaery.
Mr Collaery: All I say is that, on being challenged by interjection, Mr Berry would not indicate where in the records of this house I had made that statement. I merely observe that for the record. He was asked. He was challenged to state the page.
Ms Follett: Yes, he did. You were not listening.
MR SPEAKER: Thank you.
Mr Collaery: And he can state the page now, Mr Speaker, if he has it.
MR SPEAKER: Order!
MRS GRASSBY (9.59): Mr Speaker, my colleagues and I have pointed out on many occasions how the Canberra we all know and love is under attack from this ramshackle Alliance Government. I would like to say that the repeal of the CDF is yet another example of their slash and burn approach to policy implementation. The Bill takes away a guaranteed source of money for community services, sports and arts bodies in the ACT. This money, funded from levies placed on gambling, will now be directed into the Consolidated Revenue Fund. We have been told that the funding for community projects will be maintained in real terms during 1990-91 and 1991-92. Frankly, Mr Speaker, I am deeply concerned that as a result of this Bill that will not be the case. The track record of those opposite is not a heartening one. I cannot see how a government whose priorities are to close schools and hospitals in our community can expect to be taken seriously when they suggest that they will maintain the funding originally handled by the CDF.
Mr Speaker, I have been contacted by a number of community groups who have expressed their concern with this Bill. When community groups seek financial assistance they will now be forced to spend their time lobbying the Minister and department bureaucrats. This cannot be seen as a step forward for community relations. However, it is what we have come to expect from these people opposite. We will see smaller community groups unable to match the lobbying abilities of larger organisations. This will mean less variety, which is not a good thing. Moreover, the lobbying process is a time wasting affair, as we all know. Consequently, community groups will not know until the last minute whether or not their funds have come through. Mr Speaker, a wonderful event held in Canberra - - -
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .