Page 4666 - Week 16 - Tuesday, 27 November 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
and say, "Oh, we are going to lose the interest on the money". Of course, we are not, because, to the extent that there is surplus revenue from the same sources that now top up the Community Development Fund, that will go into Consolidated Revenue and it will be added to all of the unused money from day to day in the fund flow situation. That money is invested and it will attract interest. It will continue to attract interest, and it will continue to be available in the consolidated fund if it is needed for this or any other purpose. So, let us kill off this argument that the interest on the money is in any way relevant. It is in no way relevant; it never was; and it is no longer relevant in the future.
Mr Speaker, I can only assume, with - - -
Mr Berry: What rate is the guaranteed funding - Follett budget levels? No, you dodged that one.
MR KAINE: Mr Berry will continue babbling on. But let him go; he is okay. We might have to put him in a straitjacket eventually. But he is okay. Just leave him alone. Do not aggravate him.
The Opposition talks about this dreadful thing that this Government is doing to the CDF, and its members seem to be taking the view that somehow or other they are going to fix this one of these days. Interestingly enough, the only year in which the CDF was actually stripped was last year. It was literally stripped. If you think about that, the reason for it was that they were not confident that they would be here this year to spend any more money, so the idea was to get rid of it last year. Now, they are talking with much bravado about when they take government - - -
Mr Collaery: Ms Follett is not here to hear it again.
MR KAINE: She is never here, but she may get the message indirectly.
If they are really committed to the notion that in February 1992 they are going to take government, they should be delighted with what we are doing, because what we are doing is freeing it up. The only limit on how much money they could allocate to community purposes in 1992-93 if they were in government is the total of the entire consolidated fund. There is no limit. They can push it up as high as they want. Up until now they have been constrained by the amount of money that is actually in the CDF. But they were arguing that we are constraining this. They were saying, "This is not enough. We are depriving these people of the money". In fact, there is now no limit. If they want to put their money where their mouths are, they had better put a figure on how much money they would spend in 1992-93 if they were in government, because I would be interested to know just how far their irrationality and irresponsibility
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .