Page 1038 - Week 04 - Thursday, 18 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Motion (by Mr Humphries) agreed to, with the concurrence of an absolute majority:
That so much of standing and temporary orders be suspended as would prevent Mr Kaine from concluding his speech.
MR KAINE: As part of the review of the public service, the first priority clearly must be to bring program budgets under control. The health budget has been out of control under Mr Berry's management, blowing out, on latest figures, by $3m a month. Ms Follett has suggested that other program budgets may be out of control too, but we do not know by how much or where. Ms Follett needs to present her plan to restructure the public service so that it can produce "better services with fewer resources".
Concurrently with this, she must outline her plans to encourage and enable the private sector to grow with two important objectives in mind: To provide enhanced employment opportunities and to expand the future revenue base, because they are not going to be created in the public sector. The concurrent private sector growth and rationalisation of the public sector must be designed to achieve the right balance in service delivery and cost to the consumer and to enhance overall employment opportunities.
The strategy also makes passing reference to TAFE college funding. The TAFE problem deserves more than passing reference. The Follett Government must actively address the problem of TAFE funding. While Ms Follett says that enrolments are increasing, the Government is in its final year of a three-year agreement negotiated by the Liberals when we were in government and involving progressive reduction of TAFE funding. That put them on their mettle and they found some funding elsewhere. Does the Chief Minister now plan to reduce TAFE funding to a level less than was agreed, even though, according to her, TAFE enrolments are increasing? This will lead to an even harsher regime for TAFE management and students than that which exists now, and it will result in the turning away of even more students during 1993. Where are the Follett Government's proposals? I have not seen any.
What about ACTION buses? The Chief Minister has told us in her budget strategy statement:
The cost of our public transport system is another area receiving close scrutiny.
The ACT Government can no longer postpone solutions to the mounting cost of ACTION and this enterprise must be made more efficient and cost-effective. There has been plenty of time for scrutiny.
Mr Connolly: We have pulled it back $3m; it went up $7m when you were in.
MR KAINE: Why is it receiving such close scrutiny? You have not really attacked the problem, and you have not told us what you are going to do about dealing with this massive problem. There is a subsidy of close to $700 per household in the ACT for ACTION before anyone ever sets foot in a bus, and that is excessive by any objective standard. Subjecting the ACTION operation to close scrutiny does not serve. What does the Government intend to do after this close scrutiny? That is what the taxpayer wants to know and that is what I want to know.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .