Page 833 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 16 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
faction - as I said before, the right wing meet in the phone box on a Thursday night - said, "Listen, I just do what I am told". He relies on the numbers on the other side to stay where he is. He knows that - he is smiling over there - but he is not going to admit it.
A lot was said about New Zealand in the course of the debate. Mr Connolly should have watched the Lateline program on the ABC last night. Lateline featured the story of a south New Zealand electricity and energy firm which was privatised by the Government selling it to its employees - who were glad to buy the shares, by the way - and implementing micro-economic reforms to productivity under the Employment Contracts Act. What happened? It returned a massive profit, providing enhanced customer services and dividend returns to the shareholders at the same time. That was done not in Western Australia but in much maligned New Zealand. Everyone has a crack at New Zealand. They achieved increased returns, but they did not increase their electricity charges.
I dare say that, under corporatisation or privatisation, if a company had to increase its charges it would come up front and say, "We are increasing charges because we cannot manage the economy", as Mr Moore suggested. It is not going to hurt the people who can afford to pay; it is going to hurt the poor, those same people about whom Mr Connolly craves indulgence to say that the Government has a monopoly on caring about social justice. Where is the social justice in the poor being asked to pay increased electricity and water rates by stealth? Where is the social justice in single mothers being asked to pay increased electricity and water rates on 1 July, in the middle of the Canberra winter?
Shame on you, Mr Connolly. Shame on your Government. No wonder this MPI has come up today. You do not have a monopoly on social justice. But I will bet I can tell you what you have a monopoly on. You have a monopoly on doing nothing. You pride yourself on the fact that you know what micro-economic reform means. You do not know what it means, mate. You would not know what it means. Even if you did know what it meant, your left wing would not allow you to do it anyway, which is something you have to realise. So, Mr Connolly, do not stand up here and talk to us about the benefits of corporatisation and privatisation.
You also mentioned ACTION. Let us have a look at ACTION. In their usual dismissive way, they do not see ACTION as presenting any real problem. Let me tell you that any utility which the Government or the taxpayer is subsidising to the tune of $70m has to be a problem. How many buses do we see driving the length and breadth of the ACT with a driver on board but no-one else?
Mr Connolly: Bill Stefaniak used to go out and chase them at night.
MR DE DOMENICO: No, Bill is in a big rubbish bin. Why do we not talk about rubbish bins? Talking about micro-economic reforms, when the Liberal Party suggested that we should introduce big bins, what did Mr Connolly say? He said, "These redneck Liberals, they are all ratbags". What is he going to do? He is going to introduce mini-big bins. It is different. Big bins will save the ratepayers money - the same people that have been asked to pay these higher slugs for electricity and water - but Mr Connolly would not admit that.
Mr Moore: Nonsense; no way.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .