Page 1303 - Week 05 - Thursday, 25 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Turning to the Government's strategy for the budget, the approach to public consultation on the issues raised is impressive. As an advocate for community consultation, I cannot speak highly enough of the need for participation by those directly affected by the budget. It was appropriate for the Government to start this consultation process by contacting the following peak organisations: The Business Council, the ACT Council of Social Service, the Trades and Labour Council, and the Economic Priorities Advisory Committee of the ACT. The additional step - that is, the approach by Ministers to umbrella groups within the community about their views - is an important part of the consultative process, as is the opportunity for the input of the public and community sectors.
I congratulate the Government on its approach to the budget process and feel that the appropriate targets have been identified. They are: Firstly, to balance the recurrent budget; secondly, to limit the borrowings for capital works; and, thirdly, to examine all areas for future efficiency gains. I am pleased to see tourism targeted as one area in which the Government sees a growth industry for the national capital. Canberra is well placed to take advantage of the need for accommodation in this region, and the focus of our development in this area should be as broad as possible. The casino will have an impact on the Territory's revenue base, with a predicted $19m premium. I consider it important that the community has an input into how these funds are used, even given the Government's commitment to their use for cultural and heritage facilities.
The ACT Assembly is assessing the best location for its activities, and I see this as a beginning to a process where the Government moves away from rented accommodation to underoccupied but government-owned and therefore rent-free accommodation. I agree with the strategy announced by the Chief Minister to identify land that is genuinely surplus to government's requirements and then to develop or sell those properties to increase the return to government. Included in this will need to be an examination of the network of depots used by the various utilities, and I understand from comments made by the Chief Minister that this is part of the Government's overall strategy of property asset rationalisation. I also endorse the Government's commitment to full cost recovery on municipal services and those which have an environmental cost, its emphasis on service delivery over administration, and its commitment to minimising tax avoidance. All these factors contribute to the notion of a fair and equitable society where all sectors of the society share the costs and benefits of the provision of services.
I would also like to add my thoughts on areas which could be emphasised in budget deliberations. I feel that a close examination of demographic trends would help maximise the location of future community infrastructure. This is important, particularly in the case of Gungahlin, where the experience of Tuggeranong and projected land sales and development approvals could be used to help with the planning and timing of the provision of infrastructure, particularly with regard to capital works commitments. There is also room for a more innovative use of existing infrastructure, starting with greater coordination, promotion and cooperation of services.
In conclusion, I feel that the vision we as a community have for the future of Canberra should shape the budget strategy. I am at the same time concerned that the plan be a government strategy, not a Treasury strategy or a public service strategy, although all these people as individual community members have a stake in the outcome. The relationship between the Commonwealth Government and the ACT Government has lost its rosy glow and has become, if anything,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .