Page 1861 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 19 August 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The provision of child-care is a fundamental issue in the ACT. Because of the high proportion of families where both spouses are in paid employment, the availability of child-care places in Canberra has an additional priority. This priority is obviously reflected in the Federal Government's national child-care strategy released in the budget. With more and more Canberra families needing child-care, the key priority is to keep the price of child-care down. As well as providing more child-care places, the maximum fee assistance for one child will be increased to $4,625 per year from April next. This is particularly important at a time when major emphasis is being given to training initiatives to achieve a more skilled work force. Madam Speaker, the success of the Commonwealth budget, I believe, is built upon the nexus between responsible economic management and the achievement of our important social justice objectives.
MS SZUTY (5.09): Madam Speaker, I have just a few thoughts to state about the Federal Government's budget announced yesterday. Firstly, it is an expansionary budget, which is what the people of Australia have been calling for. The Federal Government has taken on the problem of unemployment, which, as I have said on many occasions, is the issue that Australians feel warrants the most urgent attention. There is a clear social justice component to the budget, with the increase in Medicare contributions balanced by a commitment to reduce hospital waiting lists.
The major plus I see is the public housing boost, with an increased commitment to community housing. There is a need for many housing solutions, particularly as Australia's population grows and more demand is placed on our land. I look forward to examining the new social housing subsidy scheme which aims to have public housing managers, be they State Housing Ministers or other managers in the housing sector, raise money from the private sector for projects. I will be extremely keen to see what arrangements are put in place to ensure that this program has an impact and that it does not leave social housing programs without government support. I have continuing reservations, however, about the provision for higher education. Despite the recent increases in TAFE funding, there is still a need for more capacity in the university system which will not be met by the extra 21,700 places funded by this budget. We have to make a total commitment to our young people, and part of that commitment involves university places.
Turning from national to local considerations, I am disappointed at the decrease in transitional funding for the ACT, which we have nevertheless been prepared for. On a positive note, I am pleased that the Federal Government has finally given the financial go-ahead for three new building projects that have been on the drawing board for some time - new headquarters for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Australian Taxation Office and a new annex for the War Memorial. The refurbishment of Scarborough House will also give the construction industry a boost.
I do not agree with some media commentators who last night attempted to make these projects appear to be preferential treatment for Canberra, and I can only lament the fact that the Treasurer could not defend the decision to fund them, other than to say that you cannot expect public servants to work in buildings that are 60 years old. This, unfortunately, does not give a good impression to the national audience, who would probably feel that in the current economic climate the building projects could have better gone interstate. I have a feeling that many
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .