Page 2172 - Week 08 - Thursday, 10 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
While I am about making corrections on detail, I refer the Treasurer to page 8 of the quarterly report. In program 1, of the expenditure for the year ended 30 June 1992 there is reported recurrent expenditure of $3.716m and capital expenditure of zero. Yet if you add the two columns up, according to the Treasurer's report, it comes to $3.808m. To me, $3.716m plus nothing does not add up to $3.808m. Again, it is probably an error that was not picked up in editing, but one would expect the Treasury and the Treasurer to be a bit more precise when reporting on the financial affairs of the Territory.
I am concerned that, in addition to these small errors, the Treasurer has claimed a surplus that has had the effect of giving misleading comfort to this community. The inference to be drawn from the media statement she put out was that the ACT was in good financial health, with a modest excess of revenue over expenditure. That statement is partly true, but it fails to point out that receipts from specific purpose payments are not available for general application. They are confined to the programs for which the funding is provided under an agreement with the Commonwealth. It is true that more and more of these programs are becoming untied, but that merely gives managers of the programs an ability to meet needs more flexibly. It does not give them the ability to shift money from the program to other areas such as running costs, salaries or other activities not included in the ambit of the specific purpose program. A claim based on half-truth is not a valid claim.
What we see displayed in the Treasurer's media statement is a chimera. The benign face belies a savage stinging tail, but that is not inconsistent with the Government's view on financial management. The Treasurer continues to delight in taking a lottery attitude to the Territory's financial capacities. Schools with fewer than 100 students continue to operate, having been reopened last financial year at a cost of about half a million dollars. Yet the Government objects to spending a similar amount of money, on their own claim - and I do not agree with it - by amending the Rates and Land Tax Act to exclude those who should not be taxed but have fallen foul of poor drafting and an intransigent government attitude towards finetuning of the legislation. It is left to the Opposition to take the initiative on this matter. The Government has just brought down its own Bill, but it does not remove the social injustices. What it does is tighten things up so that the Government can get more revenue and make the Act even more inflexible. But they do not mind spending half a million dollars reopening and maintaining schools that need not be reopened.
The better cities program is being pursued with enthusiasm to attract some $13m in funds from the Commonwealth, at the same time relying on the private sector, still reeling under the Labor-produced mother of all depressions, to supply the other $58m. The Minister for Planning has said that he hopes to raise all of that amount from the private sector. If that outcome is not achieved, perhaps he can win another lottery to raise the balance needed. This may well be necessary because the Government on this issue, as on many others, does not appear to have consulted with the private sector to see whether they are ready and willing to meet the Government's expectations of a $58m investment.
Mr Wood: That is what I said. I have no doubt.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .