Page 2433 - Week 09 - Thursday, 17 September 1992

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


MS SZUTY (3.42): Madam Speaker, in preparing this speech in reply to the budget, I have drawn on my response to the budget strategy put forward by the Labor Government in June of this year. One of the key areas that I feel is an important government initiative is the need for a three-year strategic approach to be taken to the ACT budget, and my colleague Mr Moore has drawn attention to that. I acknowledge that the forward estimates have been included in the budget papers. But we have no vision of what this Government feels the ACT will achieve in the next three years, except for mention of a 2 per cent per annum reduction in recurrent operating funds for most programs over the next three years.

What we are offered at the end of each program in terms of an outlook for forward years is more of the same, with no targets, aims or plans of action identified. There are exceptions. ACT Corporate Management talks of the challenge of reducing expenditure by 2 per cent per annum over the next three years. Environment, Land and Planning have outlined that they need to reduce expenditure by the same amount. Community Services have outlined their programs and they say that they need to find one per cent efficiencies over the triennium. Fire and Emergency Services have restored my faith in forward planning by listing a set of goals that they feel the service should achieve in that period. For the rest, words such as "continue", "develop" and "review" are prominent, with the feeling that we are going to have much more of the same.

Over the next three budget years there is an estimated decline in recurrent receipts from the Commonwealth from $601m to $518m. In this same summary of receipts we see a decline in other recurrent receipts and an increase in taxation. We see some of the planning for future years in a more detailed look at the figures, with revenue from payroll tax, general rates, land tax, financial institutions duty, the new casino tax, and motor vehicle taxes and registration making hefty contributions to this rise. I do not read these figures as an increase in these taxes; nor do I detect a vision for Canberra, except to see more of the same.

The future outlooks of the various programs, despite their mention of achieving reductions, have not approached the need for major restructuring of the ACT Government Service. I am aware that the Chief Minister has put great faith in the bringing on line of a computerised personnel system to help identify the size of the ACT public service, which is estimated at 22,000 or less. While we may indeed have to wait for more accurate records of the number of public servants on the payroll, there is an imperative to ensure that the public sector is as lean as service provision will allow. While only addressed obliquely in this budget, work may need to be commenced on major restructuring initiatives, with the involvement of peak community groups, unions and the general community, so that when the computers identify our public service numbers we have agreed on strategies for restructuring.

Another key area of importance I was looking for in the Government's budget was a careful examination of the social justice needs of the community. These have been addressed to some extent. We have improved access to training and jobs, particularly for young people and women, providing community groups with funds to meet their superannuation and training costs, increased funds for pregnancy counselling, increased pastoral care for high school students, and the


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .