Page 2471 - Week 09 - Thursday, 17 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Kaine: That guarantees their vote for the next three months.
MS FOLLETT: Madam Speaker, I make no bones about the fact that the most memorable statement by Mr Moore was that he would support the Appropriation Bill unamended, and I thank him for that. At least both Mr Moore and Ms Szuty understand and appreciate the social justice nature of this budget, and again I appreciate their comments in that regard.
Mr De Domenico seemed to get to his feet really for the prime purpose of proving that he could read out aloud what other people had written. He seemed to feel that he needed to prove that. Madam Speaker, if I were he, I would be trying to prove it as well, because he certainly proved that he cannot count. He has, in fact, made a twit of himself on some of the issues that he raised, not the least of which was payroll tax. Quite clearly, he has not recalled to mind the actions of his leader in regard to payroll tax in the only budget brought down by Mr Kaine. Mr Kaine, in his only budget, increased the marginal rate at which most payroll tax is collected from 6 per cent to 7 per cent. He took that action in a deliberate move to raise $4m in his budget. Mr De Domenico clearly has forgotten about that. I would like to add, Madam Speaker, that in his one and only budget the amount raised in additional revenue by Mr Kaine was, in fact, $46m. He also raised land tax. I think that has slipped members' minds as well. He raised land tax, Madam Speaker - all of the land tax that applied at the time - from 0.75 per cent to one per cent. I think members opposite have to match the rhetoric with the actions at some stage; otherwise I am afraid, as I said, that ACIL have made the truest statement that they will ever make.
Madam Speaker, I say again that members opposite cannot count. I would like to refer everybody to their little countdown campaign, the "900 days to go" campaign. Members opposite put out a quite long press release about how there were 900 days to go before they got back into government and so on. It was treated with the contempt it deserved, of course. Nobody ran it, except the Liberals who put it on - - -
Mr Kaine: But you noticed it.
MS FOLLETT: I did notice it. They put a little poster on the window of their office on the first floor - "900 days to go" on the first day; the next day, "899 days to go"; the next day, "898 days to go". It has disappeared, Madam Speaker. I can only conclude that their maths deserted them after a couple of days. It is consistent with their performance in general on anything to do with figures. Their maths deserted them completely. The only other possible scenario is the one Mr Humphries suggested in his speech, which is that they do not really think they are going to be in government in 900 days, or 900 years. He said it himself.
I should like to refer briefly, because I am a merciful person, to Mrs Carnell's comments about the health budget. My colleague Mr Lamont, in the course of Mrs Carnell's comments, very kindly maintained a Kate poll of items where she would like more money spent and items where she would like less money spent. Not surprisingly to the people who were forced to listen to her inanities, it came out at 10 each way - 10 places where she wants to spend more and 10 where she wants to spend less. Again, I refer to the contrary message on fiscal responsibility being put forward by those opposite. I remind the Liberals, who seem to have forgotten, of Mrs Carnell's comments on the Julie Derrett program on 3 April.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .