Page 4091 - Week 15 - Thursday, 17 December 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Madam Speaker, the analysis that I have had conducted concludes that the negative impacts of Fightback would be greater in the ACT than elsewhere in Australia. In other words, there is a quite disproportionate effect on the ACT of Dr Hewson's proposals. That should, of course, be no surprise to members. Dr Hewson and, indeed, Liberals in general totally reject the role of government in the economy. They have quite consciously written off Canberra and the Commonwealth Public Service. They have done that, I believe, in a headlong rush to emulate some of the failed practices of people like Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan. They seem to be the heroes of the current Liberals.
The Treasury analysis that I have had done shows that the spending cuts proposed by Dr Hewson would total $340m in Canberra in the first three years. They would result in a loss of 3,200 Commonwealth public sector jobs, or 8.5 per cent of Commonwealth employment in the ACT. This massive job loss in the Commonwealth public sector would lead to a flow-on effect into other jobs in the ACT, and our analysis shows that it would lead to the loss of a further 1,900 jobs in other ACT industries. So, there would be a cut of a total of 5,000 jobs in Canberra, and a cut of that order would devastate our community. It would take us years to recover from that kind of a setback. We might, in fact, rename Fightback "setback" as far as the ACT goes.
The Liberals' cuts to spending in the ACT would also have other major impacts on our economy. For example, they have made threats about the future of Commonwealth construction projects like the new Foreign Affairs and Trade building at York Park. Dr Hewson has also said that he will cut 5 per cent from State and Territory funding - about $52m for the ACT over the first three years. This means that we would face much larger budget problems than the adjustments that we are already facing in our transition to State-type funding. Madam Speaker, I regret to say that that kind of extra funding cut would inevitably lead to cuts in ACT government services and staffing levels or, of course, much increased rates and taxes.
Dr Hewson would apply his new tax to government services. Those services, he says, are in competition with the private sector. So, Canberra householders would undoubtedly find, every time they paid an electricity bill or a gas bill, that Dr Hewson's hand would also be in their pocket. The cost of electricity alone, Madam Speaker, is estimated to rise by some 11 per cent as a result. Of course, water, sewerage and garbage services are all expected to attract the GST, and that would, of course, have to be paid by local ratepayers.
Mr Cornwell: I raise a point of order, Madam Speaker. I draw your attention to standing order 118(a); answers shall be concise. This has gone on for five minutes, Madam Speaker. If she would like to debate it later, we would be happy to oblige her.
MADAM SPEAKER: Thank you for bringing it to my attention, Mr Cornwell. Ms Follett is in order. Ms Follett, please continue.
MS FOLLETT: Madam Speaker, I have outlined only some of the negative effects that Dr Hewson's proposals have for our own community. I now table the full ACT Treasury report, for members' information.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .