Page 3473 - Week 11 - Thursday, 14 October 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
must be aware that it would not be denying the Government the $700,000 in this year or the $1m in a full year that would be gained by the increase in the petrol franchise fee; rather, the effect of a disallowance, as worded by Mr Humphries, would be to revoke petrol franchise fees and diesel fuel fees in their entirety.
That would cost this Territory, and the budget of this Territory, Madam Speaker, some $26m. How on earth the Opposition thinks the Territory can cope with having $26m wiped out of its budget is just beyond belief.
Mr Berry: They do not have to care. They are in opposition.
MS FOLLETT: No, they do not have to care. In moving to make their cheap political points they have, in fact, portrayed a lack of understanding of even the most basic drafting of a motion, Madam Speaker. Members must be aware of that. You are not looking at what the Government has done in this budget; if you pass this motion, you wipe out $26m a year. It would not be possible, Madam Speaker, under our standing orders, for the Government to reintroduce a determination for another six months.
Madam Speaker, I presume that Mr Humphries did not intend such a dramatic consequence of his motion. I think I am probably being generous, because all we ever hear from the Liberals is, "No taxes, no taxes; but spend more". "All it takes is money", Mrs Carnell has said on television. This is, in my view, a demonstration that this Opposition has no concept of what it is to be in government, and never intends to be either. Like their Federal counterparts, they are merely intent on bringing down the Government's budget if they possibly can, and by any means that they can - by fair means or foul. The means they are employing today are, indeed, foul. They are irresponsible and they deserve to be denied by this Assembly.
MR DE DOMENICO (11.16): Madam Speaker, I am happy to support the motion put forward by Mr Humphries. Let us have a look at the situation, Madam Speaker. First of all, Ms Follett, in her budget speech, stood up and said that any difference in the diesel fuel excise is going to affect a very, very small number of people. We found out yesterday that it is 2.5 per cent. Then this morning she stood up and told us that it is only a minimal tax increase anyway. She also said that it is of concern; that they are very concerned that they have to put on these extra taxes. Then she said that if we did not increase the taxes it would not be any cheaper because we would not find anything being passed on to the consumer. Then she said that all we are here to do is to obstruct the Government. She did not mention the fact that any increase in the fuel price automatically increases the price of every other product that people buy, for a start.
She told us that in the future Mr Connolly is going to stand up and tell us how he, marvellously, is going to reduce the price of petrol by introducing independent operators. She is not going to send oil companies out of business. The only people who are going to be sent out of business are our local retailers. But then, Mr Connolly has never attacked the local retailers. Never let it be said that Mr Connolly has ever attacked anybody.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .