Page 2076 - Week 07 - Thursday, 16 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In this context, Madam Speaker, before speaking to the budget, I feel that I must comment on this statement made by the Chief Minister in her presentation speech:
In last year's budget the Assembly made its wishes known concerning government schooling.
This statement clearly refers to the caveat or condition which was placed on last year's Appropriation Bill when it was passed by this Assembly, a caveat which I believe reflected the overwhelming view of the community at that time that the Government must be prevented from cutting 80 government school based positions. I said during the debate on 25 November 1993 that I considered that the caveat was a way to impose a condition on the Appropriation Bill whilst still guaranteeing its passage. In my view, this clearly demonstrated my commitment to the passage of the budget during what were very difficult and unfortunate circumstances.
Turning to this year's budget, Madam Speaker, let me say at the outset that I believe that the ACT Labor Government's budget for 1994-95 is reasonable in the context of the continuing decline in Commonwealth funding. After the severe strictures imposed on the ACT by the Commonwealth in 1993-94, when general purpose grants were reduced by 20 per cent, it is a relief, I think, to see that the reduction in general purpose funding in 1994-95 over that of 1993-94 is a more manageable 5 per cent. It is important to recognise that this less severe reduction in funding results from favourable demographic trends and adjustments in the process used by the Grants Commission, and, as the Chief Minister reminded the Assembly, "until the transition to State-type funding is completed, the Territory has to cope with the most difficult financial adjustment ever demanded of any State or Territory in the history of Federation".
I note that, as a part of the Labor Government's three-year budget strategy, the 2 per cent per annum efficiency dividend is now in its third year. This dividend is expected to realise savings of over $5m in 1994-95. Reductions in expenditure of this magnitude are obviously welcome. However, this salami-slicing approach, as the Canberra Times called it in yesterday's editorial, does mean that good and effective programs may be impacted more heavily than others where there is spare capacity. As was pointed out in the same Canberra Times editorial, it is perhaps surprising that the broad allocations of expenditure on almost all areas of government activity have been maintained relative to each other since before self-government.
This issue of the Government prioritising its objectives is one on which my colleague Mr Moore has spoken before, and no doubt will again in the course of this debate. In speaking at the in-principle stage of debate on the Appropriation Bill 1993-94 on 16 September 1993 my colleague Mr Moore said this:
The finances of this Assembly are still more or less the same, with the same set of priorities as were set for 1989. That says something particularly about the way this Assembly and the various governments have been able to readjust their own sets of priorities.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .