Page 2089 - Week 07 - Thursday, 16 June 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Deputy Speaker, a lot has been said about all sorts of things. The word I have heard people use time and time again is "vision". One thing I need to say is that vision without strategy is absolutely useless. Everybody stands up here and talks about vision and alternatives and all sorts of things. Not once in three years or three budgets have I heard Ms Follett talk about any strategy. Mr Kaine and Mrs Carnell were right when they said that, and I reiterate it. There is no strategy at all in what Ms Follett has said. Small amounts of money have been scattered all over the place, mainly to satisfy little interest groups that Ms Follett wants to satisfy. She has gone now. I also would be ashamed if I delivered what she did in the budget.
Mr Deputy Speaker, there is no doubt that the future of the ACT economy depends on sound management of government. There is a need for fiscal discipline - that is, the cutting of waste and cost in the public sector, and the pegging of rates, charges and taxes. Ms Follett acknowledged that by saying that there has been no increase in rates, charges and taxes in this budget. But, then again, the people in Reid are paying an extra 19.8 per cent, the people of Banks are paying an extra 12.6 per cent, the people of Conder an extra 10.78 per cent, and the people of Gordon an extra 14.65 per cent. Ms Follett talks about social justice; but, in comparison, the people of Forrest are paying a 0.54 per cent increase. There is social justice for you! The rates of a multimillionaire living in Forrest go up by 0.54 per cent while those of the poor old single mum or single dad or whatever in Banks, Richardson or Conder go up by 12.6 per cent, and those of someone living in Reid go up by 19.88 per cent.
Mr Lamont: Last year you and the Red Hill ratepayers association were screaming about the rate increases in Forrest.
MR DE DOMENICO: Before Mr Lamont interjects, tell him to read the facts. They speak for themselves. He might learn something. Mr Deputy Speaker, the ACT Government needs to analyse closely the two areas of growth for business - that is, enhancing existing businesses and attracting new businesses - and provide a diversity of business opportunities with high-quality job availability. What has the Government done about that in the budget? It talks a lot about the future of employment in the ACT being dependent on the growth of the private sector. What does it do about it? The answer is nothing. Ms Follett came in here the other day and said, "Listen, I have allowed $200,000 for business incentive". Last year she allowed the same amount of money, but it was swallowed up within two minutes by one company, Auspace. One wonders where the $200,000 is going to go this year, and one wonders what is going to happen when it runs out. The answer is, as usual, nothing, because the cupboard seems to be bare.
The total business environment, Mr Deputy Speaker, needs to be clearly defined in comparison with competing States. That is obvious. It is not enough, in fact it is nonsensical, to say that Canberra is a great place in which to live and work if, on the other hand, we have a high tax regime, cumbersome controls and procedures, and disincentives to invest. A good example is the ACT tender agency which was established 12 months ago and is still compiling names, products, et cetera. It does not call tenders and continues to purchase goods from outside Canberra without calling on local suppliers. When is it intended to give ACT business the opportunity to play on a level playing field and have an equal chance to quote for government requirements? Nothing was said about that.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .