Page 2554 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 23 August 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mrs Carnell, in her comments, made some remarks about the budget presentation and her extreme difficulty in understanding it. All I can say to Mrs Carnell is that many other people did understand it. In fact, the budget presentation does conform to uniform national standards and it has been subject to scrutiny by the Loan Council. Under that kind of scrutiny the ACT budget has fared extremely well. We have also achieved a high credit rating - our AAA credit rating, which you never hear the Liberals talking about - that is the equal of that of any State in Australia. It absolutely refutes the suggestion that this budget is impenetrable or that something is hidden. Obviously, people who have a will to scrutinise this and who have the capacity to do so have done so and have come out with a favourable impression.
One of the speakers also made comments about the casino premium and the recommendation by the Estimates Committee that interest be added to that premium. I would put it to the Assembly that that has effectively been done with the additional $2.3m that the Government has allocated through the capital works program for the Playhouse theatre. I think that is a generous addition to the casino premium and one which the PDIC had the opportunity to comment on. They apparently agreed with it. There have been delays in the construction of some of the casino premium projects. Those delays, for the most part, have been caused by our commitment to proper consultation rather than by any unilateral action on the part of the Government. I believe that consultation is well worth while and will lead to better outcomes for the community.
Again, the Liberals seem to be arguing for spending the money just for the sake of getting rid of it. I will not promote that. I believe that the community is entitled to express a view through a proper consultation process, and that is what they are getting. As to the suggestion that the casino premium is in some way an electioneering or pork-barrelling exercise, I would remind members that the break-up of that premium was the subject of this Assembly's consideration, which was endorsed by the Government. It was not the other way round. So you can all take the credit for it, and I am happy to share it.
Madam Speaker, I return to general comment on the Estimates Committee report. It is clear that the Government itself has devoted a great deal of resources to providing information to the committee to assist it in its inquiries. It is no small measure of the value of the Estimates Committee process that the Government has consistently adopted and endorsed the vast majority of the committee's recommendations and will do so again this year. The Government is pleased that the committee has drawn to our attention such a range of issues, which will assist in maintaining the good government of the Territory. Our response supports all but seven of the recommendations. So, of the 37, we are supporting 30. I will not detail all of those recommendations as they are outlined in the response; but I would like to take the opportunity to comment on some of the general issues raised.
The committee has provided recommendations which, when adopted, will assist in further improving public sector accountability. I accept that there has been a developing process since self-government in terms of accountability. This includes the separate scrutiny of the 1993-94 budget outcome, inclusion of transitional information in budget documentation during the move to government finance statistics, and reference in annual
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .