Page 2717 - Week 09 - Thursday, 25 August 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Attorney-General's Department
Proposed expenditure - Division 120 - Legal Services to Government, $16,661,200 - agreed to.
Proposed expenditure - Division 130 - Community Legal Services, $7,043,500 - agreed to.
Proposed expenditure - Division 140 - Administration of Justice, $9,822,600 - agreed to.
Proposed expenditure - Division 150 - Maintenance of Law and Order, $51,138,000 - agreed to.
Housing and Community Services Bureau
Proposed expenditure - Division 160 - Housing and Community Services, $103,344,500 - agreed to.
Department of Urban Services
Proposed expenditure - Division 170 - Public Transport, $47,209,700
MR DE DOMENICO (3.43): I rise only to comment on the comments made by Mr Lamont earlier. Mr Lamont attempted to say that what other members of the Estimates Committee thought and did was wrong and that he was right. I would like to take umbrage at what Mr Lamont said. He gave us an interesting figure when he said that he believed that, in fact, the patronage of ACTION buses did go up by 0.06 per cent. Wow! I say "wow" because Mr Lamont would know that whilst patronage went up by 0.06 per cent the population of Canberra in the same time increased by 1.8 per cent. I am not a mathematician; but even I know that that means that, in a macro sense, patronage has decreased, which is what Mr Turner or Mr Flutter said. Anyway, someone got it wrong and the other person corrected him. I think that that needs to be put on the record.
Mr Lamont also suggested that the Industry Commission report was looked at very carefully before he, in turn, and his Government rejected it. It is interesting that the Industry Commission report was initiated by another Labor Government federally. It is interesting also because the Government's own Morgan and Travers report model was very similar, if not identical, to the Industry Commission report. That was a model commissioned by this Government. We also know that the Hilmer report and its recommendations literally mirror what has been said by the Industry Commission and also Morgan and Travers. Also, just today, Mr Kaine tabled a report on a review of a report from the Auditor-General of the ACT who - surprise, surprise! - also being a gentleman of much learning and much intellect, also mirrored what the Industry Commission, Morgan and Travers, and Hilmer had to say. It seems once again, therefore, that Mr Lamont and the Government are the only ones in left field who are not agreeing with what people with commonsense say from time to time.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .