Page 2790 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 13 September 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR ACTING SPEAKER: You certainly cannot table it.
MR LAMONT: Could I also suggest that it probably would have no effect if I flicked it across the room. In the Excellence in Public Management awards, the ACT Government award of 1994 went to the ACT Electricity and Water Authority for its future water supply strategy for the ACT. This is a significant award in relation to the degree of public consultation that this Government and its agencies are committed to. Mr Acting Speaker, as you have indicated, it is not appropriate to table the award, but I think it is appropriate to table and to provide to each member of the Assembly the run-down of why ACTEW received this award.
The ACT Government, in acknowledging the very sound basis of this public consultation model, has included the same strategies in other public consultations which we have seen the benefits of. We have seen the benefits of an expanded and well enhanced ACTION network, unlike what those across the road here want to happen. We have Mrs Carnell with her hands across her face. If I was as embarrassed as she was, I would have my hands across my face as well. The simple fact is that, in the one-page budget strategy which she tabled in this house earlier this year, her only commitment to public consultation and deliverance of services was to slash $34m out of ACTION. If I were you, Mr De Domenico, or you, Mr Kaine, that would absolutely outrage me, because what she will deliver through that budget process is no buses in your electorate. You go to the people of Tuggeranong and you tell them that. You are not game to. The one-page budget document has disappeared without trace. Mr Acting Speaker, the commitment that this Government has to delivering sound financial policy, sound fiscal outcomes in line with the expectations of our community, has been further acknowledged this day by an organisation with credibility, unlike the Opposition - the Institute of Public Administration.
Fuel Franchise Fee Revenue
MR HUMPHRIES: My question is to the Treasurer. Can the Treasurer explain to the Assembly why revenue from petrol franchise fees was over $500,000 below the expected figure during the last financial year? Can she assure the Assembly that this is not as a result of cross-border sales of diesel fuel under the New South Wales diesel off-road exemption scheme? Can the Treasurer assure the Assembly that neither she nor her department is aware of any such cross-border sales?
MS FOLLETT: Mr Acting Speaker, I believe that I have fully answered this question previously.
Mr Humphries: I do not think you have.
MS FOLLETT: I believe that I have. From memory, Mr Acting Speaker, the reason why we are down on that particular revenue item - it is less than $500,000 - as I have explained before, is the timing question and also the compliance question. There was, I understand, a very large payment made just after the ledgers closed. I understand that the Revenue Office is satisfied that the revenue is in line with expectations, and, in particular, that the diesel fuel revenue is also in line with expectations.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .