Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

None . . Page.. 1666 ..

Mr Speaker, we are told that we consulted over the budget only with people who were our business mates. Let me read the list of people who were consulted over this budget: The Association of Parents and Friends of ACT Schools, the ACT Council of P and C Associations - they are mates of the Government?; ACT Sports House; the Canberra Police and Citizens Youth Club; the Australian Conservation Foundation; Greening Australia, ACT and South-East New South Wales; the Trades and Labour Council of the ACT - mates of the Government?; the Canberra Rates Association - certainly not mates of the Government; the Council on the Ageing; the ACT Council of Social Service - mates of the Government?; the Community Information and Referral Service of the ACT; the Belconnen Community Council; the Gungahlin Community Council; the Weston Creek Community Council; the Tuggeranong Community Council; the North Canberra Community Council - all mates of the Government? We have a lot of mates out there! That is all I can say.

Mr Speaker, I want to make two points about arts funding. This may be more a misunderstanding than anything else. We have not funded the school of dance and drama at the Institute of the Arts because they have decided not to have a school of dance and drama. We would love to have pushed money into their pockets, but they did not want any money. They are not going ahead with the school of dance and drama. They decided to abandon the school of dance for the foreseeable future, and any school of drama will occur, if at all, in the school of general studies, not in the Institute of the Arts.

As far as arts funding is concerned, Mr Macklin is wrong when he says that the funding we are providing for things like public art and for the Health Promotion Fund are not recurrent. The only element of the Health Promotion Fund about which there is any doubt is the question of how much tobacco consumption there is in the ACT. If people continue to consume at the rate we expect, then that is the amount of money we expect to achieve into that fund. If they stop using tobacco, I suppose we will get less than we expect; but we all know that that is not particularly likely. Mr Speaker, the public art program funding is in association with the capital works program, but it is not for capital works types of issues, like architects’ plans or quantity surveying. It is for public art, commissions for public art, in association with the capital works program.

Mr Speaker, I want to conclude by asking a question, and those opposite can jump up and answer it if they wish. It is up to them to do so. Ms Follett has said that if we had had an ALP budget at this time, if the people of the ACT had not given her her marching orders on 18 February, she would not have made any of the cuts which have been referred to in this budget.

Mrs Carnell: And she would not have borrowed.

MR HUMPHRIES: And she would not have borrowed. Presumably, because she has not announced any, she would not have imposed any new taxes, but she still would have had to face the $30m deficit that we ended up with in her last year of office. She still would have had all the unfunded promises that she did not put any money aside for, such as the Clinical School, the police station and all that sort of thing.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .