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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1995 Week 9 Hansard (23 November) . . Page.. 2480 ..

Ms Follett: Was that an election promise?

MR WHITECROSS: I do not recall it being mentioned in the election. "Not one cent more", I remember; but I do not remember "Bus fares up 30 per cent". Once again, we are not seeing a strategy designed to bring people onto the buses; we are seeing a strategy designed to make it less attractive for people to be on the buses. Mr Osborne spoke from the heart, as he usually does, about how important it is to have a bus system, and he pointed out some problems he has with bus routes in Tuggeranong. He has the benefit of some information I do not have, and I will be interested to discuss that with him later. What he describes strikes me as being rather strange.

While I agree with Mr Osborne's concerns, I do not think it is entirely fair to blame ACTION management for the result. It is Mrs Carnell who has decided that the appropriation should be only $41m, not ACTION management. ACTION management are just doing their job, trying to live within the budget. I agree with Mr Osborne that that is not enough and that we should have more. I do not want to see services cut, but that is going to be the result of the appropriation that has been handed down. Like the Greens, I do not want to see services cut. Like the Greens, I believe that we should have a strong, viable public transport system. But, unlike the Greens and unlike Mr Moore and unlike Mr Osborne, I am not willing to tear up our system of government just to satisfy the urge to get the warm inner glow from having moved an amendment to this budget or to satisfy the short-term political expedient of being able to tell some particular lobby group that you tried.

We all know that most of these amendments we have seen floating around the chamber and being publicised by various members in the community were not actually brought forward until after the Labor Party said that we would not be voting for them. Suddenly, after the Labor Party said that we would not be voting for them, everyone on the crossbenches has a list of amendments a mile long. They all see instantly that this is their chance to go out and tell various sectional interest groups that they are right on side, confident in the knowledge that the Labor Party will not be supporting their strategy.

The reality is that if you appoint a Liberal government you do not get Labor Party policies, and the unfortunate thing is that the people on the crossbenches seem to want Labor Party policies. They seem to want the kind of education system and the kind of public transport system that Labor stands for, but they have not made the right choice in the government. Instead they have a government that is going to deliver them reductions in public transport and has not given them the funding to maintain education.

Mr Moore makes much of the revelation, as he would have it, that if people vote against the budget the end result will be that hidden somewhere in the secret things behind this is an aspiration on the part of the Labor Party to one day be in government. If we vote against the Liberal Party Government, there is this secret agenda, according to Mr Moore, that the Labor Party wants to be in government. It is no secret, Mr Moore. The Labor Party is in this place as an alternative government, and we will always, while we are on the opposition benches, stand as the alternative government and say why we think the current Government is doing badly and why we think we could do better. That is our job, Mr Moore. That is our aspiration as members of the Labor Party.

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