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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 1 Hansard (20 February) . . Page.. 25 ..

Ms Tucker: But you could raise it if you think that would be desirable.

MR HUMPHRIES: You have only just raised the issue with me, Ms Tucker.

Ms Tucker: Okay; you had not thought of it.

MR HUMPHRIES: You have only just raised the issue with me. I could not foreshadow it.

Mr Whitecross: You have not negotiated with them. You would not know.

MR HUMPHRIES: This is the first time I have heard this suggestion. The trade unions are not interested, though, in helping just those on lower wages. They want all ACT government workers to get that 9 per cent rise and I think, with great respect, that that is a cost we simply cannot afford, and we do not have the capacity to sustain it. Mr Speaker, I think that members opposite ought to be realistic enough and honest enough to say cleanly and squarely to the community how they would pay for their offer if they were in office; indeed, whether they would make an offer of 9 per cent if they were in office.

Mr Berry: We would not have the same priorities as you. You put yourself in this hole.

MR HUMPHRIES: They have different priorities, apparently. They would not admit the same priorities, apparently. What would they cut? What would you cut in order to meet those sorts of payments? I heard Ms Follett say that she would cut consultancies in the ACT Government. We have done a bit of research on this question and it appears that, in fact, the amount being spent on consultancies under this Government, at least in the areas I have looked at in my own portfolio, is considerably lower than the amount that was spent by the previous Government in the same areas. Take, for example, the area of legal services in the Attorney-General's portfolio.

Ms McRae: It does not negate the point. You can still cut consultancies.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, if those opposite would just listen for a moment they might learn something. Let us look at the Attorney-General's portfolio. In the 1992-93 financial year in that portfolio, $1.619m was spent on consultancies.

Mr Berry: What has that to do with it?

MR HUMPHRIES: You have said that we should cut consultancies, but we have already done that. We are spending much less on consultancies than you were. You, presumably, were not wasting money, were you, Mr Berry?

Mr Berry: But we had a far better record with the unions than you lot have.

MR HUMPHRIES: If you were spending money on consultancies, presumably we are entitled to spend some too. I will not go through these figures at this stage. The point I am making, Mr Speaker, is that those opposite claim imaginary savings to be made somewhere else in this enormous budget. They say, "You will find the money

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