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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 5 Hansard (14 May) . . Page.. 1176 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

as the previous Estimates Committee pointed out, this was an unrealistic budget. We already know from the industrial disputes that this Government severely misjudged the industrial climate, and the predicted savings from the VMOs were obviously extremely ambitious.

The Greens believe that this whole exercise has been a cynical political exercise, from both sides, and not about transparency as the Government claims. We have even been assured that the Government will not borrow the money, as it can all be found from the Treasurer's Advance, capital works and so on. The convoluted argument is about needing to have more money appropriated even though they do not actually need more money. We have, at least until the Government's Financial Management Bill gets passed - presuming that it does - an Audit Act which is the existing mechanism for the transfer of funds and which could have been implemented with the same scrutiny or transparency if the Government had chosen.

MR SPEAKER: I call the Chief Minister.

Mrs Carnell: I am just going to present the Government response.

Ms McRae: No. I want to finish the debate.

MR SPEAKER: Very well. I do not think there is anybody else wishing to speak.

MS McRAE (11.49), in reply: I am concerned in case Mr Osborne, a member of the committee, wanted to speak. I will take the opportunity to sum up, very briefly. Thank you, Mr Speaker, for your forbearance.

Mr Kaine: Well, get up and support the Chief Minister. Go on; give the Chief Minister a vote before the debate is over.

MR SPEAKER: Order! Can we proceed with the debate?

MS McRAE: There is a minor distraction. Thank you to all the members. Quite clearly, from the debate and the issues covered in the debate, the Assembly can now see what was before the committee and why the committee concluded in the way that it did. Mrs Carnell chooses to put her own interpretation on it, as usual; but Mrs Carnell will learn, like the rest of us, that it does help to listen to people once in a while. Arguments were put, and put again by several members of the committee. Primarily, what the committee has a problem with - it still has not been answered - is from which part of the budget money is being taken, which use of the Audit Act would show but this action does not, and why we need another $14.2m when there is money within the budget. No matter what, those questions have not been answered. There is absolutely no problem when there is $12m in the Treasurer's Advance, $12m in the redundancy pool, and at least $12m in the capital works program. There is absolutely nothing to stop the Government from moving that money around.

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