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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 7 Hansard (18 June) . . Page.. 1839 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

What happened last year, Mr Speaker? We had already agreed as States and Territories to give up something, to give up the specific purpose grants; and then last year, lo and behold, we were going to get the real per capita guarantee only if we signed the competition policy agreement. Of course, this year, under a totally different government, we are going to get the real per capita guarantee only if we pay a certain amount of money to the Commonwealth to plug up their budget hole. It just strikes me that they are both pretty rotten, Mr Speaker. It would appear that the number of times the States have to pay for the real per capita guarantee is really just a matter of for how many years we have to go to Premiers Conferences.

There is certainly no doubt that the Premiers and the Chief Ministers were pretty upset and not happy about the approach that was taken by the Federal Government. Equally, we were not happy last year, and I am sure Ms Follett would say that we were not happy the year before that either. It is simply an ongoing problem for Canberra. That does not mean that we should sit back and accept it. It means that we have to get in there and fight. That is what we on this side of the house are attempting to do. We are attempting to say to the Commonwealth, "Hey, you cannot live in this city and not pay your own way". I am fascinated that those opposite somehow think that that is a joke. There are a number of areas in which the ACT Government does have a capacity to charge the Commonwealth, and we will be finding every single one of them, Mr Speaker, because for too long people in Canberra have had to foot the bill for a Commonwealth government that does not seem to understand the very special needs of the ACT.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Debate resumed from 26 March 1996, on motion by Mr Stefaniak:

That the Assembly takes note of the paper.

MS REILLY (4.30): I would like to say at the outset that, obviously, the provision of custodial care for juveniles is a difficult issue. The provision of quality services for these young people is not easy to achieve, and I think we must recognise that. But we also need to recognise that these are young people who have got into difficulties for a number of reasons, and we need to ensure that we give enough energy, funds and resources to resolve the problems that they have. It is no good trying to pretend that they will not happen again if we do not give those resources.

Coming to the report by the Official Visitor, let us consider that. This is a quite special report because next Sunday it will have its first anniversary from when it was first presented. Not until now have we been able to discuss it properly. I am not quite sure of the reason why it took so long for it to receive the light of day through being presented to this house. It took nearly nine months to reach that stage.

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