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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 9 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 2646 ..

MR WHITECROSS (continuing):

You do not have to try too hard for Mrs Carnell to start trotting out the Howard and Costello rhetoric about how it is not their fault either. Mrs Carnell cannot really distance herself from the Federal Government, and she really agrees with what the Federal Government has done here, Mr Speaker. That is her fundamental problem. She agrees with what Howard and Costello have done, because she is doing exactly the same things in the ACT as those which she is trying to criticise Mr Howard and Mr Costello for doing federally.

Mr Speaker, you only have to look at Mrs Carnell's last budget and at this Federal budget, and the picture is perfectly clear. You can look at capital works and the commitment of the Howard Government to spending money on capital works in this Territory, to investing in this Territory; and then you can look at Mrs Carnell's record on spending money on capital works, on commitments to this Territory, on keeping this Territory going. You can look at the Public Service and Mr Howard's cuts to Public Service numbers, his lack of belief in the public sector; and you can look at Mrs Carnell and her cuts to Public Service numbers, her lack of belief in the public sector. You can look at Mr Howard's cuts to social services that ordinary families depend on, whether it is dental services, child care or tertiary education; and you can look at Mrs Carnell's own record of cuts to community services in this Territory. The parallels are there, Mr Speaker. Mrs Carnell cannot distance herself from Mr Howard's actions in this budget because Mr Howard is following the model that Mrs Carnell laid down last year.

Mr Speaker, I can agree with one thing that Mrs Carnell said in her speech. The best thing that can be said about the budget is that the Federal Government did not cancel the capital works for Russell Offices and the Geological Survey Organisation office. Given that the buildings were already committed, they agreed to keep funding them. Mr Speaker, I have to say that I am relieved that they agreed to keep funding them, because they are important projects. But it is really a bit of cold comfort when you consider the capital works that they have abandoned. They have abandoned the National Film and Sound Archive. They have abandoned the national headquarters for the AFP. The Minister for Territories, the Federal Minister who is responsible for the ACT, who is meant to be looking after our interests around the Cabinet table, could not even persuade them to build his own new headquarters building in Canberra. That is how effective Mr Smith is. That is how effective Mrs Carnell's lobbying for this Territory is. Mr Smith, the Minister for this Territory, could not even persuade them to go ahead with his own building, let alone any of the other investments which this Territory desperately needs. Mr Speaker, it is not a good record.

That is leaving aside the Museum of Australia. Mr Humphries and Brendan Smyth, the former member for Canberra, stood on the foreshore at Yarramundi and created the impression for all and sundry that a vote for the Liberals was going to be a vote for a national museum at Yarramundi. What happened when it transpired that, in fact, they had no intention at all of doing that? Mr Humphries went on ABC radio and said, "Oh, but you did not read the fine print. If you had read the fine print, you would have known that we were not going to build the National Museum; we were just going to think about it". So, we have $1.5m to think about it some more; but no building, no investment in Canberra and no jobs for Canberrans in the construction industry. That is the reality.

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