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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 12 Hansard (21 November) . . Page.. 4111 ..

MR WHITECROSS (continuing):

We have reduced the subsidy". That was a classic piece of Carnell doublespeak - "We have not increased the fares; we have reduced the subsidy". Mr Speaker, these are examples of the double-dealing that we have seen by this Government in its handling of Canberra' public transport system.

I want to touch on a couple of other matters in relation to these appropriations. One, of course, is the proposed transfer of Works and Commercial Services to Totalcare and of some of the operations of Totalcare to ACTION. This arrangement was so thoroughly thought through by the Government and so carefully considered by the Minister that for the one function being transferred from Totalcare to ACTION the Minister cannot even tell the Assembly whether it is running at a profit or a loss. He told us one thing in the Assembly. He told the Estimates Committee another thing. Today, when asked to clarify the situation, he said, "I am not really sure. I have to go away and think about that". For the one function that he is transferring from Totalcare to ACTION, which he decided to do, he cannot even tell us whether the service is running at a profit or a loss.

Mr Speaker, another extraordinary event was witnessed by those of us in the Estimates Committee when discussing this Totalcare fleet transfer with the Minister. We asked the Minister when the contracts - which have already expired - with Education and Health for the operation of the Totalcare fleet were going to be put out to tender. They said, "They are going to be put out to tender in January 1997". I said, "Wait a minute. So, you are telling us that you are going to put these things out to tender in January 1997, immediately after you have handed them over to ACTION. You are going to give them to ACTION and then, effectively, tender the contracts out to somebody else". A little huddle formed, with Mr Turner, Mr De Domenico and some others. Then up they bobbed and said, "No. We will go through to December 1997 and then we will tender them". That is how clearly Mr De Domenico had thought out the transfer of these functions to Totalcare and of the functions from Totalcare to ACTION. This shows what a disgrace this Minister is.

MS HORODNY (1.51 am): Mr Speaker, we have a range of concerns about the operations of this department. First of all, I turn to the environment part of the department. It has been an ongoing irritation to us that the environment is treated with such a low priority by this Government. There is no clearly defined part of the ACT Public Service which is responsible for environmental matters. The environment functions within Urban Services are split up across a number of groups and branches within the department. Parks and conservation is in the City Services Group. Environment policy and regulation is in the Strategy and Business Group. Environmental assessments are in the Planning and Land Management Group. There is no provision made for advice on environmental matters to be easily coordinated and given directly to the Government.

The Government's lack of concern for the environment also shows up in the budget papers. In Budget Paper No. 2 - The 1996-97 Budget at a Glance - the environment section of this paper is the only section that does not show the proposed budget expenditure. Does the Government not know how much it is spending on the environment, or does it not care?

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