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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 9 Hansard (4 September) . . Page.. 2898 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

I think you will find evidence that the particular company helped has done very well, but that is not enough. We need to know that it is actually good for the community as a whole. Remember that whenever we put money into a business incentive scheme it is money we could have put into an extra teacher, more computers in schools, fixing up cracks in the gutters or any of the other very important issues that come before us. It is a question of priority. If in the end the money put into business incentives produces a significant number of jobs that we would not have otherwise had, then probably it is worth while. But to barge ahead and say that a business coming into town has created 20 more jobs when in fact the jobs are effectively paid for by money that could have employed 20 people, say, in the Public Service achieves nothing.

Mr Whitecross needs to consider a series of issues. I hope you find that there is a major benefit. I also hope we will find a consistent approach to how you run business incentive schemes. For such an inquiry to come to a full understanding of the issues would take longer than we have. However, I hope the committee can at least make an initial finding. It would not surprise me to find the committee saying that further work ought to be done on this by the Public Accounts Committee after the next election. That is an option a committee always has under such circumstances. I think this reference is an excellent idea, and I would like to say congratulations to Mr Whitecross for thinking of this and taking it on. I have had doubts at the back of my mind for a long time, but I think we also have quite significant hopes.

MR CORBELL (11.53): It is very important that we look at issues surrounding the business incentive scheme and its operations. I think it is quite appropriate for Mr Whitecross to be moving this motion today, because it is important that the Public Accounts Committee look at how the Government is spending the funds and the revenue raised from the ACT community. That is the issue we are addressing here. This is not money for the Government to choose to do with as it will, without any form of accountability process. There are, I admit, processes in place which do allow the Opposition a degree of scrutiny of the business incentive scheme, but answers that have been provided to me by the Government on the operation of the business incentive scheme leave a lot of questions unanswered. Just how far do we go in using the term "commercial-in-confidence"? How far do we push that term? Certainly, auditors-general in other States of Australia have raised the issue that commercial-in-confidence is being used increasingly to deflect scrutiny of the expenditure of public funds by parliaments.

For that reason, it is very important that Mr Whitecross's motion be accepted here today, so that the Public Accounts Committee can look at just how well the community's funds are being used in the provision of support for businesses in the ACT. Supporting businesses in the ACT is important. It is important that we create an environment that allows businesses to grow and allows them to employ more people. As Mr Moore says, we also have to make sure that it is done in a way which is fair to all in our community, not just for the specific businesses that have been selected for assistance but also for businesses that perhaps have not received assistance but are competing in the same field.

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