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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 4 Hansard (25 June) . . Page.. 1089 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

So, last year he was saying, "This is borrowing. The Chief Minister said borrowing was not on, but this is borrowing", and he highlighted that. But it gets better, Mr Speaker. The day before, Mr Speaker, on 6 May, on page 2 of the Canberra Times, Mr Moore was reported as follows:

Independent MLA Michael Moore said he would be examining the dividend -

from ACTEW -

carefully to ensure it was not being used by the Government as a sleight-of-hand way to borrow money through ACTEW.

What is the difference between last year and this year, Mr Speaker? I would ask Mr Moore: What is the difference between requiring the borrowing from ACTEW last year and forcibly selling the streetlights to them this year? We had the absurd situation of the Chief Minister coming into this place and saying that the arrangement for ACTEW to buy the streetlights in Canberra was a normal business arrangement. Mr Speaker, I do not know of many businesses where they are told that they have to buy an asset that is worth about $100m. Is that right, Mr Quinlan?

Mr Quinlan: Yes; for no return.

MR CORBELL: About $100m. They were told. It was not like the board making an independent decision and saying, "It is in the best interests of ACTEW to buy the streetlights". They were told by the Government to buy the streetlights. I do not understand whether that is an ordinary business activity, but it does not sound like one to me. In fact, it sounds exactly like what Mr Moore described it as last year - a sleight-of-hand way to borrow money. It sounds like a sleight-of-hand way to borrow money. Mr Moore said that last year, and would it not be wonderful if he were honest enough to say it again this year?

Mr Speaker, Mr Moore gets better and better. On 28 May last year Mr Moore was quite damning of the Government's approach in relation to borrowings through the use of ACTEW. Last year Mr Moore said this:

Last year it was the sale and lease-back of buildings, this year it took the money from ACTEW, next year it will probably sell the city's light poles to ACTEW ... it can't go on forever.

He was right, Mr Speaker, but he seems to have changed his mind. Now it is a clever budget. Now it is a caring budget. Maybe he hopes that the clever and the caring bit can go on forever. Certainly, his career is on the line when it comes to that, Mr Speaker, but his credibility is pretty shot when you look at what he said last year and what he said this year.

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