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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 5 Hansard (26 August) . . Page.. 1400 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

the ACT Government already operates across every area of government. It would be ridiculous to suggest that we support one particular organisation at that level for that amount of money. There is work to be done and I say, on behalf of the ACT Government, that we are prepared to sit down and do that work.

I also have to put on the record that until now some elements of the campaign that have been run by those who believe that they have been doing the work of the institute have not been particularly helpful. I think some parts of this campaign have been less than creditable to the institute, or at least to those who believe that they have an interest in the ongoing funding of the institute. I have seen lots of what I would describe as pleas for middle-class welfare. I think that is not in the interests of a Territory which is facing a pretty hard time at present.

We have heard some very eloquent pleas from some very well-heeled people for the continuation of various forms of subsidy for activities that relate to them. I am also well heeled and I also enjoy a number of those activities, and I look forward to them continuing. I am also a consumer, the same sort of consumer as Mr Rugendyke is, of many of those facilities and services, but I do not necessarily ask the ACT taxpayer to pay excessive amounts of money for the provision of those services. Certainly, I would hope that we can provide services at a reasonably cost-effective level, and I will support that being an outcome, but I will not support a state of affairs where excessive amounts of money are spent on things that, frankly, the Territory could get more cheaply and as effectively elsewhere.

Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, much has been said in recent days about your own role in the Estimates Committee. I want to put on record that I have looked at what was said by you in the Estimates Committee and I consider your comments in that forum to have been quite valid and justifiable. You asked questions which I think needed to be asked. It is very easy for some members to grandstand, because there is a gallery full of people, about how outrageous it is that people who are witnesses before an Assembly committee are asked hard, fairly penetrating questions in those circumstances. The member in this place who has never asked hard, penetrating questions in those sorts of settings should stand up and contribute to this debate. I do not believe that there are any such people here.

Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, a great deal of nonsense has been said, not just in this debate today but this debate generally in the community. It is time that we were prepared to get down to the nitty-gritty, which is what level of support is appropriate for an institution which is, in essence, a Federal institution. If the classics department of the ANU - I think there is still one in existence - came forward tomorrow and said, "We would like $100,000 in funding from the ACT Government because we operate within the ACT and we believe we provide an ACT community service", why should we not accede to that request? There are a large number of areas of the ANU and other institutions, such as ADFA, all sorts of other Federal bodies, which provide some benefit to the ACT. We have not been in the business of funding them, for the most part, but we are now being asked to fund a particular Federal institution because, historically, we have. Well, that historical connection is being recognised by continuing funding over the next three years. But, Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker, it has to be justified. It has to be justified if it is to continue at levels which the institute would like to see it continue at.

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