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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 1 Hansard (2 February) . . Page.. 48 ..

MR STANHOPE: She did. The Chief Minister kept this community in the dark about her intentions for ACTEW, and she thumbs her nose at them now. The Government has failed its own test in terms of its willingness to consult, despite its rhetoric about its desire to involve the community in the governance of the Territory. In a similar vein, the Government has been just as arrogant in its approach to winning the support of members of this place and responding to expert criticism. Rather than base its case on credible evidence backed by solid argument, it adopts a chin-out, "you are with us or you are against us" posture, resorting to tactics of cajoling, bludgeoning and berating.

The eminent economists who authored and refereed the Australia Institute report were mere "local economists". Dr Hamilton told the superannuation inquiry he has never seen figures manipulated so wantonly in his years of watching quality debates. Professor Quiggan, a most respected and eminent academic, said he had never been subject to such extreme attacks on his personal reputation. What was their crime? They had the temerity to disagree with the Chief Minister.

When Mr Osborne announced he could not be convinced by the strength of the Government's argument and would vote against the sale, Mrs Carnell called him gutless. She said he could not take the hard decisions. Mr Hird used the same language today. This is no way to do business. Serious issues such as this should not be reduced to abuse and invective in this way. It is clearly the Government which has not been able to make the hard decision - to sift the evidence, weigh the options, argue the case with logic and credibility, put the time and effort into issues which are far from simple and which demand calm and deliberate reasoning if they are to be successfully addressed for the long-term good of Canberra and its citizens. No; this Government has instead opted for the easy way out, as is its wont, but this time the arguments are so flimsy and the issue so important that the habits of the past have been exposed and have failed. If one thing has particularly marked the course of the public debate leading to the Assembly's consideration of this issue, it is this demonstration of the Government's failed style of operation.

Mr Speaker, this is not a simple issue. The Government is correct to draw attention to the importance of getting the Territory's financial situation right, but it is wrong in its response on this occasion on two counts - first, in its simplistic grab for a cure-all solution and, second, in the detail of its chosen solution. The proposal to sell the Territory's largest public asset is not simple. It is a complex issue that demands detailed scrutiny and consideration, but the Government has not shown itself prepared to undertake that close examination. It cannot wait, as it never can. Instead, it has reverted to character - grab a solution and scramble for a justification.

It has largely fallen to the labour movement to subject the Government's proposal to the scrutiny demanded by the community. It was the Trades and Labour Council and the ALP who formed a privatisation committee to take up the challenge. It was the Trades and Labour Council which commissioned the Australia Institute report that so comprehensively debunked the Government's shaky financial logic. It was the parliamentary wing of the ALP that proposed the establishment of the superannuation select committee that has now convincingly demonstrated that there is more than one option available as a solution to the Territory's unfunded superannuation problem.

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