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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 2 Hansard (11 March) . . Page.. 629 ..

MR OSBORNE

United States Congress has a big say in the formulation of that country's budget process, a process that is more complex than doing the numbers in the Territory. If they can manage it, so can we. I have been saying this for a couple of years now, but, hopefully, today is a first step forward.

Our present budgetary system, I am sure, works fine for a typical Westminster majority parliament, but, as members may have noticed, we do not have one of those and all the expectations are, as I have said earlier, that we probably never will. If that is to be the case, this Assembly needs options to come forward with a new budgetary system, one that by its nature will work within the constraints that a minority government finds itself in, and I believe that a draft budget is one such option.

During my time as a member each budget has been presented as a "take it or leave it" package. Until now I have supported these budgets even though I think all have contained some ideas that I have not been completely comfortable with. One day, however, the answer from the parliament may well be "leave it" at a time when reasonable adjustments could be made to keep the majority of members happy.

A draft budget will see the Government retain its prerogative to set the bottom line, but everything above that could be adjustable so long as the net outcome remained the same. In other words, if the Government proposed to reduce the deficit by $10m from the previous year and chose to do this by introducing a certain levy to increase revenue, then this could be adjusted to, say, having a combination of a smaller levy, an increase in rates, and reducing the level of a service. All of this could be done with the help of the wider Canberra community. The downside is that this style of budgeting would require a lot more cooperation than we usually see from the major parties on financial matters and a far greater acceptance by them of the realities of minority government. The message for you both today is that, for the time being at least, this is as good as it gets; so, the sooner that you adjust the budgetary framework, the better the people of Canberra will be served.

My final point today, Mr Speaker, and it is very relevant, is that I strongly believe that there are programs in the budget which just need to go, especially those for single-issue, self-interest groups. I guess it is easier for the Government to pass out a few brown paper bags to these vocal groups than it would be to put them in their place. I question why these self-appointed, puffed-up windbags should be given any taxpayers' money at all. Groups such as the Conservation Council are no more than lobby groups. They are no more than publicly funded lobbyists who run around like hysterical Chicken-lickens, crying, "The sky is about to fall". While we have an annual operating loss of $150m, why do they deserve government funding ahead of such things as hospital equipment, nurses, schoolteachers and buses? Surely the time has come to do more than just rock the boat in dealing with this type of group. It is time to hack a hole in it. I understand, Mr Speaker, that the Government has chosen not to give the Conservation Council $54,000 this year, and I fully support it. That is one of my election promises, Mr Speaker, that has been kept.

Let us be positive, as I said earlier, Mr Speaker, and I ask members again to work towards a better model. I am happy to be involved in the process, Mr Speaker. Obviously, today and on Tuesday, the Government did not receive what they hoped for from the Labor Party, but I did not expect the Labor Party to come forward with too

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