Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 4 Hansard (28 March) . . Page.. 943 ..
MR QUINLAN (continuing):
So just two items in this budget, the interest earned on superannuation, about $50m, and this process that we have invented of taking an actuary's adjustment to our liability above the line - even though we have not funded it, for God's sake - add to something in the order of $70m. If this Government turns this draft budget into the budget that they are going to live by for the next year, then we are selling ourselves down the river to the tune of about $70m. If we claim that that is an operating result, then we are flattering ourselves by accounting processes.
I have checked those accounting processes. I did write some letters, too, during this process. I wrote to the Auditor-General and the processes are technically acceptable according to his standard. One of the processes used is an American standard that has been used in the absence of an Australian standard. However, this is where we have to be very careful that we recognise that we are not breaking even in our normal day-to-day operations.
As a consequence of that, the committee recommends to the Government that they include in the final budget a clear statement of an actual operating result net of these two superannuation accounting treatments. If it does not do that it is telling this Assembly and the people of the ACT that they are $74m better off than they are. We will be selling off the farm to some extent in terms of our superannuation. (Further extension of time granted)
I want to go back to one thing about superannuation. I would like to read into Hansard a paragraph from Bernie Fraser's report entitled "Review of Investment and Other Operations of the Superannuation and Insurance Provision Unit and the Central Financing Unit". Paragraph 31 says this:
... it is understood that the ACT Government is considering the introduction of legislation which would have the effect of ensuring that provisions made for superannuation could be used only for superannuation purposes. This would require that monies in the fund could be used only for superannuation; that all interest earned by the fund would stay in the fund; and that there be no drainage of the fund over time. These seem prudent arrangements.
Without referring to operating results, I think the sentiment of what Mr Bernie Fraser has said, and has said directly to this Government, confirms what I have just said in relation to delusion as to the bottom line, which is a function of accounting and not a function of an operating result.
In relation to the GST, I think enough has been said. The results are clouded by that to the degree that we have sympathy with the Government. I have to say that the implementation process at a national level looks like a dog's breakfast. There is still a lot more information to come forward and a lot more definitions to be crystallised before we know exactly where we are in relation to the GST. That does not inform the members of committees when they are looking at the budget. When the Government does form its position on GST, we ask that it have the good grace to furnish us with a statement on the draft budget and how the GST will affect that. Certainly, you are going to have to sort this out before you put together the final budget for next year. We
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .