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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 5 Hansard (11 May) . . Page.. 1543 ..

MR QUINLAN (6.50): I shall be very brief, Mr Speaker, in rising to speak in relation to the question that Mr Humphries took today on his claim of a $150 million saving to the taxpayer arising out of the federal budget. I want to make something clear. Simply because Mr Humphries did not answer my original question and chose to discuss his own topic does not actually alter from the question. The original question that I asked Mr Humphries was really challenging him on the overall impact of the federal budget. I presumed that he had a rough idea of the $150 million. I also presumed that he had not taken into account the direct impact of interest rate rises which were predicted as soon as the budget was brought down. I was really trying to allude to the net effect on the ACT taxpayer in the first instance. In my supplementary question, I asked about families which earned below $50,000 and whether he knew the net effect on them.

We have since had his answer, which I thought was a little bit of a political bonus. When I first asked the question, the minister did not have a damn clue as to how the $150 million was made up or where it came from. Secondly, as a function of that, he wandered off, talking in generalities, and then came back today and spoke as if I was challenging the level of the $150 million. The fact that he did not have a clue originally as to what the $150 million was made up of was, as I said, a political bonus. But the import of the question was the net impact on the ACT taxpayer and the net impact on individual families of the overall impact of the federal budget.

MR MOORE (Minister for Health and Community Care) (6.53), in reply: Mr Speaker, in closing the debate, I will make a brief comment. Having listened to the questions to Mr Smyth, I wonder how Mr Gower feels when this process continues. It seems to me that he made some statements to a committee and then clarified those statements.

When somebody appears before a committee there ought to be a little bit of understanding of how somebody feels under those circumstances. I have done so before a couple of federal committees, the last one being within the last couple of months, and I have to say that I felt extraordinarily nervous when I appeared before those committees, in spite of 11 years of parliamentary experience to date.

That having been said, Mr Speaker, I wish to make it very clear that my view is in direct opposition to that of Mr Smyth on the particular route of the road. It so happens that I believe that the community option, as it is generally addressed, would be the best result. I hope that the end of this sitting day will be the end for this particular person who has appeared before a committee. It is a strenuous situation. I understand why the opposition pursued Mr Smyth on the issue and I do not have a disagreement with that, but there is a point at which you say, "How far has this gone?" I hope that this adjournment debate will be the end of the matter.

Mr Speaker, I note that Mr Wood is sitting opposite me now. He and I, as well as other members who are not in the chamber at the moment, have been here for the full 11 years of the Assembly. We have done 11 years now. I wonder how much longer we will be in the Assembly. I must say that for those of us who have been through the 11 years, there

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