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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 7 Hansard (27 June) . . Page.. 1994 ..

Mr Quinlan: Did we run that up? Say that.

MR HUMPHRIES: I do not know why it is so hard to listen. Despite having good luck in inheriting, at self-government, a debt-free position from the Commonwealth and despite having run that up to a $344 million tab by the time we got halfway through the 10 years of self-government, despite that disability, we have achieved an enormous amount in our budget. I ask members therefore to consider whether that hard work should not be accepted and rewarded and whether the government should not have an opportunity of putting those achievements into action in the ACT by having our legislation on the 2000-01 budget passed by this Assembly when the debate occurs later this week.

MR QUINLAN: Mr Speaker, my question is to the Treasurer. Treasurer, earlier this month you made public statements to the effect that ACT taxpayers were substantially better off than their New South Wales counterparts. You used the figures of $1,912 for New South Wales and $1,199 for the ACT and quoted the difference of $713. You used the term "taxed at state level". The clear message you put forward, the message that was reported in the media in one of those headlines, was that Canberrans were overall $713 better off than their counterparts in New South Wales. Treasurer, is the average Canberra household substantially better off, to the tune of $700, than the average New South Wales household when all state and local taxes, charges and fees collected by government are taken into account-note in the question the term "average household"-or was this just another artful deception?

Mr Moore: Questions that carry imputations should be ruled out of order.

MR HUMPHRIES: Mr Speaker, I think that is the case.

MR SPEAKER: If the Treasurer takes objection, I will ask for the question to be reworded. The inference at the end of it was that-

MR HUMPHRIES: I do take objection, Mr Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: Would you mind rephrasing your question, please, Mr Quinlan?

Mr Quinlan: Can I check with you, Mr Speaker? How about the words "Was this exercise just another blatant deception?"

Mr Moore: Just rule the whole question out of order, Mr Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: Unless you change it, Mr Quinlan, I will.

Mr Quinlan: I will delete that particular element of the question.

MR SPEAKER: Thank you. That is all you have to do. You are asking him to explain.

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