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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 5 Hansard (7 May) . . Page.. 1252 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

After 61/2 years in opposition, of doing no work, of simply dragging down-speaking down-the ACT economy, they have absolutely no idea of what it is to foster and encourage growth in the ACT.

The Chief Minister gave a speech to the chamber of commerce the other day. He said that spending on research and development grants would be maintained, as would incentives for business expansion and relocation to the ACT. I want to focus on that point, because they were critical of us in government for exactly that. How dare you have incentives for people who come to the ACT?

What do we do? Their only policy, the only thing he really said in a 46-minute speech at the chamber that brought not a single question from the audience-because I think most of us had gone to sleep-was that spending on research and development grants would be maintained, as would incentives for business expansion and relocation to the ACT. Didn't Labor criticise us for concentrating our resources on attracting firms that would ultimately come to the ACT and create jobs? Mr Deputy Speaker, if we want to grow the economy so we can deliver more and better services, and pay for increases in service delivery for people with mental health problems or disabilities and those who have young families, growing businesses or sporting aspirations, we must have a base upon which to draw, to enable that money to be spent.

We created that base. We managed to increase the revenue to cover the debts we were left with in order to expand our policies and honour our promises to deliver more and better services to the people of the ACT. That is why, in the last budget, we looked into what we wanted to do. I think this should be the first thing in any budget in this country.

We said we wanted to specifically target poverty, so we created a poverty task force to address the issues affecting the poor in the ACT. We put in place early intervention strategies to break the cycle, and make sure that we did not create problems for the future. What do we get from those opposite? Nothing but criticism. "It was ad hoc, it was a hotchpotch. You have spent too much. How dare you clean out the cupboard?-because we won't be able to keep our promises."

You went to the election in the full knowledge of the state of the budget. The Treasury made those figures available. I do not believe that any attempt to change, rehash, grow or shrink the figures washes with the public. I think Ms Dundas said exactly that-that the public are sick of this argument, because we are in a very robust budget.

The question is, what will those opposite do to keep it there? The answer is, they do not know, and they won't tell us. They will not tell us until some time next year. What are you going to do to foster industry? What are you going to do to grow business? What are you going to do to increase employment, which is the greatest bulwark against poverty? Give somebody a job!

In our time in government, we took unemployment from 7.1 per cent to 4.2 per cent, and we are proud of that. We are proud of the robust economy we created. We hope that those opposite will stop the hiatus and get on with running the territory.

MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! The member's time has expired. The discussion has concluded.

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