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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 9 Hansard (20 August) . . Page.. 2417 ..

MS DUNDAS (continuing):

I realise that there is a great deal of history and tradition in this place, but it was disappointing that ministers at times appeared to act evasively and defensively, and that the shenanigans reminiscent of question time in this chamber appeared in the estimates hearings.

I approached estimates with a desire to gain more detail about the budget and to keep the government accountable. Despite these concerns, I believe that what we achieved, to varying degrees, met both of these aims. We had four ministers appear over 10 days and we came up with 65 recommendations. A lot of ground was covered in the examination of this government's first budget.

I would now like to draw the attention of the Assembly and the government to a number of areas which I believe are key areas. Firstly, I would like to talk about full retail contestability. The introduction of full retail contestability will mean price increases on electricity bills for many households across the ACT. The Treasurer knows it, the Estimates Committee is aware of it, and yet it appears that retail contestability will occur this year.

There is no money in this budget for a publicity campaign to tell consumers about the effects of this change. The government must address this immediately. Further, I would like to see a change in government subsidies to include the electricity service fee, which is predicted to rise substantially if full retail contestability is introduced.

Secondly, I would like to discuss Totalcare. The lack of transparency in Totalcare Industries, in relation to ACT government capital injections, is of continual concern. We are still unable to tell how much the ACT government has spent propping up private industry contracts, New South Wales private hospital contracts or other interstate contracts.

When I called for a review of this during estimates, the Treasurer responded by saying that no review was necessary, as we just had to concentrate on the day-to-day running of the business. It is obvious that Totalcare lost ACT taxpayers in excess of $39,000 a day last year, and I sincerely believe that now is the time for a review.

Next, I would like to discuss crime prevention. Whilst we have seen statistics released in the past couple of days which have shown a decrease in crime rates, except in the area of sexual assault, it was disappointing to discover that some of the money allocated in last year's budget for crime prevention strategies was not expended in the financial year, and that that money has been returned to general revenue.

Whilst this Assembly may discuss the needs of those at Belconnen Remand Centre and the need for a prison, it is obvious that work still needs to be done in the early stages in crime prevention. Hopefully, the government will take note of recommendation 38-that unspent monies for crime prevention be returned to JACS and the Australian Federal Police, so they can continue to expand their crime prevention programs.

I am also interested in how the $1.6 million that will be spent in WorkCover over four years, enforcing the Dangerous Goods Act of 1975, will be spent. The committee has noted three things-that $1.6 million will be spent over the next four years, that the

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