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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 10 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 2849 ..

MR HUMPHRIES: Well, he keeps on interrupting me, Mr Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: And then you keep complaining about being interrupted. It is a circle of events.

MR HUMPHRIES: I am not in any hurry, Mr Speaker. I am happy to keep going. It is true, Mr Speaker-Mr Stanhope didn't actually make the statement; it was made by Mr Quinlan on his behalf. I think Mr Stanhope was present on 15 October to launch the document entitled ACT Labor's Financial Statement. That statement says, under the heading "Administrative Buffer":

A Stanhope Labor government-

there is that name again-

reserves the right to review the effectiveness of existing budget funding levels for Ministerial advice. Labor believes the Liberal Government has conducted an approach to Ministerial services which is contrary to Labor principles and the public interest. Under Labor's approach, it is estimated that cost savings in the order of $2.3 million-

by the way, that is recurrent, not one-off-

could be achieved. These savings would be redeployed to achieve Labor's objectives in the ACT Public Service.

You said there you could make a saving of $2.3 million. Why didn't it go into health? Why didn't it go into hospital waiting lists? You choose not to answer that question. There is no point asking you this question in question time because you won't answer it then either. But it is a real question. You made that promise. I am sorry to keep reminding you about the promises you made, but there is a question of accountability here. You said collectively that you would be an open and transparent government.

Mr Quinlan: We went for 2 per cent overall-what about that?

MR HUMPHRIES: You said you would be an open and transparent government. If you are open and transparent, why can't you answer that question? You said there was a saving of $2.3 million. You actually quantified it. You quantified it for each of the four out years; you show how large that saving might be. You even said in the first year you can make a saving of $2.3 million. Now you tell us that the hospital system needs money but you are not prepared to explain why you would not transfer money from the executive budget to the hospital budget. I ask members to ask themselves what sort of transparency that is and whether this really is the government that people saw in October 2001.

Mr Speaker, another small point that I should mention is the promise by the government to deliver electorate offices. The term "electorate offices" wasn't a term coined by the Liberal Party.

MR SPEAKER: Order, members! Mr Humphries has the call.

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