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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 10 Hansard (27 August) . . Page.. 2869 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

The government is developing an internet based risk advisory service to assist community organisations, sporting groups and small business. The service will primarily focus on improved risk management. The site will be developed in consultation with key community groups and linked to community organisation websites. The estimated cost of the project is $300,000 to be met within the Department of Treasury budget.

Firstly, is that not exactly what we recommended in our inquiry? We said that such a scheme might, for example, establish an advisory service on reducing actuarial risk. That is what you have done. That is what we recommended. We said you should use the windfall from stamp duty to pay for it. You say it is coming from within the Department of Treasury budget. However, with great respect, extra spending of $600,000 was needed to acquire additional advice. You said the budget was so tight that you could not afford to provide that additional economic advice without getting extra dollars into the Treasury budget, yet you can find $300,000 in petty cash to pay for this scheme. To me, it seems more likely that the government is using the money obtained from insurance premiums to pay for that scheme.

I observe, in passing, that $300,000 for an internet-based scheme seems very expensive. A person has to log on to get the advice.

MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Would you like to take your second 10 minutes.

MR HUMPHRIES: I would seek an extension of time, Mr Deputy Speaker. (Extension of time granted.) It seems to me that, if you are just logging on, $300,000 is a lot of money-unless you have live operators at the other end. In that case, why can't it be a telephone service as well? The internet is wonderful, but there are limitations as to its effectiveness in answering people's questions within a short space of time.

I am sorry if that exasperates you, Mr Treasurer, but we are trying to find what is best for the citizens of the territory. I suggest it might not be a bad idea to look at some other model of scheme. The government, with respect, has taken up the suggestion of the Estimates Committee but not given the committee credit for so doing.

Mr Quinlan: That is because it was in place before you thought of it!

MR HUMPHRIES: It was not in place.

Mr Quinlan: It was being put in place.

MR HUMPHRIES: If it was in place, why did you not tell us that that was the case, when you went before the Estimates Committee? Take out that interjection, Mr Deputy Speaker! You were before the Estimates Committee, and we were pressing you on this question.

Mr Quinlan: I don't think so.

MR HUMPHRIES: Yes, we were. It was virtually the initial thing I raised on the first day you were there. Go back and check the Hansard. I asked you, "Why, when you have a windfall from stamp duty, don't you spend it on those sorts of things?" That was your chance to tell us you were setting up an internet-based advisory service.

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