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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 5 Hansard (8 May) . . Page.. 1732 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

attitude, but that is not enough. The opposition has always been clear that it is not enough to simply criticise-we must present the alternative. As I have said many times in this place, I will try to be a positive opposition leader. The community expects and deserves to know what the opposition vision is.

Mr Speaker, the community expects and deserves to know what a Smyth Liberal government would do when it takes office. The city is now at a watershed. The bushfire disaster has forced us to take a long, hard look at what Canberra is, and what it is going to be in the future. For too long, the ACT has been bailed out of financial troubles by its dependence on the sale of land.

If it were not for the extraordinary growth in revenue from land sales and property-based taxes, this year's budget would have had an enormous deficit, as it has in the past. The previous Labor government's $344 million deficit was partly addressed by Liberals through growth in land sales, but we must face the reality that this is unsustainable. There is only so much land left in the ACT. Already we have pretty much gone as far as we can down south. If we are to believe the whispers, north Gungahlin is not going to be able to accommodate nearly as many people as was first thought. The zero sum equation of the land-based economy is fast approaching its zero point.

The Treasurer was this morning quoted on radio as saying that part of the ACT's Stromlo Forest area could become new suburbs. Indeed, the ACIL report values the land of the Stromlo Forest for residential development at something like $700 million.

If this government is to develop that land, the money must not be squandered. A development at Stromlo would be Labor's last throw of its economic dice. On current evidence-the evidence of this budget-if this government realised new suburbs at Stromlo, the money would be frittered away.

The Treasurer has mentioned in his post-budget speeches that the people of this town are its greatest asset, and that is true. A Smyth Liberal government would invest in this asset, but not in the piecemeal, hotchpotch, lazy, and indecisive way of Labor. The future of the ACT is dependent upon its people. I have already shown how I would reshape the economy around that asset. The insurance crisis is a case in point. The government's response was to be content with tinkering with tort law. My response was to create a system that has, as its primary goal, the welfare of the injured party.

The health action plan is another example. On being presented with yet another of the government's paper achievements, I acted to make it work for people by inserting goals, targets, and outcomes. Today's Canberra Times carries a story about a father whose son died at the Canberra Hospital psychiatric unit. The headline of that story says it all: "More cash no remedy". Throwing cash at a problem does not fix it. That is why I, and many in the community, have called for, and will continue to call for, a time-out facility to assist those approaching a mental health crisis.

Mr Speaker, in the dry language of economics, we call this government's approach "focusing on the inputs". The economic alternative is to focus on the outputs. In real language, that means to focus on people. A Smyth Liberal government, in its budgets, programs and policies, would return to the fundamental principle of spending money on

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