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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Friday, 14 May 2004) . . Page.. 1968 ..

rethink this decision in the interest of all people in the ACT, both current and future residents.

In tourism, it is a bit of the old three-card trick. Again, on face value, it looks good—an extra $7 million per year on tourism promotion. It’s a few million short of the Liberals’ commitment, that is, to increase tourism funding by $12 million. I guess, from the Treasurer, it’s not a bad start. However, the government neglects to mention that last year’s budget cut tourism funding in the outyears to the tune of $4 million. This $7 million increase is really only a $3 million increase on the previous year.

When we look at business itself, we see that the Treasurer’s claim that the budget funds commitments from the million dollar white paper but, as the white paper contained few initiatives, the budget itself contains little for business. Again, there are sprinkles here and there but I suspect that, on closer examination, things will evaporate.

It is not enough for me to stand here and speak disparagingly about the Treasurer and his budget, although what we have said is true. This is despite the fact that this government is the government of lost opportunities where the government has squandered an aggregate surplus of $230 million over four years down to a meagre aggregate surplus of $43 million over four years. We have lost the opportunity to fund effective restructuring and strengthening of the ACT economy.

So, Mr Speaker, particularly in an election year, I want to set out what our approach would be. So what would I do? What would a Smyth Liberal government do? For a start, as I announced last year, our vision is for a creative Canberra. We don’t have the industrial base of other jurisdictions; we are rapidly running out of land for revenue; and we cannot rely on the Commonwealth for future growth, particularly if a public-service-slashing Mark Latham federal government is elected later this year. We have to diversify our economy; we have to build on our smarts, on our creativity. Creative industries are the way forward around the world; they are the way forward for the ACT.

The key point of the Canberra Liberals’ approach is fostering and developing creative industries—industries such as film, research and development, publishing, software, TV and radio, design, music, and toys and games. They’ve conned the ACT again on building these and other industries through diversification, through employment growth and through developing a much stronger economic base. As a community, as an economy, we benefit from achieving diversification of our industrial base. Hence the emphasis we are giving through our creative Canberra initiative to fostering and encouraging development and diversification.

The government has blown some $600 million in its term. What have we got in return? Nothing.

A Smyth Liberal government would invest such funds for the future. A simple increase of tourism funding of $12 million would produce, on modelling provided by the University of Canberra, a return of up to $75 million—a good investment.

A Smyth Liberal government would provide support and development to the identified creative industries. Each of these industries requires only a few hundred thousand dollars

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