Page 841 - Week 03 - Thursday, 30 March 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
committee. In any event, if we can achieve progress on fuel-efficient vehicles—and I know there is some debate on the energy usage of these vehicles when one puts the entire manufacturing process into the equation—it would appear to be a measure that ought to be supported and encouraged.
The committee also recommended that the government’s revised greenhouse strategy contain concrete measures towards meeting the projected targets and that the costings are revised. It is well to speak in the generality about greenhouse. It is, to use the cliche, up there with motherhood and the flag. But if we do not have concrete measures, if we do not have costings on what these measures might involve, then it is difficult to really take seriously that this level of commitment is there. More importantly, it is very difficult to measure performance. I know that, often in government, that is not the most exciting term—having performance measured.
There has been much political mileage made out of questions of the previous greenhouse strategy adopted by the Carnell government, which were brought in in good faith. I am not always an ambassador on behalf of that particular government. I have said that here before. There was a genuine belief in a greenhouse strategy and they were keen to be a leader in Australia. I have heard the criticism over those costings, but now is the time to test the performance of the current government. Our committee has recommended that there be these concrete measures towards meeting the projected targets and that we have, in fact, very clearly defined costings on that strategy.
We also asked for quarterly actuarial assessments of the superannuation liability to be undertaken and published for the Assembly. One of the most significant elements impacting on the ACT’s accounts is the cost of its work force and the associated costs of superannuation related to that work force. What is critical in the view of the committee is that this Assembly have a better handle on the cost impacts of those things.
Obviously, there are significant variations that relate to developments, particularly in the equities market. Most of those factors, one might argue, are beyond the control of the territory government. We do not expect them to perform miracles in relation to world economic factors. But there is certainly a view from the committee that it would be in the interests of good government if the assessment of that liability could be undertaken and published on a more frequent basis. It would also temper demands on both sides of this chamber if those of us who are armed with that information had a better appreciation of the likely budgetary pressures on government in this environment where bright ideas seem to still occur on a fairly regular basis without necessarily full regard for the impact on the ACT economy and our taxpayers.
The committee also asked that, to the extent that work is not already taking place, the Summer Nats 2005 review and cost-benefit analysis report’s recommendations Nos 2, 3 and 9 be implemented.
A further recommendation relates to ACTTAB. We recommend that ACTTAB explore the feasibility of enhancing its website with pop-up information windows highlighting responsible gambling messages, and that ACTTAB give favourable regard to providing funds for gambling support initiatives. Most, if not all, members of the Assembly would agree on the importance of having programs and initiatives to ensure that responsible
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .