Page 1041 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 2 May 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
There is no doubt that since self-government in 1989 successive governments, including Labor governments, have not taken decisions which I have no doubt every government since self-government gave serious and detailed consideration to from time to time but, for a range of reasons, including, of course, the difficulty of minority government, did not pursue or proceed with, and did not pursue or proceed with to the long-term detriment of the territory. I do not believe that there is a single government or a single member of a previous government that could claim honestly otherwise.
MR PRATT: Mr Speaker, I ask a supplementary question. Chief Minister, notwithstanding that you clearly have no insight into general trends in the ACT public service, what do you say to those people who have mortgages and other financial commitments and whom we have made redundant as a consequence of your government’s poor economic management?
MR STANHOPE: I thank Mr Pratt for his question, which was preceded by the statement that I have no insight into trends within the ACT public service. Mr Pratt, I would like to challenge any other leader of a government in Australia to stand up and say that since 1 July last year there have been 115 redundancies in his public service and 315 departures through natural attrition, with a sum total reduction of 430. I would defy you to name any other leader of a government in Australia who could stand up in his parliament and tell you to within five the number of redundancies that have been taken and the number of other positions that have not been filled, the level of attrition or reduction in the public service. I would challenge any other leader—in fact, almost any other minister—in Australia to be able to stand up in their parliament and say, “This is how many redundancies, this is how many people have departed through natural attrition and this is the plan for the future.”
You stand up and say, “You have got no idea.” I have a precise idea. I have a very close eye on exactly what has happened within the ACT public service. I have just given you detail regarding the number, and in response to that you stand up and claim that I have no idea. Mr Pratt, you make yourself look foolish with those sorts of wild, mad assertions in the face of specific detailed information in relation to exactly what is happening in the ACT public service. The absurdity of your position is there for us all to see and I am surprised that you continue to embarrass yourself in the regular way that you do in the claims that you make in this place and elsewhere.
Be that as it may, I answered the question previously. Those are the trends and those are the details of what is occurring in an employment sense in the ACT public service. Since 1 July last year there has been a reduction in the ACT public service of in the order of 430 people. I expect that trend to continue into the future. Of those 430 people or thereabouts, 150 took a redundancy willingly, voluntarily, and in most instances gladly and with thanks. One of the great urban myths is that you have to beat people with a whip to take redundancies. The great difficulty with almost every government that has pursued voluntary redundancies is in fact dealing with those that vociferously seek but fail to achieve a redundancy; dealing in fact with the level of demand that always emerges within any organisation, not just government, when redundancies are available. There is the urban myth inherent in the question about voluntary redundees who are crying into their breakfast every morning. Let me assure you that this is not the case.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .