Page 1098 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 3 May 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
It is a very simple motion. It simply calls on the government to be honest, open and accountable, as they have promised so often to do. What the motion does is note that the government commissioned a report called the functional and strategic review of government structures and programs, also known as the functional review of the ACT budget. The government has now been presented with that review. The motion calls on the government to table the report by close of business today.
All governments, of whatever persuasion, find it useful to review part or all of their operations at regular intervals. Policies change, priorities change, the external environment changes and other factors change. In this context, it is incumbent on good governments to be aware of what influences are changing and to be prepared to meet those changes.
The Stanhope government is no exception to this and, in the ways of many of these of types of reviews, has turned to a person outside the bureaucracy to undertake such a review. Hence the ACT government has now received a report prepared by Michael Costello on an activity that was described by the Chief Ministers as a functional review of the ACT budget.
There is nothing unusual about this approach. What seems to be unusual, however, is the way in which this government has handled the report of this review. I will get to that in a moment. It is instructive to consider, in addition to the more generally accepted reasons for conducting such a review, why the Stanhope government has sought this report at this time.
Everyone who lives in the ACT is now quite well aware that the Stanhope government has not delivered when it is assessed on its economic and financial performance. We are all now well aware that the Stanhope government has spent its funds as if there were no tomorrow, that the Stanhope government has frittered away the revenue generated by the boom in the housing industry, that the Stanhope government has failed to husband the additional revenue that has flowed to the ACT from the goods and services tax, that the Stanhope government is pursuing things that simply should not be on this government’s spending list, that the Stanhope government is not approaching the funding of major capital projects in an appropriate way, that the Stanhope government has made no provision for the not-so-good times that all too often follow the boom years and that the Stanhope government did not reform when it should have. It is very awkward fixing a leaky roof in the rain. It is far better to maintain that roof before the rain begins than fix it then. Jon Stanhope has finally been forced into recognising that the four years of profligate spending under his government had to stop.
It is little wonder that the former Treasurer, Mr Quinlan, pulled the plug a few weeks ago. It is obvious that he saw the writing on the wall and decided that he did not want to continue to be associated with this nonsense. Of course there are some in the Labor Party who see Ted Quinlan’s action as betraying the party because he left the party in the lurch mid-term, as it faced a very difficult budget. But I would judge that Ted Quinlan had basically had enough of providing sensible advice to his colleagues and seeing this advice repudiated as further stupid spending decisions were made. Rather than make any hard decisions, therefore, Jon Stanhope called in the consultant, and the report from Michael Costello is that result.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .