Page 2772 - Week 08 - Thursday, 24 August 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Inherent in this is exactly the same debate as was run by the Liberal Party during the last election campaign: “Close the prison and spend the money on health. Provide an additional hundred beds at the hospital with the moneys that are currently being utilised for a prison. Vote as if your life depended on it.” And they did. The people of Canberra saw through the nonsense of suggesting that you could stop work on a capital project and somehow magically convert capital into recurrent expenditure and fund beds and the staff required to manage, operate and introduce those beds.
Mr Stefaniak: Read the policy.
MR STANHOPE: No, Mr Stefaniak, this is what you did during the election campaign. The people of Canberra did not fall for it. You ran a campaign of closing the prison on the basis that you could invest all that money into the provision of additional services in health. The people of Canberra looked at your policy and at the nonsense and said, “You cannot do that.” Here we have again the suggestion that we should not build a prison; we should apply the capital devoted to the prison to some higher order, priority or need. What, precisely? What capital project? What about the cash position?
Mr Stefaniak: How much capital are we spending on schools, Jon?
MR STANHOPE: We are spending $190 million in this budget on schools. There is more than that in cash available. You misunderstand. You are out there talking about—I heard it now in the speech—the parlous cash position. It is a lie. The cash position as represented in this budget is sound. You did not mention the cash position at all. You did not mention the fact that in the financial year 2008-09 available cash builds to over $300 million.
Mr Corbell: Recurrent and capital.
MR STANHOPE: Yes, it is different. There is a difference between capital and recurrent. The cash position in this budget—open the papers and have a look—reflects the fact that in 2008-09 cash will build to over $300 million. And here you are saying, “Stop the prison. We need the $120 million.” What for? It is nonsense. It is crap. There are hundreds of millions of dollars of cash available for these other projects.
Mr Stefaniak: Why did you increase our rates?
MR STANHOPE: Because there is a difference, Mr Stefaniak, between capital and recurrent. The recurrent costs of the prison are already essentially met in the running of the remand centre and in the payments made to New South Wales.
Mr Stefaniak: Are you are sure about that?
MR STANHOPE: Yes, I am. I am quite sure about that. There is a differential between the cost of running the prison recurrently and the costs of staffing the remand centre and of providing our annual payment to New South Wales for the maintenance of ACT prisoners. The present costs are essentially the same as the recurrent costs for managing the prison. This project is supported by the chamber of commerce, the Business Council
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .