Page 2822 - Week 08 - Thursday, 24 August 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
an eye-opener to me to see how many distressed people there are living on the streets of Canberra who are not evident when you walk around the city. They came out of the woodwork, and we were giving them clothing, food and the like.
There are people in less destitute circumstances in some of the poorest suburbs in Canberra and within my electorate who are doing it tough. They really do struggle to pay their bills, and they struggle to meet their household budget and to buy their kids the things that most of us try to arrange for our children. I just think there is a high level of insensitivity in this budget, and I have never heard that aspect addressed.
I have heard it said that people expect too much in Canberra and that our services cost 20 per cent higher than they ought, but I am genuinely concerned. I know the government has the capacity to put this budget through—and we cannot stop that—but I would hope that there is some measure of review down the track to see the number of people who fall through the cracks. One of the great indicators will be the number of people who start to default on payments, because will mean that people are starting to run into difficulties in meeting their fines and charges and levies and so forth. I will be very surprised if, 12 months from now, we do not see that situation deteriorate for a number of Canberrans.
We are facing a few additional costs. We have interest rates increasing and we have all these water charges going up. Who are the people who are going to get hit with the water charges? It is going to be people with larger families, the least capable. It is not the singles that are going to have a problem with this. I appeal to members of the Assembly and to the government in particular that, in signing off on this budget, they understand that there may be many unintended consequences out of this legislation. I would hope that a measure of compassion at some time will come down—balanced, of course, against the not insignificant problem of trying to bring this territory back onto a balanced budget basis.
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (4.38 am): While I agree with a lot of what Mr Mulcahy says, I do believe he does have to acknowledge the role of the federal government in the creation of poverty and in creating the situation that many of the people of St Vincent de Paul work with. St Vincent de Paul itself has made those statements. So let us not try and sheet home all the blame to our ACT government, which is pretty small fry in many ways in the creation of this but which does have a role in alleviating the hardship of our citizens. In fact, this is a government that has knowingly asserted that that is a role that it will take through its social plan and many of the other very wonderful statements that have been made over the years, which, I believe, is a major reason why it was elected at the last election.
I have already said on the record that I am unable to support the appropriation bill. I have said that the main reason for this is that the functional review, the basis for the budget, has not been released. We do not know what the assumptions are that it is based on and what benchmarks have been used. Its recommendations have not been analysed for their social and environmental impact and the budget itself lacks transparency. There was a lack of detail provided in the budget papers and to the estimates committee regarding the cuts in funding to departments, programs and staff.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .