Page 4167 - Week 13 - Thursday, 14 December 2006

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

---

Today on ABC radio Mr Mulcahy said, “We will cut the public service.” What part of the public service will he cut? Will he do what he did last time? Will he again cut mental health, disability services and the Emergency Services Authority? Will he refuse to fund child protection workers? Will he go back to the past, back to where he was, when he takes this $16 million out of the budget? Which $16 million of services does he intend to remove? What services are they and what $16 million? After we add the fire levy, which $36 million worth of services will he cut? This morning he said on ABC radio that he was going to cut the public service. That means services.

Mr Mulcahy: Point of order, Mr Speaker. The appointed hour for the adjournment of the Assembly has arrived. Do we not appropriately adjourn at 12.30?

MR SPEAKER: If I were to ask whether it was the wish of the Assembly to adjourn at this point I think somebody would say no.

MR STANHOPE: These are the questions that need to be answered.

Mr Mulcahy: We are just getting tired of this nonsense.

MR STANHOPE: He does not like being exposed. He has been exposed in relation to this issue, and he knows it. As shadow treasurer he cannot stand up in this place and announce that he will cut another $16 million of revenue on top of the $20 million from the fire levy. He is going to cut $36 million in revenue measures without telling us what services he will cut. There are two issues here. He has no intention of cutting these taxes when he comes into office. Either this is a lot of froth and bubble or he wants to go back to where he was in the past, with no services for mental health, no services for disability, requiring a royal commission, no services for child protection workers, and no emergency services funding. That is his legacy and his form. That is what he is going back to and we know it.

Question put:

That this bill be agreed to in principle.

The Assembly voted—

Question so resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.

Bill agreed to.

---

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .