Page 964 - Week 04 - Thursday, 3 May 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
69 per cent increase over four years in disability funding; a reform of all of our systems; an absolute commitment to those with a disadvantage, those in need, those that require support. That is what good governance is about.
Your record stands for all to see—and all have seen it—and it is why the people of Canberra have rejected you so resoundingly. The delivery of good governance is why this government continues to be supported by the people of Canberra and you do not. You sit there without a single policy to your name—not a single policy delivered to the people of Canberra since you have been in opposition.
MR STEFANIAK (Ginninderra—Leader of the Opposition) (4.56): I think the people of Canberra appreciate our public schools policy in relation to closures, Chief Minister.
In March 2001, at a gathering of Labor leaders in Canberra, Mr Stanhope made what I am sure he thought was a landmark speech that he titled “A code of good government”. In that speech he outlined what he thought were the failings of the Carnell-Humphries Liberal governments. He declared the Carnell-Humphries years as years of wasted opportunity. But he did make one concession. He said, “No government governs entirely badly,” and he said:
The Carnell-Humphries Governments have kept Canberra ticking over. The place does have a good feel to it.
For Mr Stanhope to make that declaration, the place, as he calls it, must in fact have been flourishing. I will come back to that point later. His answer to the so-called wasted opportunities of the former Liberal years was to espouse:
… a vision of a strong confident community asserting its place in the country’s affairs as the national capital. It is a vision of a community-of-the-whole that does not ignore one in favour of another.
Who can disagree with that sentiment? Any political party I am sure would proudly adopt those very same words. The trouble is that Mr Stanhope’s code of good government is an entire speech of sentiment; it is certainly not one of action. Let us go to some details. In his landmark speech of 2001 he said of his government that it would not draft its budget “behind closed doors or in isolation from the community”. Further, he said:
Openness is one of our core values. We understand that we cannot construct a Budget or a program of government without responding to community needs.
Mr Stanhope also said:
Labor will adopt a sensible and public Budget timetable that will allow ample time for submissions from the community, people and organisations, Government departments and agencies, and Assembly Committees.
When this very same man took on the role of Treasurer last year did he maintain that core value of openness? No, he did not. I concede that he called for submissions from interested community sectors, but those submissions disappeared into a black hole. It
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .