Page 1324 - Week 05 - Thursday, 31 May 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The so-called “rivers of gold” have indeed been flowing towards the commonwealth and despite its increasing share of taxation the commonwealth has reduced its contribution to key services such as acute care, disability services and housing assistance. For the ACT specifically, between 2001-02 and 2005-06, per capita specific purpose payments actually decreased by more than 10 per cent in real terms. That is right. John Howard reduced funding to disability services, housing and acute care by 10 per cent over that period. So much for a caring government!
In 2001-02, the commonwealth contributed 31 per cent of acute care costs in the ACT. This has now dropped to 23 per cent. In 2001-02, the commonwealth contributed around 20 per cent towards the costs of disability services. This has now dropped to 14 per cent. The federal Liberal government has reduced funding to disability services and state governments have been left to make up the difference in costs in an environment where not only is the population ageing, but clearly the need for services is growing. It is quite telling also that at a time when housing affordability is at its most problematic, the federal Liberals have reduced funding for housing assistance in real terms.
The government’s record on financial management is a strong one. The current government has delivered five successive audited accounting standard surpluses, including the biggest and the second biggest since self-government. By contrast, there were record deficits in the successive years of Liberal rule: $344 million in 1995-96; $170 million in 1996-97; $157 million in 1997-98 and $161 million in 1998-99. The figures speak for themselves. There were successive record deficits under the Liberals, and this is the comparison on financial management, the same accounting standard and same basis.
Mr Mulcahy made the extraordinary claim in the debates earlier this week that the government has not made savings. It is fair to say the government inherited a number of programs and service areas that were severely underfunded, and these included services for the most vulnerable in our society. Remember mental health. When we came to government we had the lowest per capita expenditure on mental health in the nation. That was the legacy of Brendan Smyth and Michael Moore.
We had record problems with disability services. Let us remember the Gallop inquiry into disability services. What an absolute shemozzle we inherited there! And, of course, there were the ongoing issues with child protection. The government has properly resourced these programs to ensure that the most disadvantaged members of our community are able to access the services they need. At the same time we have ensured that the services are efficiently provided and the cost of administration is reduced.
The shadow Treasurer said yesterday that the government has not made savings. This is simply incorrect. The government’s structural reform program introduced in last year’s budget will deliver $383 million in savings from more streamlined structures, more efficient processes and increased productivity. At the same time, the same budget provided the single largest investment in public schooling since self-government, a growth envelope for health that is above the growth rate of revenues and provision for growth in demand for health care services.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .