Page 1406 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 5 June 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We know the reason why they chose not to embrace it: they immediately delivered five Australian accounting standard deficits in a row. If those five deficit budgets were back cast to GFS, it would be interesting to see the extent of the GFS deficit delivered by the Liberal Party in those five years—if we exposed their budgets to the level of accountability and transparency of this budget this year, and all budgets into the future, until perhaps the Liberal Party one day get back into government, do what they did last time and immediately embrace the Australian accounting standard.
That is what they did last time. They embraced it; they utilised it. They delivered budget after budget—deficit budget after deficit budget—under that accounting standard. We continued with that accounting standard for five budgets in a row and produced five surpluses. The graph is stark. Under the same accounting standard, the Liberal Party budget is under the line and the Labor Party is above the line. It is there for the world to see. Five Liberal Party budgets under the line; five Labor Party budgets above the line. Five Liberal Party deficits in a row; five Labor Party surpluses in a row—five Labor Party surpluses in a row.
I am happy to back cast those five Liberal Party deficits. What we have now is Mr Mulcahy, in his desperation, back casting an Australian accounting standard budget delivered in exactly the same way as Liberal Party budgets were delivered—back casting to GFS and saying, “Oh, look, the underlying position is not what it is represented as.” We have always known that there was a difference with the Australian accounting standard—the standard introduced and utilised by the Liberals, the standard which we did utilise for five years but which we no longer use.
MR MULCAHY: I have a supplementary question, Mr Speaker. Treasurer, why have you imposed in the last year new and increased taxes on the people of Canberra when, and I quote from your media release, Labor has “delivered five successive audited accounting standard surpluses”?
MR STANHOPE: I thank the shadow Treasurer for the question. Once again it does intrigue me that this new shadow Treasurer, the current shadow Treasurer, is at great pains always to ensure that the record of his colleagues in government is highlighted in this place. Why does the shadow Treasurer want continually and constantly to highlight the record of his colleagues in this place? We know why. He has knocked his last leader off, he has got his current leader in his sights, and he will do anything he can to actually enhance his own apparent credibility at the expense of his last leader. Interestingly—we do not forget—he knocked him off in this week last year. It was in this week last year, straight after the budget, straight after Mr Smyth had made such a hash of last year’s budget process, that Mr Mulcahy swooped and knocked him off. So, Bill, watch out, mate.
Opposition members interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Come back to the subject matter of the question.
MR STANHOPE: You knocked your previous leader off at Mr Mulcahy’s behest following last year’s budget—and I would be nervous if I were you!
MR SPEAKER: Chief Minister, order! Come back to the subject matter of the question, please.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .