Page 2223 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 28 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We have got lots of words, but really no direction. We have got lots of luck. Let us face it. He will go down in history as the lucky Chief Minister. He had more money to spend than anybody. He has spent more money than anybody and he has not achieved what he set out to achieve. We are spending $5,439,000 on our ministers and in question time today we were told that the economic goodness that is flowing and growing in the ACT at the moment is all because of Jon Stanhope.
I would challenge Jon Stanhope to point to a single initiative that has helped achieve that. The city has actually been built up by the federal government. We now have a national museum, something that was abandoned for 13 years by a Labor government. There have been two extensions to the war memorial, an upgrade of the Federal Highway, an upgrade of the Barton Highway, the commencement of new defence headquarters, a new Attorney-General’s office, a new PM&C office, refurbishment of the Australian Mint and a new portrait gallery, which will open later this year.
These are all symbols of a government that is committed to building up and making independent the nation’s capital. On the other hand, for the $5,439,000 that we spend on ministerial support, the public tell me they are sick of the state of the roads and the potholes, the graffiti, the rubbish, the uncut grass, the dead trees and the kangaroo carcasses that are not removed. In fact, not only are they not removed but they are line marked. There is the John Hargreaves memorial pothole in Wanniassa. And the list goes on.
When this government are challenged, they go into combative mode. They refuse to answer questions. They name call, they obfuscate. When you get consecutive reports saying that this is the case with the government, you have to ask why. You have to ask: are we getting value for our $5.439 million? I think the answer is no.
Proposed expenditure agreed to.
Proposed expenditure—Part 1.3—Auditor-General totalling $2,004,000 (net cost of outputs), totalling $2,004,000.
MR MULCAHY (Molonglo) (5.07): Thank you, Mr Temporary Deputy Speaker. As you have indicated, the question before us is the appropriation of approximately $2 million for the office of the ACT Auditor-General. In looking at matters relating to that office, the Auditor-General has reported that they are having difficulties—and this has been raised in prior years—attracting appropriate staff at the moment. This is a highly competitive area, and qualified staff are hard to find. They are hard to find in all areas, but accounting has been particularly stressed in terms of potential recruitment, really, in fact, from my memory, since GST came into being. There is a very strong level of demand for people in that field.
The matter was discussed in estimates committee hearings on 18 June. In that hearing the Auditor-General explained that she does not believe that this is a problem that can be solved with more money at this moment. Rather, she explained that the state of the market meant that new recruits were very expensive and expected pay levels could not be justified. The Auditor-General said:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .