Page 3103 - Week 10 - Thursday, 18 October 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
this government understands that calling a meeting together and saying, “We are going to do this and it is going to start from such and such date” is clearly not consultation, and this is what I understand happened on this occasion. A meeting was called with industry and the minister presented business with his plan to increase their fees by 100 per cent. He could not even stick to that undertaking. Industry did not agree to the changes, and consultation—and by that I mean meaningful consultation—did not, in fact, occur. Instead, the government exhibited, once again, its heavy-handed approach to business in this territory.
It is worth asking what benefit these extra charges have delivered for the industry that is affected by these particular revenue measures. From the amount of representations that I receive—I know that Mr Hargreaves probably gets sick of the letters I write to him, as he has indicated on occasions—they certainly indicate to me that despite these extra revenues Canberra streets are not cleaner. I have been in far, far bigger cities than Canberra and seen cleaner cities. Our public areas are not better maintained than they were three years ago. The government has not used the extra revenue that they have received from the massive increases in fines and charges to improve the amenity of suburbs or public areas. We continue to see a deterioration in our city. Instead, it has gone into those bottomless government coffers to be squandered on poorly managed services.
I welcome my colleague’s motion. It presents the government with an opportunity to demonstrate that their attitude to business has changed even just a little bit since Mr Quinlan so eloquently expressed the Labor Party’s policy in relation to business. I have talked to cafe owners about this issue. It is bad enough that they are harangued over the most minor breach of their area. I have talked to cafe owners who have been severely reprimanded because a chair leg has gone outside the designated area. What kind of society are we living in? Have we got that many people available to us to go around and make federal cases with people over such a trivial breach as having a chair leg outside a brass marker in the middle of the footpath?
I know that Mr Hargreaves will say, “We have to watch liability.” You can go through life anticipating all manner of gloom and doom ahead, but some measure of sense is required. I do not often agree with Dr Foskey, but I have lived in Melbourne and I think the way in which they have encouraged their cafe sector to function and the diversity you get in Melbourne suburbs is very appealing. We as a city cannot say that we can do everything they do in Melbourne and Sydney. The fact is that we are operating in a much smaller community. As Mr Smyth said, the cafe culture has come quite a way from the time that Gus took on the authorities and set up the alfresco-type approach.
Let us not make life harder than it already is for people in small business. I know a number of cafe owners, and it is not an easy life. They are having massive problems now getting staff. It is extremely challenging. I talked to another one only a week or so ago and he indicated to me that the biggest single challenge that he has at the present time is getting staff in these cafes.
Why are we putting more burdens on these businesses? Why are we demonstrating such zeal in tackling this section of our community that I think adds to our social landscape and adds to the appeal of Canberra as a place to live? It is beyond me. I
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .