Page 3812 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 4 December 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
An enormous vote of thanks needs to go to the secretary of the public accounts committee, Hamish Finlay, who is not here today because Tuesday is his day off to do childcare. He really put an enormous amount into this report and made himself available over the weekend and so on in order to get it completed. Given that this was his first report from start to end, I think he has done a very commendable job. It is a report which is very easy to read and is very well presented. Lydia Chung has always had a great deal to do with presentation of reports, and I am sure that there are other secretaries in the committee office who also had some input into the report.
It is somewhat concerning that the debate on the bill will occur with few members, apart from those on the committee, having had time to digest the report. After all the work that went into it, we would have liked to know that there would be debate on it today. Of course, there would have been more chance that this would occur if the bill were debated on Thursday instead of today.
I will talk about the bill later today, along with everyone else. I would like to draw members’ attention to some issues that stood out to the public accounts committee. The first question relates to the way in which government windfalls are treated—whether they should be regarded as a bonus for more spending, to be put aside for a rainy day, or to lead to a consideration of tax cuts. How prepared we are for organising the centenary of Canberra and the issue of security at bus interchanges and taxi ranks came up, as did the need to step up the implementation of a climate change strategy.
Other issues were accounting for and funding liabilities in the Department of Justice and Community Safety, providing language other than English programs that give real opportunities for children to learn another language, concern about retrospective approval of expenditure, the family and community picnic day, and the very large expenditure of about $1 million for the one-day event of the Beijing Olympic torch relay next year.
All in all, though, the committee does recommend that the appropriation bill be passed, and I am sure members of the committee look forward to contributing to the debate later today.
MR MULCAHY (Molonglo) (10.39): Following on from Dr Foskey’s remarks, I will have a more detailed response to or comment on the bill later in the day, as will my fellow Liberal members and opposition spokespersons for the various areas of government activity. It is important to note in particular recommendation 2 of the committee’s report, which gives some attention to the issue of the substantial surplus funds that the territory has generated, particularly as a consequence of the new raft of tax measures brought in in 2006, together with the property boom which has delivered substantial revenues from conveyancing, as well as obviously the windfalls that the GST reforms have delivered to this territory since they were introduced by the former Liberal government.
Dr Foskey made the remark that some thought should be given to putting aside funds for a rainy day. Storms are forecast every afternoon this week and, as far as I am concerned, the rainy day is here and now. I firmly believe that the territory could fund
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .