Page 1499 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 7 May 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
We will go through those numbers again: the Liberal Party in government, through its last term, delivered on average $86 million of capital. That was the great investment which the Liberal Party made in community infrastructure—$86 million. Eighty-six million dollars a year was the original program proposed, prepared and presented by the Liberal Party through each of its last three budgets. I repeat: $86 million a year. The average program presented by my government over the last three years is $350 million a year.
Let us contrast those again: the last three years of this government, $350 million a year to be invested in capital; the last three years of the Liberal Party in government, $86 million a year. It is another one of the reasons that they were ejected from government in 2001. And it is another one of the reasons that people will not bother to trust them again. You just have to look at these numbers in relation to the respective positions or commitment of the two governments to capital and infrastructure. The Liberal Party’s commitment was $80 million a year. The last three budgets that the ACT government has prepared have average programs of $350 million.
The introduction of the annual capital upgrades program has assisted in the delivery of the capital works program. Agencies have certainty of base funding allocations and are able to more effectively plan procurement activities around this considerable component of the program.
In 2006-07, 96 per cent of the $32 million capital upgrade program was delivered within the financial year. It is interesting—in the face of the question from the Leader of the Opposition seeking to make some capital out of my government’s record in relation to delivery of the capital program—that a question should be raised. He does not—in his question or his criticisms—look at his own party’s performance or indeed at his own party’s commitment to the capital program. In 1998-99, the Liberal Party’s original budget was for $87 million. Its underspend—
Opposition members interjecting—
MR STANHOPE: No. This is a question by the Leader of the Opposition of the Labor Party in relation to our record and capacity to deliver capital. So it is relevant that we go back and compare our record against the Liberal Party’s record. One of the relevant points about a question such as this is that it invites the government and the community to compare performance now and performance then. And who was running the capital program in 1998-99? None other than the deputy leader, Mr Smyth. Let us look at Mr Smyth’s commitment: in 1998-99, a capital program of $87 million and the rollover of $36 million. Out of a program of $87 million he delivered $50 million. (Time expired.)
MR SPEAKER: Supplementary question, Mr Seselja.
MR SESELJA: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Treasurer, given the infrastructure spend announced in your budget, what action are you taking to improve the performance of your government in delivering capital works projects?
MR STANHOPE: I think it is relevant, before answering a question such as that—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .