Page 411 - Week 01 - Thursday, 11 December 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
briefings. It will be interesting to see if the government lives up to what it is saying in its own document that this money will provide.
Subclause 7(3) agreed to.
Subclauses 7(4) and 7(5)
MR SESELJA: (Molonglo—Leader of the Opposition (8.26): I will speak briefly to these appropriations. I put on record in my speech in reply, in relation to the Canberra International Arboretum and Gardens, that we do not believe this has been a good use of taxpayers’ money, particularly in a drought. That remains to be seen, but that is one piece of spending that we have not been particularly keen on.
The residual Beijing torch relay costs of $438,000 are clearly an example of the Rudd government not honouring its agreements and foisting, we believe, the legitimate costs that should be borne by the commonwealth onto the ACT. Across the chamber we heard from the Treasurer earlier on. I think she is clearly disappointed with her Labor colleagues that this new era of federalism, this new era of cooperation between state and federal, does not extend to basic courtesies like honouring your commitment to cover these costs. I am sure that if it had been the Howard government that had done this we would be hearing a little bit more from our colleagues across the way; we would be hearing criticisms.
I did see in the Treasurer’s eyes a longing, I think, to have John Howard back in that job. Not only did he honour his commitments to this government; he spent a lot in Canberra. I suspected that Mr Stanhope, Ms Gallagher and the other ministers really enjoyed having a conservative in the federal parliament because it gave them someone to fight. We saw their lack of fight, in fact, when Kevin Rudd took the same approach as John Howard on civil unions. They did not fight him on it when they could have. In fact, Dr Foskey said they should fight, and she stayed true to her principles. But it must be said that we have not heard much on the residual Beijing torch relay costs being foisted onto the ACT taxpayer by the commonwealth. That is unfortunate. I hope that Katy Gallagher will continue to make representations, or the Chief Minister will make representations, for that money to be paid by the commonwealth, as is right.
On the solar power facility adviser, we very much believe in the importance of solar power and in developing solar energy in the ACT. So this would appear to be a good use of taxpayer funds. We need to get these processes right. We do want to see a solar industry here. We do want to see the private sector coming in and spending money in the ACT on solar power, so we are very happy with that particular appropriation item.
Ms LE COUTEUR (Molonglo) (8.28): With respect to the Beijing torch relay, we are advised by the Treasurer’s office that this money has already been spent, so there is really little point in debating whether or not we include it in the bill. I am very glad to see, with respect to the solar power facility adviser, that there seems to be universal agreement that this is a good thing. It is to fund the development of a request for a proposal to build a solar power station and it is the next stage to carry it forward. We have heard a great deal in this chamber about how important it is and we are glad to support its importance.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .