Page 902 - Week 03 - Tuesday, 24 February 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
That was the downturn that will be used as cover by some administrations to break promises they never intended to keep. And the promise they never intended to keep was that their policies would keep the ACT in surplus for the next four years.
We have a government that, over seven years, have spent between $1.6 and 1.7 billion of extra revenue to achieve absolutely nothing. There is no new convention centre—which would have brought additional revenue. They canned the business programs; that would have grown new businesses. They abandoned their economic white paper, which had 46 priorities and nine key areas, and said, “Well, we’re not working on that any more.” They have abandoned business and, through that, they have abandoned the ability to pay for social programs into the future. (Time expired.)
MS BURCH (Brindabella) (4.42): The Treasurer has already outlined this afternoon some significant external factors impacting on the ACT budget. I am wanting now to address the motion by outlining how the government has placed the ACT and the budget in a position to confront the current challenges.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the ACT government’s fiscal management has been based on ensuring prudent and responsible management of the territory finances as a key component to a successful economy. Maintaining a AAA credit rating has not only resulted in lower borrowing costs for the ACT government but a reduced tax burden for the people of the ACT. The AAA credit rating also instils confidence in the ACT economy, including to business considering expansion options and to potential investors.
Almost three years ago in the 2006-07 budget, the government implemented significant and deep structural changes to place the ACT budget on a long-term sustainable footing. The ACT government introduced a series of structural reforms into the budget processes which focused on efficiency savings. These structural reforms essentially addressed a longstanding mismatch between spending and revenue in the ACT. These were difficult decisions for the government; they were unpopular but they needed to be made. They placed the territory finances on a sound footing. Needless to say, the opposition opposed them. The budget today has more than $1 million in efficiencies embedded within it. Structures were streamlined and back office costs reduced. The reforms now allow the ACT government to meet the current fiscal and economic challenges with a sound budget structure.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the reforms were not introduced in anticipation of the shock and the magnitude of the current global financial crisis. However, the major reforms implemented by this government have certainly ensured that the ACT is better placed to face down such an unprecedented crisis. The reforms were opposed outright by the Liberal opposition, and we can only but imagine the state of the ACT budget and government service provision if the Liberal opposition had been in control.
The government’s fiscal strategy focused on a balanced combination of efficiency gain and revenue measures. The strategy was not based simply on revenue raising; in fact, around two-thirds of the structural adjustments were based on expenditure savings and only around one-third related to revenue measures. Had this government
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .