Page 1988 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 6 May 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR BARR: It is interesting that Mr Doszpot did not listen at all to my initial answer. Let me repeat, for the benefit of Mr Doszpot: there is a series of tasks that we will require the Planning and Land Authority to perform in the next 12 months. We are funding them to undertake those tasks. Once those tasks are complete, there will no longer be a requirement for those tasks to be funded on an ongoing basis. That is fairly straightforward. Even Mr Doszpot should be able to grasp that. Even Mr Seselja might be able to grasp that. Mr Smyth?
Ms Gallagher: Probably not.
MR BARR: Maybe not.
Ms Gallagher: Selectively understood.
MR BARR: Yes, selective. That is right: he might selectively understand. But the important point to stress is that the range of tasks, as I have outlined in my initial answer, that go to a range of issues within the Planning and Land Authority’s responsibilities, will be required to be performed within that period.
Beyond that, the government will of course set priorities through the statement of planning intent. In fact, at the conclusion of this financial year it would be timely for me to issue a new statement of planning intent, which I intend to do, and that will outline the future directions and priorities for the Planning and Land Authority. We will then make budget decisions in relation to those priorities. That is as you would expect it to be, as was the case when I issued my first statement of planning intent as planning minister and as Mr Corbell did when he issued a statement of planning intent when he was planning minister. That is a sensible way forward. That is how we undertake guidance to the Planning and Land Authority. That is the formal instrument, the statement of planning intent.
I am sure members opposite will of course keenly contribute to that debate—because they are not interested in opposition for opposition’s sake, of course. They will show a positive engagement on these issues—maybe not. Maybe we will get the standard, stock, boring, predictable lines from those opposite. They have nothing new to contribute to the public policy debate. It is the same old, same old confused strategies—different questions, everyone going in a different direction. But again, come 2.30 tomorrow, the Leader of the Opposition will face his moment of truth.
Budget—savings
MR HANSON: My question is to the Treasurer. Treasurer, in your budget you note that the Stanhope-Gallagher government is targeting aggregate savings of $153 million by 2012-13. The budget also notes the unallocated savings of $97 million. Treasurer, why have you included $97 million of what you have called unallocated savings in your budget with no details of what this amount comprises?
MS GALLAGHER: I thank Mr Hanson for the question. I had thought that Mr Hanson was at every event, except the community sector event, that I have done since the budget. I think he was at the chamber of commerce and the breakfasts. I
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .