Page 2109 - Week 06 - Thursday, 7 May 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
who have failed to make the decisions that the community would have expected from those two ministers. And all these two ministers provide is a flimsy document that they purport to have as a plan. It is a flimsy document that will only be developed after the government has consulted, yet again, with the community.
The Treasurer has been critical of me and my colleagues for being what she describes as unnecessarily negative about the prospects for the ACT economy. I reject that conclusion. I have been and remain very optimistic about the ACT economy, as do my colleagues and as do the communities that live in it, particularly the business community, which is dedicated to improving our lot. I love living in Canberra and I love all that Canberra offers to me, my family and my community. It is not that I can be accused of talking down the ACT economy; rather, I can be accused of expressing criticism of decisions that have been made by the Stanhope-Gallagher government. That is quite a different matter; that is the legitimate role of an opposition. I do not have to accept all the decisions that have been made by the Stanhope-Gallagher government; that is our prerogative as the opposition. But what we are required to examine are the decisions of the government of the day, to analyse, to question and even—surprise, surprise—to criticise.
As far as the 2009-10 budget is concerned, Wednesday’s Canberra Times summed things up pretty well with the headline “Risky strategy to delay pain”. This budget is a pretty dismal effort from a Treasurer who is simply not up to the task.
We see a budget that does not have a coherent strategy, and you only have to refer to budget paper 3 at page 19 where all of the activity under 2009-10 is simply listed as zero. A big fat zero. That is a pretty accurate summary of what this Treasurer has delivered. What we see is a budget that does not acknowledge that the ACT economy began to slow down well before the influence of the global financial crisis became evident in late 2008. I know that for four out of the last six quarters for the ACT—12 months out of the last 18—we have had negative growth, and that for five of the last 12 months retail sales have been negative in the ACT. We have a government that seeks to place all the blame for the current economic difficulties on the global financial crisis, but it defers any hard decisions that are needed and proposes even more consultation on this budget.
My colleague the Leader of the Opposition has outlined in considerable detail many of the concerns that we have identified with the 2009 budget. Let me reiterate by simply saying that there were clear and unambiguous signs of an economic slowdown long before the global financial crisis. Yet the Stanhope-Gallagher government continued as if nothing was wrong. The reality is that they should have been responding to these emerging signs earlier but, no, they carried on blithely ignoring those developments. As a consequence of this, the ACT is now in an even bigger mess than should have been the case.
At this late point what has been the response of the Stanhope-Gallagher government? In particular, what has been the response of the Treasurer? She has simply run up the white flag. She has surrendered. She has said that the ACT will have difficult times for the next seven years. The Stanhope-Gallagher government will increase public sector employment during 2009-10. The Stanhope-Gallagher government will have
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .