Page 2111 - Week 06 - Thursday, 7 May 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
industry and community groups and others interested in developing responses to the global economic slowdown. Is that not consultation? Did they not listen? Did they not hear? Did they not learn? How much consultation does this government require?
What does this government do when it is consulting with the community? Did the ministers ask any questions? Did the community give any answers? Despite all this consultation in the lead-up to the budget, we still have a community talking about the need for more community engagement as part of its budget plan. This is nonsense. It shows that the Stanhope-Gallagher government has not listened, and it shows that the Stanhope-Gallagher government has no idea on how to conduct consultation and that it has still not learned anything from the consultation fiascos of recent years.
One important aspect in any major policy announcement is to consider the views of third parties. Yesterday we had a motion attempting to condemn Mr Seselja for selectively quoting, a motion rejected by the Assembly, and yet we have got a Chief Minister who does it all the time. Yesterday the Chief Minister selectively quoted from the Canberra Business Council by claiming that the Canberra Business Council, through Chris Faulks, reported on the budget that “capital works expenditure will generate employment opportunities in the short to medium term”. That is true; that is in the document. But what the Chief Minister did not read is the final paragraph of the conclusion. What did the Canberra Business Council conclude about this budget? Well, let me tell you what they said:
The council expresses concern over the magnitude and duration of the forecast ACT Budget deficits. This concern is amplified by the fact that the 2009-10 budget does not clearly outline how the ACT Government expects to eliminate the deficit by 2015-16. Given the amount of pain the ACT suffered to generate savings of $100 million in 2006-07, the target of $153 million in savings identified over three years in the current Budget seems alarming. The announced actions—an efficiency dividend—
of one per cent from large agencies and half a per cent from smaller agencies—
public sector wage restraint and unspecified programs of expenditure reviews—are unlikely to be sufficient to return to a balanced Budget without the need to resort to extreme measures.
The situation is likely to be further compounded by steps taken by the federal government to bring its budget into balance over a similar period. I seek leave to table the entire document for the edification of the Assembly.
Leave granted.
MR SMYTH: I table the following paper:
ACT Budget—Summary 2009—Canberra Business Council, dated 5 May 2009.
Madam Assistant Speaker, why did the Chief Minister not quote the overall conclusion and the view? Well, I think it is clear by what they said. Is it a ringing endorsement of the 2009 ACT budget? I think not. Indeed, it is far from an
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .