Page 2571 - Week 07 - Thursday, 18 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Interestingly, he does not say that the nature of the deficit was solely due to my role as Treasurer in the ACT. In other words, Mr Harris recognised the context in which—
Mrs Dunne: Perhaps he’s too polite to say so.
MS GALLAGHER: Mr Harris has acknowledged that there is a global financial crisis which has impacted on our budget. That is the point I was making there—a point that has been missed by the opposition. Mr Harris also recognised the transparency and adequacy of the budget information to assist an external reader. He said:
The ACT government also had to take into account and properly reflect in its budget the significant distortions of temporary Commonwealth fiscal stimuli as well as its own responses to the recession. The unique nature of the ACT budget also means that approaches used in analysing budgets of other Australian jurisdictions cannot be simply applied to the ACT budget. In particular, the ACT government’s reliance on its almost unique superannuation arrangements has to be carefully considered.
He went on to say:
Fortunately, the ACT government has recognised these issues and has provided sufficient information to assist in preparing this analysis.
That is an endorsement, again, of the approach that we followed in presenting—
Mr Barr: Was any of that in the estimates committee report?
MS GALLAGHER: No, there is not huge coverage of this in the estimates report. Mr Harris found the information useful in analysing the budget and cautioned against a simplistic approach. He provided his own analysis of the budget estimates based on past forecasts and actual results. An interesting quote in the report is when Mr Harris went on to say:
The ACT general government—
operating result, I think it is; that is a misquote—
has one of the strongest, if not the strongest, balance sheet of all Australian states and territories. Even though it is embarking on a large capital works and capital investment program, its budget suggested that it would emerge in four years time with no net debt.
This strength enabled the government to bear operating deficits (at least on some measures) in the budget year and over the forward estimates period without having to take immediate steps to reduce expenses or increase revenues.
That deferral of action might have been justified but recent downward revisions to the estimates … means that the ACT government is facing a $200 million loss of revenues over four years. This would further endanger the government’s
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .