Page 4513 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 14 October 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
before budget cabinet as well, and I am conscious that that may come with a price tag that we will have to manage, and we remain committed to that as well.
In saying that I do not want to amend the motion because I understand the sentiment of what Ms Hunter has put forward and I agree with it, I would just flag that that overall savings task is going to be a difficult one. As an Assembly I am sure we will be able to work through it, minimising any impact on the community services sector, who do such a fantastic job in providing right at the coalface the services to our community’s most vulnerable. Indeed, they perform a job that is often unseen, but certainly members of this place acknowledge the work that is done. I also acknowledge Gordon Ramsay as one of the leaders in the field in providing emergency assistance to perhaps Canberra’s most—or one of the most—vulnerable population out there in west Belconnen.
We look forward to working with community organisations and with members of the Assembly as we seek to recover our budget in a sensitive way that is mindful of our responsibilities to the community services sector.
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (6.23): I congratulate Ms Hunter for bringing forward this matter today in Anti-Poverty Week; it is thoughtful and laudable. But there are elements of the motion that the Canberra Liberals cannot support—not because we are heartless plutocrats but because in a way it constrains the government in what it says that it has to do in bringing the budget back into line, and it will have unintended consequences.
The tenor of the motion is that the work that non-government organisations do in relation to the alleviation of poverty is somehow better and more important than the work of broad-ranging government service provision in relation to the alleviation of poverty, and this is the issue that I have some concern with.
The situation of people living in poverty in the ACT is an important one and one that in many ways is underrated and underappreciated, simply because of the things the minister spoke about in relation to the relative wealth and the relatively high standard of living that people on average experience in the ACT, which to some extent masks but also exacerbates poverty in the ACT. There are substantial pockets of disadvantage in the territory which we as legislators and as elected representatives must address in a variety of ways.
I can understand why Ms Hunter, with her background in the community sector, would put forward this motion, and I can understand why she would like to call on the government to quarantine community organisations from the efficiency dividend. I am surprised that the government have supported this. I was told that you were not going to support this and that you were going to amend it. But I do agree that the amendment that was circulated from Ms Gallagher’s office did not actually make very much difference and she is right: it was splitting hairs.
The Liberal opposition discussed this at some length this morning and, whilst we appreciate the position that the Greens put on this, we think that it is irresponsible to constrain the government by quarantining particular sectors, because there are many government service delivery organisations which impact on the assistance to people in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .