Page 5603 - Week 15 - Wednesday, 9 December 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
There are a number of aspects to the bill that I want to touch on. The first is the issue of reporting on the performance of the ACT budget and the ACT economy generally. There are two components that I want to talk about. Firstly, there is a series of regular reports as required by the Financial Management Act. At present, there are quarterly reports dealing essentially with financial matters and what should be regular reports after the mid-point of each financial year covering budgetary matters, economic and financial. Secondly, there are irregular or ad hoc reports prepared in response to special circumstances, such as the recent global economic and financial crisis. There is no doubt about the intention of the provisions in the ACT relating to budget reviews. Six months after the annual budget, a review shall be prepared dealing with both financial and economic matters. Mr Smyth, I think, set out the intentions of Treasurer Quinlan very clearly, with no ambiguity about the intention of the midyear review.
The second issue concerns the preparation of a report or reports as a result of special circumstances. We can never anticipate all eventualities. Hence when an event of major significance occurs, such as the global economic and financial crisis, and the necessity for governments to respond to an event is required, a special report or reports can be prepared. There is nothing sinister or untoward about this. Indeed, such a response shows that a government is in control. It has the flexibility to operate outside its normal operating parameters. That is what effective management is all about.
The fact that Ms Gallagher could not break out of what she sees as the established process is an indictment of her approach to the Treasury portfolio. She failed to see what the global economic and financial crisis meant. She failed to respond to this crisis as would have been expected. She simply tried to respond to it in the context of the normal way of doing things. By acting in this way she demonstrated a lack of capacity to think outside the square and to adapt to different circumstances.
The third issue concerns the history of the preparation of reviews of the ACT budget since the provisions were enacted in 2003. There have been six midyear reviews to date. The pattern of the release of the first five is consistent. The first, the report for 2003-04, was released on 13 February 2004. The report for 2004-05 was tabled on 15 February 2005. The revised report for 2005-06 was released on 20 February 2006. The report for 2006-07 was released on 20 February 2007. The report for 2007-08 was released on 14 February 2008. But, as Mr Smyth noted, the report for 2008-09 was released by Ms Gallagher on 23 December 2008, just before Christmas.
Even though Treasurer Quinlan did not spell out precisely the process for releasing this report, his actions demonstrate quite clearly what he intended and this was re-enforced by the actions of Treasurer Stanhope. The decision by Ms Gallagher to prepare a midyear report before the end of the relevant six-month period was an unthinking response that unnecessarily broke the established pattern for a progress report on the ACT budget. Moreover, by adopting this approach, Ms Gallagher downplayed the significance of the report by the ACT government on the global economic and financial crisis rather than preparing a specific report on this crisis.
Our bill will do two important things. It will ensure that midyear reviews of the ACT budget are prepared after the completion of the relevant midyear. That is quite a
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video