Page 1407 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 24 March 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mr Stanhope would have us believe that this never happened; that there were no budgeted deficits; that it was only the former Liberal government that had budgeted for deficits. And that is wrong. At the top of the cycle, the Labor Party budgeted for deficits. Facts are facts. The deficits were, in order, $17 million, $69 million, $5 million, $17 million, $365 million, $68 million—and then there were two surpluses—and $83 million in 2009-10.
As if this is not bad enough, most of these deficits, as I have said, were budgeted for at a time of a revenue boom in the ACT, when the government had almost an additional $1.8 billion above what they had expected. So we have the crazy situation of a government budgeting for deficits when revenue was flooding into the ACT coffers. It defies conventional economic wisdom that in the good times resources should be husbanded. This was not sustainable, and it certainly did not position the ACT as strongly as could have been the case.
The paramount issue that faces us in the ACT is the need to curtail our spending in the ACT budget. This is a matter on which the Treasurer has spoken on many occasions, even lecturing us on what needs to be done. But, at the same time, you have got a Treasurer that has made no attempt whatsoever to diversify the ACT economy to bring us extra revenue lines. Ultimately, the Treasurer has not done what she has asked others to do; she has not reduced spending. She has only said that she needs to reduce spending. The budget speech in 2009, on pages 4 and 5, said:
The Government will take a measured and longer-term approach to addressing the deficit.
This is not deferring the problem.
But, if you look at page 19 of budget paper 3, reductions in spending for the 2009-10 year, the proposed reduction in spending is zero. So it is deferral. The Treasurer said:
Mr Speaker, our Budget Plan is a strategy to restore a balanced budget by 2015-16.
That is seven years—seven years of deficit, even though, on the same chart, on page 19 of budget paper 3, it expects growth at five per cent to outstrip expenses at 4.5 per cent. So even in the minister’s own documents there are inconsistencies. She went on to say:
Mr Speaker, the Plan sets a goal and a clear path towards that goal.
No, it does not. All it simply says is that we need to do something, but then chooses not to do anything. She went go on to say, however:
But further savings will be required.
And, yes, they will be. The problem now that we in the ACT face is that Ms Gallagher still has not had the courage to make the spending decisions that are needed. She has failed to such an extent that the government has had to engage a panel of external
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video