Page 1891 - Week 05 - Thursday, 6 May 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR SESELJA: That is not what your figures say. From the tortuous procurement procedures to the ruinous payment policies, many small and even large businesses are thinking twice about working for the ACT government because it is simply bad business. Details of the recent payment history of invoices by the ACT government are quite revealing. In a number of answers to questions asked on notice, we discovered that the financial system operated by the ACT government or by agencies within the ACT government does not have the facility to identify invoices from small and medium enterprises. So how can they be serviced properly? We found that a number of agencies had a significant level of invoices that were considered to be overdue, including Disability, Housing and Community Services, Territory and Municipal Services, the Chief Minister’s Department, Education and Training, Health, ACTPLA and Treasury.
As a matter of principle, all governments should pay their debts on time. This is particularly important in small jurisdictions such as the ACT, where the activities of the ACT government are relatively significant in the overall level of economic activity.
SMEs would benefit from receiving revenue on time. This would mean that these entities will have a reduced requirement to fund their operations from overdrafts. Ultimately the efficiency of government should be improved as the Shared Services agency and all other agencies work more effectively to ensure that all invoices are paid in a timely manner.
I know that other parties talk about this. It is in your coalition agreement. But Mr Smyth has concrete legislation ready to go to make it a reality. The fact that you cannot even identify small businesses, let alone service them properly, shows that your commitment to this sector is a sham. That is why we will take legislative action. If you will not do it, we will take the steps to make sure you do. Again, this is not an expensive policy announcement. It is simply better governance and an example of where simply doing business better will result in better business being done in the territory.
Our response to this budget says much about our response to this government, where we differ and where we would change priorities. Make no mistake: we support families. We believe governments must do all they can to support them and their needs, not give in to the urge to impose their ideals upon them. We understand what it is like to live in the suburbs, to put kids through school, and to save for a home and one day make it a better home. If a family needs two cars, they should not be punished or condemned by this coalition government. Instead, they should have roads that work and places to park. This budget does not support those people, but we will.
Homeowners moving into the market through an apartment or retirees downsizing and splitting their blocks are slugged in this budget. We will support them. If a family supports environmental action but cannot afford solar panels, they should not be forced to subsidise a major company to boost their bottom line. This government does not give them choice, but we will. If a family faces bullying at their school, they should be backed up by the strength of the department, not blocked by bureaucrats. This government does not stand up to bullies, but we will.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video