Page 2905 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 29 June 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
have to ask what one bed-night for a hotel is. Compare that to the private sector and something like the Foreshore event. Most of us were at the Australian Hotels Association the other night where the Foreshore won an event for the best tourism event. They won a prize for the best tourism event and they get no assistance. They bring something like 17,000—
Mr Barr: They do.
MR SMYTH: They got a small amount of assistance. Sorry, I apologise.
Mr Barr: Never let the facts get in the way of the story, Brendan.
MR SMYTH: No, no; I am happy to acknowledge when I get it wrong—unlike you, I will acknowledge it. They got a small grant to assist, but what they cannot get from a federal Labor government is a commitment that they can use the same space three years in a row so they get some certainty for their event. But what there seems to be is no ongoing or growing commitment to the Foreshore event to help it realise its potential. The organisers of that do not give away a third of their tickets. What they did not get was $3½ million of government expenditure. They run a great event, and the private sector in the ACT is a great sector, but what they do not get from this government is the support that they need.
The Chief Minister on the day of the budget is quoted as saying: “We are being asked to stand on our own two feet. We are having to do just that.” I asked her: “What does that mean? How do you stand on your own two feet? What is your plan?” If members go to page 13 of the government’s response, the recommendation is:
The Committee recommends that the ACT Government table, by no later than the first sitting day in December 2011, the plan to enable the ACT to stand on its own two feet through diversifying its economic base, instead of being so totally dependent on Federal funding and land based taxation.
What is the government’s response? You would have thought it would give an enthusiastic response to that: “Yes, we are happy to stand on our own two feet, and to make it happen we are going to have a plan.” No plan; just being noted: “Yes, we note the recommendation.” But we see, apparently:
This has already been implemented. The Government’s Budget Plan returns the budget to surplus in 2013-14, two years ahead of the original target.
But there is no plan to stand on our own two feet. To say that the budget document is our plan is to say it is business as normal and business as normal is to get record taxation and spend more than you get. The private sector does not get to operate like that. If there were reasons to run deficits to ensure that basic services were being provided, you might accept it. But we have more cash than we have ever had. Despite their protestations that they were affected by the global financial crisis, the revenue is, over four years, about $2 billion more than the original estimates had determined. The problem is we spend it—that is the problem with this government. You have to question their spending priorities. We go back to Enlighten—why is it that the government felt this urge to set up an event in autumn, at a time of year that is already
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video