Page 5879 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 7 December 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mr Seselja interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Order! One moment. Stop the clocks, thank you. Mr Seselja, as I have made clear, I expect members, if they want to take an issue on, to at least get to their feet and to have the fortitude to do so. It is quite clear that Mrs Dunne provoked Mr Barr. I find myself as the Speaker in a very difficult position in these circumstances. I guess I could have warned both Mr Barr and Mrs Dunne, but I simply sought to try and keep the chamber moving along so that we can actually finish this debate. Mr Barr, you have the floor.
MR BARR: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I apologise; I should not have reacted. I apologise.
In relation to the motion before us, paragraph (1)(a) refers to an alleged scheme to sack 3,000 commonwealth public servants. There is no truth to that statement, so the government cannot support it.
Paragraph (1)(b): I think we have all acknowledged the impact job losses have on Canberra families, so I can make that statement. I would make a political observation and contrast an efficiency dividend for one year with the exact quote of the federal shadow treasurer, Mr Hockey, on ABC Melbourne, referring to the public service:
What we have said is that you have to reduce that, as soon as possible, by more than 12,000 as a starting point.
So even if you were to assume, which I do not believe, that it is 3,000, what Mr Hockey is referring to is another 12,000 on top of that. So let us get some perspective in relation to this.
I certainly do not accept point (1)(a). On point (1)(c), that the Leader of the Opposition has written to his federal colleagues regarding this issue, good; I am glad he has.
The rest of the motion from Mr Smyth calls on the Chief Minister to follow the example of the Leader of the Opposition and write to her federal colleagues. Yes, the Chief Minister has written to her federal colleagues in relation to this matter and made personal representations, both over the telephone and face to face, as I have done, and made repeated comments, particularly—and it is online on the ABC website if they could bother to do even a modicum of research—in relation to the National Capital Authority.
Part 2(b) calls on the Chief Minister to stand up for the Canberra community and publicly denounce the “scheme to sack public servants”. But there is no scheme to sack public servants. There is, however, an efficiency dividend, and everyone has acknowledged that. I was pleased, and I am sure all members will be pleased, that the small cultural institutions were exempt from any further efficiency dividend. I think that is a good decision. I am concerned and have put on the public record more than once, and did again today, concerns about those three institutions that sit within
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video