Page 5886 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 7 December 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR SESELJA: Ms Gallagher groans because she does not like it. She has got a chance here. She endorsed these words when Ms Porter brought them. She was not groaning when Ms Porter was putting this forward. So obviously it is all about politics. It is not about Canberra families; it is not about jobs in Canberra. It is about who is in government; it is about who is making the cuts.
The Canberra Liberals say that we will stand up to political parties federally, no matter who they are. If it is in the interests of Canberra families, we will stand up to them. We would expect nothing less from our opponents; we would expect nothing less from the Labor Party here. But we are not getting it. They are a morally bankrupt party. They consistently lied to the people of Canberra over this issue; they should be held accountable for those lies and untruths and for selling the people of Canberra out.
MS HUNTER (Ginninderra—Parliamentary Leader, ACT Greens) (6.31): On 24 August this year we also debated a motion on commonwealth public service job cuts. On that occasion we noted that the federal Liberal Party were proposing to cut 12,000 public service jobs. I understand that since that time Mr Hockey has raised the stakes to say that the proposed cuts are of at least 12,000 jobs.
In that debate I moved an amendment noting that the Liberals proposed to scrap the department of climate change. This is consistent with their policy of climate change denial and it appears to be consistent with the new local Liberal position, which appears to be not to do anything about climate change whatsoever.
We all recognise the impact of this issue on Canberra and how profound the impact of public service job cuts are on all of us. Not only do we all know someone who works in the public service, but also we know that the economic activity and prosperity of the ACT depend on the flow-on effect of public service jobs.
As a result of the MYEFO we know that our GST revenue will decline but special purpose payments will increase. We also know that government spending as a share of the economy is expected to decline from 24.8 per cent of GDP in 2011-12 to 23.6 per cent. This is an important point to note. I think we all recognise that we are, and will remain for some time, reliant on commonwealth spending. The challenge is to minimise this reliance and create a sustainable economy that ensures the greatest prosperity for all our residents.
The Greens have proposed a number of initiatives and talked about the types of industries and initiatives that we should be looking at delivering to get to this ongoing prosperity. Tomorrow we will conclude the debate on the large-scale feed-in tariff, which is an excellent example of the diversification of our economy and one that will provide a range of benefits to the whole community.
Mr Speaker, I will turn to some of the particular details of the motion. There is, of course, a bit of tit for tat. I must admit that I am a little surprised that the Liberals would want to draw attention to this issue. On 27 June this year Mr Hockey said on the ABC program Q&A:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video