Page 558 - Week 02 - Wednesday, 22 February 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Clearly, this work is being done. If you apply their maxim of “squeeze them till they bleed but not until they die”, it is so neatly rephrased there without the rhetoric in it, where Ms Gallagher says:
… we weigh that up and consider that in the context of what people can afford …
It does not seem to be what is fair or what is appropriate but simply what people can afford. This statement is very interesting because Ms Gallagher could be saying: “What can people afford? How much more can we squeeze out of them?” It really is shades of former Treasurer Quinlan: “Squeeze them till they bleed but not until they die.”
My question to Ms Gallagher is: if your government considers the potential impact of measures on the community then why can’t the community have some idea of what that analysis is as well? This approach, through a cost of living statement, could enhance debate about the budget. In an era, sometime in the future, when there is appropriate openness, transparency and accountability in the ACT, we may achieve this state.
Cost of living pressures have been an important topic for some years, particularly following the uncertainty created by the global economic and financial crisis in 2008-09 and with the ongoing legacy of that period continuing as the countries of Europe struggle to resolve their sovereign debt issues. People in Australia have become increasingly cautious about financial affairs, increasingly conservative about taking on debt and increasingly conservative about boosting savings. And all of this is taking place at a time when there are significant pressures on household budgets from increases in the costs of a wide range of goods and services.
Do we want to know the good news? Apparently Ms Gallagher has finally discovered that there are people with financial concerns in our community. Apparently it took a meeting with community sector workers late in 2011 to make Ms Gallagher aware of people with financial concerns. The worry for the people of Canberra now, however, is to see a response from the Chief Minister.
I do not have time to deal in full with Ms Gallagher’s response to the concerns that she discovered recently, but what I can say is that, as far as we can understand her response, all of us should be most concerned. Her plan is to allow people who are experiencing financial pressures to access cheaper loans. What a marvellous strategy from the Labor government! If somebody is under financial pressure, what do you do if you are Ms Gallagher? You offer, and presumably encourage, people who are not able to afford more debt to take on more debt. What nonsense.
She wants the ACT government to go into the business of what appear to be “payday loans”. She wants people who may be working hard to repay their mortgages or other loans to increase their level of debt. It is not very smart strategy for people who are struggling financially to be encouraged to take on even more debt, even if it is at a concessional rate. Of course, it comes on top of that other famous statement from the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video