Page 1792 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 2 May 2012
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
When this government came to office, 60 per cent of people in the ACT were employed in the private sector. It is now fifty-fifty. The private sector has not grown under this lot because they are not committed to the private sector. Being committed to the private sector does not have to be to the detriment of the public sector: you can be committed to both. But that is something that those opposite find impossible to do. You have only got to go back through the records and the quotes of Mr Stanhope and Ms Gallagher. She said, “We will always be a government town.” That is not the case. Government may be the biggest employer, but it does not have to be the only thing that happens in this city.
Ms Porter read out a list of companies that have grown in the ACT—started here and gone on to do great things. But the majority of the people she read out on that list got grants from a former Liberal government, to set up, start up, develop product or get overseas—because we were committed. So Ms Porter should check her facts before she claims credit. It is quite interesting the number of firms that we assisted. Indeed the Follett government before us had programs as well; programs that came to an end in 2006 when the poisonous Costello review, which is still yet to be released, said to the government, “You don’t need business programs”—something the current minister voted for and, in cabinet solidarity, still supports because he will not release the Costello report.
Let us find out what the Costello report said. The Costello review found that the territory’s small size and narrow economic base limited the government’s capacity to seriously influence and assist business activity and economic opportunities: “Don’t bother.” And what did the government do? They took that to heart and they gutted business assistance and business policy in the ACT and the industry section in the department. They slashed resources from in the order of $22 million in 2005-06 to $17.7 million in 2006-07 and to $12 million in 2008-09—a reduction of $10 million from a base of $22 million or just under a reduction of 50 per cent in resources for industry development. That is the history of the Labor government, that is the history of the Greens-Labor alliance and that is the proof of the decade of neglect that this government, aided and abetted by the Greens, supported and foisted on this community, denying them the opportunities that were there.
Much is made of this promise apparently that they will make some changes to payroll tax. Isn’t that interesting? What was the first action of the incoming Labor government in 2002? It was to stop the increase in the payroll tax threshold, trap more businesses, condemn more businesses, to the burden of a tax that of course they pass on to the community, contributing to the cost of living. That is the record of the Labor government, Ms Porter—something that you ignore, something that all those opposite constantly forget. Indeed the Carnell Liberal government had announced that it would increase the payroll tax threshold by stages. And just before the 2002-03 budget was announced, where the threshold would have gone to $1.5 million, what did the government do? It said no.
We all know Mr Barr’s record on that. He sees anything that goes to business as business welfare: “You can’t do that; it’s business welfare. You can’t have this; it’s business welfare. Business should do this on their own; otherwise it is business
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video