Page 2572 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 7 August 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
These are very important issues. All three things that I have highlighted—there are only three but there are many more that one could put in this place—involve large sums of money. All three affect the bottom line. All three affect taxpayers and what may happen to the taxes that they pay. What we are simply saying is that, in agreement with the bipartisan committee report yesterday that said—
Mr Barr: I would give up on that one. Oh, it’s bipartisan!
MR SMYTH: So it is not a bipartisan committee?
Mr Rattenbury: Come on! Credibility just flew out the door, Brendan.
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, members.
MR SMYTH: So two and two is not bipartisan? There were only four members. Well, there you go. Let us go to the report then. The report was passed by the committee. The Labor members could have stopped the report and they did not, so there is tacit support for all the recommendations in that report; otherwise they would have stopped it.
Members interjecting—
MR SMYTH: They had their opportunity, Madam Speaker. Those opposite can laugh, but there is a report from the Select Committee on Estimates that was agreed to by the committee. It was agreed to and passed; otherwise it would not have been tabled.
Dr Bourke: You can’t even say it with a straight face.
MR SMYTH: There you go. I am laughing at you, Chris. I am just laughing at you. I am laughing at your companion who moves motions and then moves dissent from his own motion.
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, Mr Smyth! Mr Smyth, would you address the chair, please?
MR SMYTH: Yes, Madam Speaker; I will talk through the chair. This is the lunacy of what happened yesterday from those opposite. We have a report that was passed by a committee that consisted of two members of the Liberal Party and two members of the Labor Party; otherwise it would not have been tabled.
Members interjecting—
MR SMYTH: What are you objecting to? The report itself says there are holes in the budget. The report says that there are details lacking, and that those details should be made available before the budget is debated. That is not an unreasonable position. Let us look at what we are talking about. We are talking about a dividend from ACTEW that we believe will now be reduced by an estimated $100 million. We do not know that it will be approximately $100 million. We had the offhand remark from the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video