Page 2844 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 13 August 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The nub of Mr Smyth’s motion is not about the merits of the budget. We will debate that at some stage. Whether it is today or whether it is another day, we will go through it line by line. We are ready to do that. This is not about avoiding time; this is about trying to get the information because we in the opposition have a responsibility on behalf to the community to make sure that their money is spent wisely by this government on their behalf. It is impossible for this Assembly to make some of those decisions without the relevant information. The point is that the government has not provided the relevant information when it comes to some extremely substantive elements of this budget totalling hundreds of millions of dollars.
The concern has also been raised about whether what we are doing today is in breach of the FMA. The points have been made with direct quotes by Mr Smyth, but the nub of it comes down to what the government is required to do—to give full, accurate and timely disclosure of financial information about the activities of the government and its agencies. As Mr Smyth and Mr Coe have articulated, the government has failed to do that.
Turning firstly to the issue of rates, the government has touted this and the Treasurer has touted this as the biggest tax reform in history in the ACT. That may well be the case. If it is the case, it would require, in order for this side of the Assembly to agree to it, our seeing all of the modelling. We would need to see all of the evidence. As we found out during the estimates committee process, the government has done that modelling. The government has the information. The government understands the impact of their rates reform, but it is refusing to give that to the community. They are drip-feeding it. They are drip-feeding it, Madam Deputy Speaker. They are giving it in four or five-year chunks.
When you look at those four-year chunks, when you look at what is in the budget—this budget we are going to be asked to vote on—rates are going up at a rate of 10 per cent a year. When you extrapolate that, rates will triple in just over 11 years. Based on the information that the government will give us, rates triple in 11 years. The government had the information that they could present to this Assembly to refute that that is going to happen. But they refuse to do so. We must have asked the government and this Treasurer to table that dozens of times in this place. It has been the subject of motions; it is in the estimates committee report.
Why will he not do that? The only conclusion that can be reasonably drawn is that he knows that the modelling he has will show exactly what we are saying and exactly what is in the budget, and that is that your rates will triple. We have a duty on behalf of householders to make sure that when we are debating these issues, when we are being asked to vote, we understand the full implications of that reform, and he is refusing to give it to us. That is why this minister does not have our confidence.
When it comes to the issue of light rail, the argument for light rail is contrary to the evidence that has been provided. Mr Coe showed that quite clearly. But importantly, this is not just about the start of a debate. What today will do if we decide that we are going to go on with the budget—this mob opposite, with the support of Mr Rattenbury, are going to support it—is lock us into light rail. It is quite clear, because the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video