Page 142 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 11 February 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
What would that mean for employment? What would that mean for infrastructure? If it is the position of the shadow treasurer that it must be a surplus or a balanced budget over everything else at this moment in time, given everything that has been thrown at this economy—from his federal colleagues in particular, but not exclusively—then let him say so and let him put forward the measures that would achieve that.
That is certainly Joe Hockey’s position. That was Tony Abbott’s position until a few days ago. All of a sudden, everything has changed. I have no doubt that the federal government will continue to run budget deficits for some time now, with a view to supporting the Australian economy, as they should at this time.
The ACT, like the Commonwealth of Australia, had very low levels of debt and has a AAA credit rating. So we have the capacity to support our economy at this time. We have the capacity to invest in productive new infrastructure for this city. We also need to maintain the high level of services that we provide to the Canberra community. And we need to support jobs; we need to continue to support jobs.
The alternative economic recipe, the alternative policy position, is exactly what has happened in conservative states. Where conservative governments have come in in other Australian states, what has their approach been? To slash employment, to cut services and to reduce spending on infrastructure or to try to privatise everything that is not bolted down. We have seen what has happened to those governments in Victoria and now in Queensland. If that is the recipe, if that is your policy approach, bring it on. We are very happy to have that debate and to contrast our approach with that of conservative Liberal governments in Victoria and Queensland—indeed, what we have been seeing nationally. We are very happy to do that. If you want to continue down that path, great. We look forward to that debate. We really look forward to that debate.
We do not resile from supporting our economy at this time. We do not resile from putting jobs first. We do not resile from supporting new productive infrastructure for Canberra. And we do not resile from working in partnership with the private sector—indeed, with new investors in the ACT economy. We are seeing that, and it is terrific for Canberra. Our national and international exposure as an investment destination and as an exporter of high quality goods and services is growing day after day. The shadow treasurer may not like to hear that, but there is a positive message from the Canberra economy: it is the success of our enterprising businesses, who are focusing on national and international markets and achieving outstanding success.
There is also a great story to tell about the new level of investment that this economy is attracting at a national and international level. An economy of our size does not have sufficient capital within our territory’s borders in order to maintain a level of growth and living standards, so we are seeking to attract new capital into this economy. And we are succeeding. We are also using our own balance sheet to invest in new productive infrastructure for the territory. That is this government’s focus, and that is what this economy needs at this point in time.
I am very happy to have this debate. It is austerity; it is cuts; it is Campbell Newman, Denis Napthine, Ted Baillieu and Lawrence Springborg. You name the leaders. They
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video