Page 2634 - Week 07 - Thursday, 1 August 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The only people talking about privatising ACTION buses is the Australian Labor Party ACT branch and the Chief Minister.
This is the government that also opted for a PPP model for light rail with an embedded finance rate of about six per cent rather than borrowing at more like 2 or 2½ per cent and taking control of it right away. Why were they so desperate to get an international consortium to run the light rail for 20 years? How is that possibly consistent with the matter of public importance we have today: the importance of essential services remaining in public hands. Why are they going for a PPP model with the courts if they believe essential services should remain in public hands? Is light rail not an essential service? Is the Supreme Court not an essential service? Are operations in our public health system not essential? Is training in WH&S and other services not essential?
There is real hypocrisy here. It is all very well for those opposite to grandstand at their Labor Party conference but they cannot come in here and say that it is the fault of the Liberals. Have a look at your own cabinet. The backbench in this Assembly is disinclined to hold their own cabinet to account. They would rather throw grenades at the Liberals about outsourcing rather than hold their own cabinet to account.
Why is it that so many operations were outsourced to John James Hospital and not done at TCH? They were public patients done at Calvary John James. Why is it that so much training is outsourced to the unions rather than being done at CIT? Why is it that we have PPPs for light rail and the courts when they could easily have been traditional construction contracts then taking over the management?
There are all sorts of inconsistencies with this argument. If those opposite are serious about this they will rule out any more PPPs, particularly those that include operation. They will also hold their own Chief Minister to account for what he said in December of 2014, that they are contemplating significant change in relation to ACTION buses as part of an overhaul of public transport. I asked if he meant licensing or privatising, and he said that is under some consideration. The problems are much closer to home.
MS BERRY (Ginninderra—Deputy Chief Minister, Minister for Education and Early Childhood Development, Minister for Housing and Suburban Development, Minister for the Prevention of Domestic and Family Violence, Minister for Sport and Recreation and Minister for Women) (3.46): I thank Mr Pettersson for bringing forward this important debate today. It is a matter of significant importance to the people of Canberra because all Canberrans in some way rely on the essential services that our government provides. It is vital that these services remain in public hands because public services are there for the benefit of Canberrans.
Globally there are many examples of what happens when essential public services are sold off or contracted out and where the people reliant on those services are worse off. The government knows this and remains committed to helping keep essential services in public hands.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video