Ms MARTIN - 2000-10-11
Yesterday, the Chief Minister was reported on ABC television as claiming that the Prime Minister had advised him that he would review the issue of Commonwealth fuel excise when the extent of any windfall from the current high fuel prices became clearer. Yet the Prime Minister said he has no such plans.
So I ask the Chief Minister, do you still stand by your assertion yesterday that the Prime Minister will decide upon fuel excise on the basis of the windfall at some time in the future? And, if not, when did you change your mind about your conversation with the Prime Minister? Regardless of what the Prime Minister may or may not do, are you still planning - and your Treasurer - to slug Territorians an extra 1.1 per litre on fuel prices, by removing the general fuel subsidy the Territory provides?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, to take the last point first, what we intend to do is slug the children in the Northern Territory with state-of-the-art IT in their schools. And we are very proud of it.
Could I just take the opportunity, the previous question from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said that I said that the drug-related crime in the Northern Territory is minuscule, and I question whether or not that was a correct interpretation of what I said. I was assured yes. Once again, absolutely consistently, they try to mislead the House. My comment from Hansard, I quote, and I said this: ‘There is drug-related crime in the Northern Territory, there is no doubt about that, but compared to other jurisdictions, is minuscule’.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: I asked the question whether or not he was extrapolating national data - he was. He had no data whatsoever with regards to the Northern Territory. He tried to say that drug-related crime as a statement of mine was minuscule. I said my statement clearly shows that I accept that there is drug-related crime, but compared to other jurisdictions it is minuscule, particularly, when one considers the drug-related crime we are talking about is illicit drugs such as heroin, which is the real problem down south.
Now, in terms of the comments of the Prime Minister as quoted by me, that is probably a question that has been faxed to the Leader from Dear Kim, who would probably want to make much of that. I believe I have been misreported in the Northern Territory in the ABC - before the journalist herself gets upset, I accept blame for that. I am certainly not putting words in the Prime Minister’s mouth. His position with regards to fuel excise is absolutely clear. He intends doing nothing about it. In terms of his answer to me based on the comments I raised with him that he needs to address very clearly the perceptions in the community …
Mr Stirling: He won’t be talking to you any more.
Mr BURKE: Will you please listen? If you are not interested, Territorians are. …that he needs to address the clear perceptions in the community that there is a windfall gain to governments based on the additional excise that the federal government is collecting, and the perception of windfall gains through GST to the states and territories. His simple answer to me was that that information was not clearly available, and no one, and he certainly could not make a judgment on those issues until that information was available.
So I ask the Chief Minister, do you still stand by your assertion yesterday that the Prime Minister will decide upon fuel excise on the basis of the windfall at some time in the future? And, if not, when did you change your mind about your conversation with the Prime Minister? Regardless of what the Prime Minister may or may not do, are you still planning - and your Treasurer - to slug Territorians an extra 1.1 per litre on fuel prices, by removing the general fuel subsidy the Territory provides?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, to take the last point first, what we intend to do is slug the children in the Northern Territory with state-of-the-art IT in their schools. And we are very proud of it.
Could I just take the opportunity, the previous question from the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said that I said that the drug-related crime in the Northern Territory is minuscule, and I question whether or not that was a correct interpretation of what I said. I was assured yes. Once again, absolutely consistently, they try to mislead the House. My comment from Hansard, I quote, and I said this: ‘There is drug-related crime in the Northern Territory, there is no doubt about that, but compared to other jurisdictions, is minuscule’.
Members interjecting.
Mr SPEAKER: Order!
Mr BURKE: I asked the question whether or not he was extrapolating national data - he was. He had no data whatsoever with regards to the Northern Territory. He tried to say that drug-related crime as a statement of mine was minuscule. I said my statement clearly shows that I accept that there is drug-related crime, but compared to other jurisdictions it is minuscule, particularly, when one considers the drug-related crime we are talking about is illicit drugs such as heroin, which is the real problem down south.
Now, in terms of the comments of the Prime Minister as quoted by me, that is probably a question that has been faxed to the Leader from Dear Kim, who would probably want to make much of that. I believe I have been misreported in the Northern Territory in the ABC - before the journalist herself gets upset, I accept blame for that. I am certainly not putting words in the Prime Minister’s mouth. His position with regards to fuel excise is absolutely clear. He intends doing nothing about it. In terms of his answer to me based on the comments I raised with him that he needs to address very clearly the perceptions in the community …
Mr Stirling: He won’t be talking to you any more.
Mr BURKE: Will you please listen? If you are not interested, Territorians are. …that he needs to address the clear perceptions in the community that there is a windfall gain to governments based on the additional excise that the federal government is collecting, and the perception of windfall gains through GST to the states and territories. His simple answer to me was that that information was not clearly available, and no one, and he certainly could not make a judgment on those issues until that information was available.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016