Mr BALCH - 1999-04-29
Like many members of this House, I have been going over my budget papers. I spent all last night searching the budget papers looking for the $20m-worth of flower boxes for Parliament House, which featured so prominently in the Opposition Leader’s reply yesterday. I couldn’t find any evidence of what she’s been on about. Has the Chief Minister been any more successful in locating a reference to this project which so annoys the Opposition Leader?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I can confirm that the only capital works spending of any note that has occurred at Parliament House has been renovations to the Opposition Leader’s office. As I said in my previous answer, it is unparliamentary to call the Leader of the Opposition a liar in this House. I will leave that to Territorians to judge in good time.
I made the observation, and certainly the Treasurer made the observation, that the Leader of the Opposition’s reply to the budget was nothing short of disgraceful. She had every opportunity to lay out a position, but what she did was reveal what I believe is now her policy – to act alone. The rest are just lemmings. They’re irrelevant. She acts alone. Everything revolves around Ms Clare Majella Martin, the Leader of the Opposition. And her policy is tell them anything as long as you get a grab. That was her approach to the reply to the budget. She invented $20m in government spending on a redevelopment ...
Ms Martin interjecting.
Mr BURKE: Let’s talk about the record. The Leader of the Opposition made the point in her budget reply yesterday that I had confirmed in this House that this development was going ahead. This was the question asked by the member for Arafura:
To prove that you really are different to the previous Chief Minister, will you dump the outrageous plan announced by the previous Chief Minister that the Country Liberal Party will spend $20m to beautify the surrounds of Parliament House?
Interjections occurred during my answer, which was:
Mr Speaker, I gather that’s a reference to the State Square development. Am I correct?
Someone over there nodded and I continued:
Well, that’s an important initiative that’s going through consideration by our planners at the moment to see where it fits and when, and how and if it fits into the development.
That was the answer - ‘if it fits’. Now, you can’t take an ‘if’ and turn that into a $20m spending spree by government and, worse, use that as the linchpin of your budget reply if you stand up and propose to be a leader of government. You simply can’t do it. It is plain, straight lying. It is nothing short of a lie, and that’s what she did. She stood up in this House, claimed that the government had spent $20m ...
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Mr Speaker!
Mr SPEAKER: Yes, there is a point of order. The Chief Minister can’t imply that the Leader of the Opposition lied.
Mr BURKE: Mr Speaker, there was a time when I was prepared to give the Leader of the Opposition …
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Mr Speaker! The Chief Minister should withdraw unequivocally.
Mr SPEAKER: The Chief Minister will withdraw.
Mr BURKE: Mr Speaker, I withdraw because of the procedures that exist in this House. I will leave others to judge.
There was a time when I gave the Leader of the Opposition consideration …
Mr Bailey: Here he goes, hand-wringing again!
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Wanguri is being over the top. I suggest he keeps his thoughts to himself for a while.
Mr BURKE: There was a time when I gave the Leader of the Opposition some consideration. I thought she had taken on too much of a portfolio load and would find it very difficult to carry that sort of load and be Leader of the Opposition. Then I thought maybe she was just plain incompetent and an economic illiterate. But what she is is a calculated deceiver - a calculated deceiver who will, firstly, run stuff on polling and, secondly, give a budget speech which invents a $20m spending spree by government and claims that that money should have been spent on health and education.
It’s not in the budget! Her responsibility is to reply to the budget. There is no $20m in the budget. There is no decision by this government to spend $20m on State Square development. It is not, as the Treasurer says, even in the forward estimates. Plain responsibility suggests that the Leader of the Opposition should not use that as the linchpin of her budget reply. Calculated deception is the policy of the Labor Leader opposite.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I can confirm that the only capital works spending of any note that has occurred at Parliament House has been renovations to the Opposition Leader’s office. As I said in my previous answer, it is unparliamentary to call the Leader of the Opposition a liar in this House. I will leave that to Territorians to judge in good time.
I made the observation, and certainly the Treasurer made the observation, that the Leader of the Opposition’s reply to the budget was nothing short of disgraceful. She had every opportunity to lay out a position, but what she did was reveal what I believe is now her policy – to act alone. The rest are just lemmings. They’re irrelevant. She acts alone. Everything revolves around Ms Clare Majella Martin, the Leader of the Opposition. And her policy is tell them anything as long as you get a grab. That was her approach to the reply to the budget. She invented $20m in government spending on a redevelopment ...
Ms Martin interjecting.
Mr BURKE: Let’s talk about the record. The Leader of the Opposition made the point in her budget reply yesterday that I had confirmed in this House that this development was going ahead. This was the question asked by the member for Arafura:
To prove that you really are different to the previous Chief Minister, will you dump the outrageous plan announced by the previous Chief Minister that the Country Liberal Party will spend $20m to beautify the surrounds of Parliament House?
Interjections occurred during my answer, which was:
Mr Speaker, I gather that’s a reference to the State Square development. Am I correct?
Someone over there nodded and I continued:
Well, that’s an important initiative that’s going through consideration by our planners at the moment to see where it fits and when, and how and if it fits into the development.
That was the answer - ‘if it fits’. Now, you can’t take an ‘if’ and turn that into a $20m spending spree by government and, worse, use that as the linchpin of your budget reply if you stand up and propose to be a leader of government. You simply can’t do it. It is plain, straight lying. It is nothing short of a lie, and that’s what she did. She stood up in this House, claimed that the government had spent $20m ...
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Mr Speaker!
Mr SPEAKER: Yes, there is a point of order. The Chief Minister can’t imply that the Leader of the Opposition lied.
Mr BURKE: Mr Speaker, there was a time when I was prepared to give the Leader of the Opposition …
Mr STIRLING: A point of order, Mr Speaker! The Chief Minister should withdraw unequivocally.
Mr SPEAKER: The Chief Minister will withdraw.
Mr BURKE: Mr Speaker, I withdraw because of the procedures that exist in this House. I will leave others to judge.
There was a time when I gave the Leader of the Opposition consideration …
Mr Bailey: Here he goes, hand-wringing again!
Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member for Wanguri is being over the top. I suggest he keeps his thoughts to himself for a while.
Mr BURKE: There was a time when I gave the Leader of the Opposition some consideration. I thought she had taken on too much of a portfolio load and would find it very difficult to carry that sort of load and be Leader of the Opposition. Then I thought maybe she was just plain incompetent and an economic illiterate. But what she is is a calculated deceiver - a calculated deceiver who will, firstly, run stuff on polling and, secondly, give a budget speech which invents a $20m spending spree by government and claims that that money should have been spent on health and education.
It’s not in the budget! Her responsibility is to reply to the budget. There is no $20m in the budget. There is no decision by this government to spend $20m on State Square development. It is not, as the Treasurer says, even in the forward estimates. Plain responsibility suggests that the Leader of the Opposition should not use that as the linchpin of her budget reply. Calculated deception is the policy of the Labor Leader opposite.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016