Ms MARTIN - 2001-06-05
Last week’s budget delivered a fudged bottom line surplus of $1m by treating the remaining assets in the Conditions of Service Trust as income. Chief Minister, why aren’t you consistent in your treatment of assets and liabilities in this budget? The Territory has unfunded employee entitlements of $1.3bn. Why did you count the assets as income but not the liabilities as expenses?
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I am surprised that the Leader of the Opposition directs those questions to me. As the shadow treasurer, she knows that those answers can be provided in detail by the Treasurer. I refer the question to him but I will simply reinforce the point as clearly enunciated by the Treasurer: the inclusion of the conditions of service program in this budget was to bring fully onto the budget, in accordance with accrual accounting requirements, every asset that the government has and it is only in line with those procedures that it has been brought into this year’s budget.
Mr REED (Treasurer): Mr Speaker, it might well serve the good Leader of the Opposition to recognise that she has been in this House a few years now and she should know which minister to direct her questions to.
I had the pleasure last week of doing PowerPoint presentations to some 600 Territorians from Darwin through to Alice Springs and explaining to them the value of the budget, its direction and its five-year horizon that will generate enormous benefits to Territorians and create thousands of jobs for Territorians. I also explained to them - and they understood, as the Leader of the Opposition does not - that we are proceeding to full accrual budgeting.
Mr Stirling: But do not mention liabilities.
Ms Martin: So where are your liabilities? Don’t mention the liabilities.
Mr REED: Thank you for the stupid interjection. I will pick that up because it is most welcome. We do not mention the liabilities and why don’t we mention them? We do not mention them because the budget presentation this year is still in the cash format and we are in transition to accrual accounting.
In the budget speech I clearly outlined that next year we will move to full accrual accounting. During the meantime there are some very important works that have to be done to enable us to move to full accrual accounting. For example, we have to make sure that all of the government’s assets are valued so that we can place upon the full accrual accounting budget next year their value and other matters that must arise and must be included in the budget. So if the Leader of the Opposition were not so cute and pretended that she did not understand and tried not to misrepresent the facts, she might find herself in a better position.
What upsets the Leader of the Opposition is that we in fact have $150m in our kitty. That is what really galls her. The fact that this government was prudent enough over many years to be able to set aside some funding in a very prudent way - it is not easy to do given the demands that government faces. Part of that, of course, was also the toughness with which the government took the decision to set aside in the Conditions of Service Trust the money for the railway. Having done that we left it there and it gained interest and value over time, the three or four years that it was there, but we had the strength not to touch it.
We said, ‘It is for the railway,’ and that is what will make the railway happen. It was in the Conditions of Service Trust and that was the most appropriate place for it to be. Given that the Conditions of Service Trust transfer took place for the railway, I considered as Treasurer that it would be appropriate this year to move next year to accrual accounting and to do away altogether with the Conditions of Service Trust, to bring it onto book this year and to be fully transparent in terms of what was in the Conditions of Service Trust.
Having moved that component for the railway out of it, we may as well at the same time move on to budget the $150m in what is virtually cash assets. They are real investments, they are not pretending. They are financial investments which will accrue to the Territory value in terms of returns on those investments.
From the point of view of the outcome in the budget, if the Leader of the Opposition doesn’t like it, very sorry for her, she can continue to try and interpret it in whatever way she wants and present it in whatever way she wants. The government, in the meantime, while she is on the sidelines whingeing - and she’s got a very good training in whingeing - will be creating jobs, we will be ensuring that we maximise opportunities from the world-class railway development and from the emerging gas industries which she is already starting to walk away from in terms of the commitments for companies to develop facilities on Middle Arm.
ANSWER
Mr Speaker, I am surprised that the Leader of the Opposition directs those questions to me. As the shadow treasurer, she knows that those answers can be provided in detail by the Treasurer. I refer the question to him but I will simply reinforce the point as clearly enunciated by the Treasurer: the inclusion of the conditions of service program in this budget was to bring fully onto the budget, in accordance with accrual accounting requirements, every asset that the government has and it is only in line with those procedures that it has been brought into this year’s budget.
Mr REED (Treasurer): Mr Speaker, it might well serve the good Leader of the Opposition to recognise that she has been in this House a few years now and she should know which minister to direct her questions to.
I had the pleasure last week of doing PowerPoint presentations to some 600 Territorians from Darwin through to Alice Springs and explaining to them the value of the budget, its direction and its five-year horizon that will generate enormous benefits to Territorians and create thousands of jobs for Territorians. I also explained to them - and they understood, as the Leader of the Opposition does not - that we are proceeding to full accrual budgeting.
Mr Stirling: But do not mention liabilities.
Ms Martin: So where are your liabilities? Don’t mention the liabilities.
Mr REED: Thank you for the stupid interjection. I will pick that up because it is most welcome. We do not mention the liabilities and why don’t we mention them? We do not mention them because the budget presentation this year is still in the cash format and we are in transition to accrual accounting.
In the budget speech I clearly outlined that next year we will move to full accrual accounting. During the meantime there are some very important works that have to be done to enable us to move to full accrual accounting. For example, we have to make sure that all of the government’s assets are valued so that we can place upon the full accrual accounting budget next year their value and other matters that must arise and must be included in the budget. So if the Leader of the Opposition were not so cute and pretended that she did not understand and tried not to misrepresent the facts, she might find herself in a better position.
What upsets the Leader of the Opposition is that we in fact have $150m in our kitty. That is what really galls her. The fact that this government was prudent enough over many years to be able to set aside some funding in a very prudent way - it is not easy to do given the demands that government faces. Part of that, of course, was also the toughness with which the government took the decision to set aside in the Conditions of Service Trust the money for the railway. Having done that we left it there and it gained interest and value over time, the three or four years that it was there, but we had the strength not to touch it.
We said, ‘It is for the railway,’ and that is what will make the railway happen. It was in the Conditions of Service Trust and that was the most appropriate place for it to be. Given that the Conditions of Service Trust transfer took place for the railway, I considered as Treasurer that it would be appropriate this year to move next year to accrual accounting and to do away altogether with the Conditions of Service Trust, to bring it onto book this year and to be fully transparent in terms of what was in the Conditions of Service Trust.
Having moved that component for the railway out of it, we may as well at the same time move on to budget the $150m in what is virtually cash assets. They are real investments, they are not pretending. They are financial investments which will accrue to the Territory value in terms of returns on those investments.
From the point of view of the outcome in the budget, if the Leader of the Opposition doesn’t like it, very sorry for her, she can continue to try and interpret it in whatever way she wants and present it in whatever way she wants. The government, in the meantime, while she is on the sidelines whingeing - and she’s got a very good training in whingeing - will be creating jobs, we will be ensuring that we maximise opportunities from the world-class railway development and from the emerging gas industries which she is already starting to walk away from in terms of the commitments for companies to develop facilities on Middle Arm.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016