Territory Stories

Parliamentary record : Part I debates (19 November 1985)

Details:

Title

Parliamentary record : Part I debates (19 November 1985)

Collection

Debates for 4th Assembly 1983 - 1987; ParliamentNT; Parliamentary Record; 4th Assembly 1983 - 1987

Date

1985-11-19

Notes

Made available by the Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

Language

English

Subject

Debates

Publisher name

Northern Territory Legislative Assembly

Place of publication

Darwin

File type

application/pdf

Use

Attribution International 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)

Copyright owner

Legislative Assembly of the Northern Territory

License

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Parent handle

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/220608

Citation address

https://hdl.handle.net/10070/698925

Page content

DEBATES - Tuesday 19 November 1985 Mr BELL: I draw the minister's attention to the Public Works Division's 1984-85 budget authorisation for $7.36m. If we take from that works in progress in 1985-86, at $5.53m, the value of works completed in 1984-85 is shown at $1.84m. Why was only 25% of the Public Works Division's capital works budget authorisation expended in 1984-85. Mr MANZIE: Mr Chairman, an amount of 25% was not spent. The member for MacDonnell's calculations do not reflect necessary programs during the year. Projects may be admitted or amendments made to existing projects in the capital works program after Budget Paper No 5 is produced. Full expenditure on the amendments or new projects may be achieved prior to the end of the financial year. If that occurred, it would not be reflected in the following year's Budget Paper No 5. Normally, it would be shown in the Treasurer's annual financial statements contained in the Auditor-General's report. The 1984-85 capital works program figure of $363.874m mentioned by the member does not reflect an increase of $2.7m made during the year, and the public works expenditure for its own capital works program for 1984-85 totalled almost $4.5m against the final 1984-85 program of approximately $9.7m - in other words, about 46%. Mr BELL: I will check those figures in Hansard tomorrow. I pass on to the Transport Division's capital works program. Why is the capital works appropriation for that division being cut by 91%. Mr MANZIE: Mr Chairman, in comparing the proposed new works for the Transport Division in 1985-86 with those in 1984, it must be remembered that the responsibility for marine transport was transferred to the new Ministry of Ports and Fisheries in December 1984. In 1984-85, capital works for marine transport made up 82% of all capital works for that division. Hence the substantial drop in capital works appropriation for the division. Mr BELL: I do not believe that that explanation appears in Budget Paper No 4. I would like to place that on record. It is a matter of concern if there has been a shift of allocations that have caused those decreases. Perhaps the minister can direct me to where they appear in Budget Paper No 4. I was unable to find any mention. Why is the Katherine weighbridge facility included as proposed new works for 1985-86 when it was included as proposed new works last year? Mr MANZIE: I presume that the member refers to the Katherine weighbridge. On 2 April, all uncommitted works on the 1984~85 program were deferred due to the mini-budget. Therefore, the Katherine weighbridge facility was placed on the 1985-86 capital works program. Mr BELL: I point out 2 things to the minister. If it was deferred, it presumably should appear as works in progress. Also, I am interested in the rationale for the deferral of various capital works projects as a result of the mini-budget. What were the priorities? Were they technical priorities or were they political priorities? Were particular electorates of concern in that regard? What was the justification for deferral? Mr MANZIE: Mr Chairman, I think that it is probably not worth my while going over in detail what was discussed in this Assembly regarding the mini-budget, the reasons it had to be introduced and the cuts that had to be made to our expenditure in the Territory. But I will say that the member has 1902


Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are advised that this website may contain the names, voices and images of people who have died, as well as other culturally sensitive content. Please be aware that some collection items may use outdated phrases or words which reflect the attitude of the creator at the time, and are now considered offensive.

We use temporary cookies on this site to provide functionality.
By continuing to use this site without changing your settings, you consent to our use of cookies.