Introduction
Welcome to you all,
and thank you very much for being here today.
I am particularly
delighted to be able to share the podium with Mr
Saul Eslake, whose regular incisive analysis of
Tasmania’s economic circumstances is eagerly
anticipated and greatly appreciated by all those
with an interest in our State’s progress.
Saul, thank you for
your willingness to participate today, and for your
most informative presentation.
We sought the expert
input of Saul, knowing he would provide an objective
assessment and some views that do not necessarily
reflect well on the Liberal Party.
But as a Party that
has been in Opposition now for eight or nine years,
we can accept that there is much we have not got
right.
But moving forward, I
am committed to leading a Liberal Party that is
driven by information, ideas and principles.
And to paraphrase Saul’s last comment today, a Party
that can, even from the relative impotence of
Opposition, participate positively in policy debate
that drives reform and a lifting of our State’s
economic and social position.
A Party that will talk
to business and will engage with the community.
Because people are
starting to complain of feeling disengaged and
disenfranchised.
I think it can be
attributed to a number of factors such as political
sensitivity; a small town mentality all too common
in this State; a belligerent and out of touch
government, lead by Premier Paul Lennon that has
lost its connection with the community.
Labor’s vision to
bring “Tasmania together”, has fallen apart under
Paul Lennon’s government.
We want to pick up
those pieces, to fill that void, and to give
Tasmanians a new, alternate direction.
Overview
So today I will
briefly give you an understanding of my vision for
Tasmania, and of the Liberal Party’s alternative
direction for our State.
The emphasis today is
on economic development, but that does not mean we
are not interested in social issues and the
provision of human services.
As Liberals, though,
we are unashamedly fervent supporters of business
and economic growth.
Indeed it is a
fundamental, philosophical Liberal belief that
private enterprise is the true driver of wealth
creation – that means a wealthier society investing
in greater social capital.
Setting the scene
And why is an
alternate direction required?
Well, I want to stress
from the outset, that I am a very, very positive
person.
I am very optimistic
about Tasmania’s future.
I wouldn’t be doing
this job if I wasn’t.
But equally, I
wouldn’t be doing this job if I didn’t think we
could do things much better.
Tasmania has enjoyed a
few years of relative economic prosperity, but as
Saul has mentioned today - and as the State
Government’s own mid-year financial report has
revealed - there is much more to do.
But more so, to borrow
one of Saul’s themes, there is no reason why we
can’t ‘do an Ireland’.
Indeed, that is a
foundation stone of my vision.
That is, seeing
Tasmania consistently and in many ways leading the
nation in economic and social indicators.
There is no reason,
indeed there is no excuse, for not thinking that
Tasmania can outperform other Australian states, not
consistently lag behind them.
Yes, recently we have seen Tasmania perform well in
some areas.
But with our economy
again at the cross-roads, the time is right to snap
out of the indulgent delirium generated by a few
years of economic prosperity and to accept some
realities and confront the challenges.
We need ideas, and to
start debating creatively and freely the future of
our state.
So, at the risk of
today appearing negative – sadly the bane of
Opposition – I will make some observations in the
spirit of that debate.
Because we do not want
to be looking back in twenty or thirty years wishing
we had been more honest; more prepared to face up to
the challenges; and more ready to tackle them.
‘Things have never
been better’
I refute the State
Government’s repeated boast that ‘things have never
been better’.
Indeed, in many
respects, this State Government is letting us down.
I think instantly of
the recent demise in standards of governance.
A failing of accountability and transparency, and a
government messing where it shouldn’t, brings about
a scandal like the Tasmanian Compliance Corporation
affair.
Various similar
examples in recent years are symptomatic of a
government performing poorly.
And if you think that
doesn’t affect our economic performance, you are
wrong. It is intrinsically linked and does – as
business groups have said – go straight to the heart
of business confidence and a willingness (or
otherwise) to invest.
Good governance brings
certainty; consistency; a level playing field.
Values business likes, and needs.
It is a central part
of our alternate direction, and a set of values that
should not be underestimated.
But they are values
that won’t be acquired by a government simply
claiming to have a change in attitude or behaviour.
Structural reforms and improved practices of
governance are needed to deliver greater
accountability, transparency and good governance.
For example, last year
I presented a Bill to fix the terms of our
Parliament to four years, providing certainty for
the public, and importantly, for the business
sector. The Lennon Government voted against it,
despite the Labor Party organisation across the
country supporting the notion.
They showed their lack
of real commitment to structural reform to bring
about greater accountability in government.
Project management
Another area, I want
to touch on, in setting some context today, is
project management.
There are, sadly, good
examples all around the state of where the
government is failing in the management of major
projects that are critical to our economic and
social development.
Take, for example, the
building of a new Hobart Hospital - considered by
many as a central part of the reform of our health
system, and possibly a $1 billion project.
A year ago, at the
State Election, the Premier said it couldn’t and
wouldn’t be built.
The then Economic
Development Minister, Lara Giddings, said it
shouldn’t be built because it would rip the heart
out of the Hobart CBD.
After the Election,
Premier Lennon and ironically the new Health
Minister, Lara Giddings, announced that they would
build a new hospital.
But, they can’t say
where it should be built; how much it will cost; or
how they are going to pay for it.
What a glowing example of project management!
That does not reflect
planning, process, certainty or decision-making free
of political opportunism.
And that’s what
happens when there is no certainty in the political
cycle, and no commitment to detail a long term plan.
A long term view
So, fundamental to our
alternate direction is providing just that; a long
term plan.
We prepared a
comprehensive Foundation Plan for the last Election,
and we are committed to doing so again.
A plan that goes
beyond four-year electoral cycles to where we should
be in twenty, thirty or forty year’s time.
And a vision that
takes us out of the confines of our current
circumstances, like a State Budget that is
tightening, for example, or a government seemingly
in perpetual damage control.
Key parts of the
plan
Now, it is not
possible for me to outline in detail each and every
aspect of our vision today.
And we must not only
identify opportunities, but we must also identify
current and future threats, and start planning now
for how we might confront them.
But, I do want to
highlight some key areas that we consider imperative
to our future economic and social prosperity.
Educating Tasmania
As we know, our
productivity levels and skills base remain
deficient.
Independent analysis
reveals that educational outcomes in this State are
inadequate.
From the early years,
right through a process of lifelong learning,
greater achievement in education is critical to our
future.
There is much merit in
the argument that there should be consistency in
education across the country.
And we should demand that our children are getting
the same quality of teaching, and reaching the same
educational outcomes as children in other States.
That sort of national
consistency can not be argued with.
But equally, Tasmania
as a small state and a close community, with a small
population, should be capable of delivering an
education system that meets those fundamental or
generic needs, but one which also secures tailored
educational outcomes needed to drive our future in
growth industries and in areas of high demand.
To borrow the words of
one of my Opposition colleagues, we can
“revolutionise education” here in Tasmania.
The Lennon Government
commenced a process of reforming our curriculum that
it couldn’t deliver. It got too hard and was
consigned to the dustbin.
We must return to the
task, to revolutionise Tasmania’s education system,
for the long-term.
Our current system is
not delivering the benefits needed for today, let
alone those needs that will confront us in twenty or
thirty years time.
And I should stress
that when I talk of education here, I do so broadly,
encapsulating further education, and research,
development and innovation.
The Education
Minister, David Bartlett, recently talked about
establishing a Centre of Excellence in literacy.
We should, in the
years ahead, have a suite of Centres of Excellence –
in education, research, development and innovation –
in areas of need, and in fields of opportunity.
This is ground in which Tasmania can ‘be an Ireland’
and lead the world.
Information and
Communications Technology
Another area vital to
our future development is information and
communications technology.
It presents great
opportunity – to develop an infrastructure base that
allows us to extract greater efficiencies and the
productivity from our workforce that, as Saul has
mentioned, is so important.
It would enable us to
better provide the complex services of the future
with our ageing population.
It will drive
investment and innovation in research and
development and enterprise.
It is a crucial
‘enabler’ of people and communities in regional
areas, who should rightly have access to broadband
technology, now a mainstream commodity for people
living in advanced societies.
And conversely, if it
is not taken up with a far greater enthusiasm and
commitment then we have seen, it will loom as a
massive threat with Tasmanian not only missing
opportunity, but being left behind in an
increasingly complex information economy where
skilled human capital is pivotal.
How can we expect to
keep pace with the rest of the country, and be ‘an
Ireland’, if we don’t equip ourselves with an
investment in this critical social, economic
enabler?
We have already squandered too many opportunities in
this area.
Just last week, for
example, I learned that the government is still
distributing funds from the Intelligent Island
program, now the better part of a decade old,
designed to assist local IT companies to develop and
compete with the world.
An $18 million pool of
money, from a $40 million program designed to launch
Tasmania’s fledgling IT companies.
Now whilst the program
has brought some successes, I find it extraordinary
and a very poor case of government management, that
this valuable capital funding has been allowed to
sit idle in a bank account gaining interest whilst
the government dithers over how to spend it.
Wasted opportunity
Tasmania can not afford.
So, investment in
Information and communications technology is, for
the State Opposition, an area of priority.
In spite of Tasmania’s
geographical limitations, we are not incapable of
keeping pace.
Instead we are well
placed to trial developments in ICT.
We can create, as part
of a broader research and development capability,
greater proficiencies; collaborating government,
private sector and educational institutions in a hub
of research and development activity.
Tasmania can be an
Ireland in this area. And a truly “Intelligent
Island”.
And it is central to
our vision for the State.
Conclusion
Today, I have sought
to identify a facet of our alternate direction for
the State.
Investing in our human
capital by driving the education of Tasmanians of
all ages; boosting productivity, and our skills
base; and securing the infrastructure critical for
this to occur is pivotal to our ongoing economic and
social development.
This should happen,
particularly in industries in which we can compete,
like information and communications technology and
research and development.
But also where we
already have a competitive advantage – for example,
in agribusiness; agriculture and aquaculture, or our
valuable tourism sector.
Or in strategic
opportunity where, for example, we can turn to
advantage our precious water; an asset highly valued
in today’s environment.
The State Opposition
is committed to a playing a positive role.
I want to stress,
again, that I am very positive about Tasmania’s
future.
We are a close,
passionate, and small community.
And I will leave you
with a thought about our small population.
The State Budget
papers reveal that we continue to lose our young
people to other States. The government’s efforts to
stem this flow have failed.
And whilst I would
always encourage young people to experience the
world outside Tasmania, we are not replacing those
who leave. We need young, intelligent and creative
people in this State.
Instead, and I say
this with the greatest respect to those who come
here - according to ABS Migration statistics, people
aged over 65 accounted for less than 4% of all
interstate migration movements in 2004-05. Yet
Tasmania’s net gain in this age group accounted for
43% of the state’s overall net gain from interstate
migration.
That is extraordinary.
Just under half the
people currently moving to Tasmania are over 65
years.
And over the next four
decades, the number of Tasmanians aged over 65 is
projected to more than double, and the number of
people aged over 80 will treble!
We do welcome everyone
to this state, but what does it say about our future
needs?
What does it say for
our productivity levels and our skills base into the
future?
My vision for Tasmania
is it being more than just nicest retirement village
on the planet.
There is much to be
positive about.
And much to do.
And the time to start
doing it is now. Right now.
Thank you.
<<
return to
speeches page
|
