Talk:2006–07 Australian Capital Territory budget

Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal 2006–07 Australian Capital Territory budget is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Sections[edit]

What would you all think about putting this into sections for the affected areas (education, health, public service, tourism, etc)? Rebecca 05:13, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think sections would be useful. I was thinking of doing a table of closed schools by district. Thanks also to Jtneill for imaging the letter. How extraordianry that the citizens of Tharwa missed out - perhaps it was failure of the deliverer rather than the government's intent - wonder if Hall households received it?--A Y Arktos\^talk 05:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Sections would be excellent, Rebecca - Thanks AYArktos for your expertise in setting this up. Also through your example in setting up this article, I've (almost) learnt how to reference on WP properly! :) Jtneill - Talk 06:14, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Two updates on the Letter to Residents: Tharwa residents did receive letters and I have found a more offical pdf of the letter than the flickr scan - interestingly, not on the Chief Minister's site, but on the DET "Towards 2020" page - http://www.det.act.gov.au/2020/pdf/CMStanhopeLettertoResidents.pdf. Will update the article. PS Thanks for the further instructions on referencing on my user talk page, AYArtkos, much appreciated Jtneill - Talk 05:52, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Letters to the editor[edit]

I am not sure whether letters to the editor are entirely helpful as references. They are by definition one person's point of view even if they may seem to represent a broader perspective we cannot verify that. I think editorials are slightly better - the paper is then putting its neck on the line with its point of view. Today's Canberra Times editorial covered school closures with the view that money could be better spent than on keeping half empty schools open ... Well I must confess that I didn't bother to read it closely but I think that was the gist.--A Y Arktos\^talk 09:02, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- The editorials of this week seemt to be pushing the school closures are essential line prety consistently - see
  - 9 June - School closures are essential
  - I can't see today's on line but it has much the same to say.--A Y Arktos\^talk 09:06, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - You're right...I have found some better ABC Online articles (based on searching Google News for "Stanhope") and I will switch over some of the referencing to these so its a bit more reliable.Jtneill - Talk 10:19, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best coverage of the reaction to this can be seen in the actual coverage given by the Times over the last week, which should be all available in Factiva if you've got access. Nice work on splitting it up, too - it's coming along just nicely. Rebecca 04:26, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What will be spent and revenue - overview rather than just changes[edit]

At the moment the article focusses on major announcemnts about changing speniding patterns. I would like to see a secction develop on how much the government spends on what and where it gets its revenue from - just a summary.--A Y Arktos\^talk 12:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I will work on tomorrow or over the next few days from http://www.treasury.act.gov.au/budget/budget_2006/files/paper2/bpaper2.pdf --A Y Arktos\^talk 12:51, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]