Page 2084 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 5 June 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
From a purely economic point of view, if this happens to reduce the income to the ACT, I do not have a great deal of difficulty with that, provided that it does not have the effect of sending the industry underground. That is the risk that we are taking by introducing too much at a time. That is my concern and I would like the Government to take it into account.
I am delighted to hear that the Government Law Office has provided Mr Duby with a categorical assurance that there is no risk whatsoever to this, and I am sure that he has adopted that as his personal stance as well.
MR STEVENSON (10.34): I speak against Mr Moore's amendment. It proposes far too low a figure, but it does bring up an interesting point as to why there is a tax on, as Mr Duby calls it, this legal business of distributing, selling and hiring X-rated videos. Why is there not also a tax on cake shops, dress shops and other shops? I am sure that, as Mr Duby said, as businesses in the ACT, they pay all the normal taxes. So why is there to be a tax? Well, we all know the truth of that, although not many people have really looked at the idea. It is because it is an antisocial operation.
The suggestion is that, because it is antisocial, there should be a heavy tax as what this business creates in our society is not okay and in some way we will punish it economically. Well, I do not think a 20 per cent tax is enough punishment. Indeed, I do not think a 40 per cent tax is enough punishment, though the Alliance does. Mr Moore thinks a 20 per cent tax is reasonable punishment. The Alliance thinks it should be 40 per cent. I think a reasonable punishment for the antisocial activities they create in our society is, as I have already said, 400 per cent.
MR DUBY (Minister for Finance and Urban Services) (10.35): Mr Speaker, again the Government is opposed to this amendment. I would just like to point out that we do not regard a business franchise as a punishment tax whatsoever. The Government seeks revenue from whatever areas it may legitimately claim it, just as we claim franchise from the sale of tobacco products. As we have revenues coming into the Government from gambling and those areas and from the sale of liquor, we also have a revenue source in what we regard to be a legitimate business.
Mr Moore has argued that 40 per cent be dropped to 20 per cent. I should point out to him that the cost to the ACT community of doing that is $2m. It is our view that that is unacceptable to the community and that that is money that can be well spent on other more productive areas rather than remaining in the hands of the industry. It is also our view that the industry can and will sustain a level of franchise of 40 per cent. We have no doubts at all that the responsible members of the Adult Video Industry Association of the ACT will certainly not be going
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .