Page 4549 - Week 15 - Wednesday, 20 November 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR DUBY: I ask a supplementary question. As a result of the response that you gave in October, Mr Connolly, can I assume that you have not made inquiries with the New South Wales Government as to whether they plan to cease that operation in February?
MR CONNOLLY: I made the inquiry as to what is the position in New South Wales and I was told by my departmental officers that they had been told by New South Wales that if they are going to change the current position, which is that the service is there, they will let us know. These rumours that things are going to change in February have been run by Mr Duby. The New South Wales Government is the decision maker on this, not I. We have the assurance from the New South Wales Government. Nothing has occurred about it and I think this is purely rumourmongering and scaremongering.
Land Tax
MR STEVENSON: My question is to the Chief Minister. Recently in the ACT home owners were sent a letter by the land tax office, requesting information if exemption was sought from paying the land tax. We have had a number of constituents contact us, complaining that they were unhappy with the correspondence received. They said that the first letter did not specify a date by which a reply should be received, and the second was considered by many to be bureaucratic and offensive. Could the Chief Minister please comment on both the letters? Also, is it true that 60,000 of the answers to the first letter were lost due to a computer malfunction?
MS FOLLETT: I thank Mr Stevenson for the question, Mr Speaker. I will answer it in broad terms. The last part of Mr Stevenson's question related to a number of responses to the land tax questionnaire going astray. I am afraid that it is the case, Mr Stevenson, that a batch of 1,272 declarations had not been processed to finality and that in the case of those 1,272 declarations the people concerned were incorrectly sent a reminder notice. That is the extent of the error there. I think that Mr Stevenson referred to a much larger number.
Mr Stevenson also asked about the initial inquiries about land tax. I think it is true to say that there has been a very good response from people. Obviously, if they believe that there is a chance that they will be charged some tax inadvertently, they get their answers back pretty smartly. I am sorry to hear that some people have felt that a second round of correspondence was bureaucratic and offensive. If Mr Stevenson would like to bring any such examples of
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .