Page 5650 - Week 17 - Thursday, 5 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR HUMPHRIES: Well, commercial leaseholders. They should have the same kind of security that they would enjoy if they had a similar leasehold or a similar piece of land on a similar basis in other places in Australia. I think it is important for us to bear in mind that we are trying to treat ACT leaseholders, in a commercial sense, differently from those in other States, and I think that that is quite improper. We have no evidence as to why that should be the case, no reasons for that being the case, and I urge that the Assembly support Mr Kaine's amendment.
MR COLLAERY (12.59): I will make some brief comments. Members should be aware of the great irony of this issue, because it was on this issue that Mr Kaine committed harakiri and lost his Government. People should know that he lost government over this, against advice, even from within his own camp.
I cannot believe that the Liberal Party is still pressing this issue. Business leaders I speak to are very unhappy with the Liberal Party at the moment. They are not pressing this issue; they are pressing issues like payroll tax, stamp duties, and the rest, as the Chief Minister well knows. They are not pressing this issue to us. They know that they will never convert us, or the Labor Party, and they see the reality of it.
Mr Humphries: Whom do they agree with - you or us?
MR COLLAERY: I can accept the symbolism that probably is why Mr Humphries got up, and I accept that politically you have to say these things; but let us put something on the record. I invite you to read the Financial Review these days. Increasingly, throughout Australia, governments are granting 50-year, 60-year and 99-year leases to business, to commercial interests, for CBD sites. Most of the casino tender issues in the country at the moment are on leases. So, the Liberal Party cannot even get its own business case straight.
Mr Kaine: Do not address the gallery, Mr Collaery; you are here to address us, not the gallery.
MR COLLAERY: They look better, Mr Kaine. The fact is, Mr Deputy Speaker, that the Liberal Party cannot even formulate their own case. They never put anything on the table to demonstrate the essential difference between residential and commercial land.
Mr Berry: Come on; that is enough. We understand.
MR COLLAERY: The essential difference, Mr Berry, is that commercial land is defrayed in its capital costs through an actuarial basis on the basis of the use the land is put to. It is as simple as that. It is for that reason - it has nothing to do with the Canberra leasehold system - that business has no problem in accepting tenders for 50, 75, 60 and 99-year leases in Brisbane, particularly in Queensland
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .