Page 5822 - Week 18 - Tuesday, 10 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR HUMPHRIES (8.29): Mr Speaker, the Gas Levy Bill and the Taxation (Administration) (Amendment) Bill are unexceptionable pieces of legislation and, as such, will be supported by the Opposition. They are, in effect, revenue Bills. I, therefore, have some question as to what, if anything, the Opposition or other parties other than the Government could do with them in any case. But, leaving that to one side, I see and my party sees no reason not to support these Bills. They raise additional revenue for the Government to the tune of $635,000 in a full year. Every little bit helps, as they say. I am sure that it will come in handy when the health budget blows out. Mr Speaker, I think this legislation will be supported fairly readily.
Mr Berry: We will know what is going on in Health. That will be the difference.
MR HUMPHRIES: I can see that I have upset the Minister for Health, but I will press on.
The Government has successfully negotiated with Australian Gas and Light for the company to absorb the levy, initially at least, the levy so that there is no increase in gas prices for citizens of the ACT. So, in effect, at least in the short term, this amounts to a tax on AGL which AGL has agreed not to pass on. That is an admirable piece of negotiation, and I think that is a desirable outcome, although I notice that the words used are "initially absorbed". One would have to assume that in due course the Government will, as a result of this measure, pass on to the consumers of the ACT some costs which will have to be borne.
The position of consumers of gas as opposed to consumers of electrical power has to be considered. Of course, in 1989 the first Follett Government froze gas prices. Whether that affected the relative position of gas consumers against electricity consumers I could not say. But, whenever one decides to intervene in the marketplace by freezing prices or otherwise regulating or controlling what suppliers might do, one runs the risk of affecting those sorts of things.
As I indicated, the Bills are supported by the Opposition and will certainly be a welcome contribution to the Government's revenue. I note also, before I sit down, that the formula used by the Government in clause 7 of the Bill appears, on Mr Kaine's advice to me, to be slightly different from the formula which was being considered by the Alliance Government. We, of course, developed this Bill originally. But that is not a matter that identifies itself to me as a matter of any great concern. Whether a lawyer might take advantage of the definition of "gross sales" or not I could not say. But that is not for me to decide; that is for others to consider. I commend the Bills.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .