Page 5862 - Week 18 - Wednesday, 11 December 1991

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


Whilst it is the Rally's view that we should reduce red tape and regulatory measures, wherever possible, from their impact in the building and service trades, there is, of course, the element of public interest in the registration of subcontractors. That is the approach taken in New South Wales, where there has been no strong objection within industry. On the basis of equity, if plumbers and electricians have to pass the test in the ACT, so too should the other trades, particularly those related to occupational health and safety issues such as those who drive earth-moving equipment on sites. The Rally will support these moves, subject to further consultation with the affected groups.

Returning to the amendments, they are, as members can discern, already complex in their form and they add to a complex piece of legislation. That legislation, payroll tax legislation, is a law which in Victoria and New South Wales, more by commissioner ruling and discretion than by statutory prescription, commands a field of taxation. There has to be a balance, of course, between discretion and prescription; but in the scale of discretions on the east coast the ACT commissioner, clearly, from my reading of the relevant CCH series for Victoria and New South Wales, is the less accommodating.

I believe that the commissioner in this Territory is in an invidious position. The way the amendments were drawn in 1989 gives very little discretion, arguably, to the commissioner, who, by providing some exemptions, may in fact be acting ultra vires the legislation and taking a risk that the Auditor-General would not be able to countenance. Equally, there is a lack of clarity about a discretion to the commissioner in definitional terms, particularly those relating to what is in the course of business and the performance of service contracts.

The amendments before the house today, I remind members, have been put together not by the Residents Rally upstairs, but by the best minds available in the industry. In my view, they need to have an effective input from the Commissioner for ACT Revenue, and there may well be a capacity for improvement.

Mr Moore: It is really important that you table this Bill today!

MR COLLAERY: However, the overriding view of the Rally is that, with this legislature unlikely to commence again until next May, and with issues of this nature hardly likely to be at the forefront of an incoming legislative program, we may see another long period of assessable liability and impact on the ACT building and service trades groups. I remind members, having heard Mr Moore's flippant interjection, that the impact of this essentially is a disincentive to employment, particularly in the youth and apprenticeship areas. I know that that has been acknowledged by members previously in this house. We believe that the Government should - - -


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .