Page 6157 - Week 19 - Tuesday, 17 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR DUBY (11.22): I am sure that all members are aware of the need for this piece of legislation to have been introduced. The issue of bad debts to the Territory associated with the payment of liquor tax has been known for some time. The matter had been addressed by my former colleagues when in government in order to ensure that the liability of the Territory to bad debts under the Liquor Tax Act would be minimised.
The Government, with this piece of legislation, has not tried to bite the bullet in terms of the collection of those taxes but instead has come up with a scheme which is really a compromise from a number of fixed positions. It appears to me that the legislation that the Government has introduced does not change the provisions for existing liquor licence holders but imposes the newer harsh conditions on new applicants for a liquor licence. Whilst it is, in effect, saying that it is addressing the problem, I do not believe that it really is.
However, I personally am not of a mind to object. I am quite prepared to let the Government go ahead with its plans, although I do not think they go far enough in addressing the issue. It has listened to the vested interests of the liquor industry, I think, in the Territory. As for the claim that the legislation proposed by the Alliance Government would have put a number of people out of business, I do not believe that such was the case, and I do not believe that that would ever have occurred. Indeed, I think it would have brought a bit of sense and sensibility into the liquor area.
The Government has decided, for whatever reasons, to introduce this mishmash Liquor Tax Bill. It is a mishmash of ideas. Future governments should take on notice that this area is one that I believe needs to be revisited. This Bill does not really address the problems that led to the variations in the first place. For example, I simply do not believe that it is impossible to bring existing licensees who are currently paying liquor fees up to 18 months in arrears into an advance payment system without imposing a heavy financial burden on those licensees.
The argument that was often put was that if we imposed a burden on these folk they would move out of the Territory and operate their businesses from across the border in Queanbeyan. This particularly applied to the mail order business. The argument that was put was that, whilst mail order liquor sellers can move their businesses, someone who has a restaurant in a certain building cannot. With that in mind, the Alliance Government proposed to introduce a sliding scale of fees for various people. I think that would have made much more sense than this hotchpotch approach that the Government has adopted. Nevertheless, whilst not necessarily supporting the Bill, I will not be voting against it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .