Page 862 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 16 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR MOORE (8.59): I would like to take this opportunity to make some general budgetary comments at this time, while I also happily give my support to the Supply Bill without amendment. It seems to me that we have to look at the issue of taxation as an important part of budgetary measures. There were some issues about taxation raised today in an earlier debate. That dealt with the notion of using a flat rate of taxation. I do not intend to pursue that matter any further because I think we dealt with it rather thoroughly today. At that time I did raise the notion of using land tax in terms of taxation as far as the budget goes. I think it would be important for me to clarify some of the notions I have there about the use of land tax. Increased usage of land tax, I believe, should also be accompanied by a reduction in other taxation. I believe that attempting a transition towards a greater reliance on land tax is a most appropriate way for us to go.
One of the interesting things about Australia as a whole is that we have been singularly unsuccessful in taxing the very wealthy in our society. I recall a television program looking at taxation and Mr Kerry Packer and how inadequately we as a community had dealt with that kind of taxation. I think it is a very sad reflection on us that the wealthiest members of our society wind up paying a very small amount of tax; hence the taxation burden is left either to the middle class or, in many cases, as with a flat rate tax, with the poorer members of the society. That being the case, and recognising how attitudes in Australia at the moment reflect the terrible problems we have with unemployment, it really is time to look beyond what we have been doing in the past and to try to find a better method of providing the services for which government is responsible. That is why I think it is appropriate for us to move in gentle steps towards a land tax and at the same time reduce other taxes. I presume that many will be rapid to say what taxes we should reduce. I can almost hear the Liberals calling out, "Cut payroll tax". It may well be an appropriate move for them to do that, and I am leaving that open. I can make some suggestions as to what we should do about taxation.
I think it is also important for us to move towards looking at some efficiencies in government. The catchcry of the 1980s was for more and more efficient government and leaner and leaner government. I think we are approaching a time when we will be putting far too much stress on the public servants who are required to deliver the services. There has been more efficiency and there is still room for more efficiency, but we must be reaching a point where we are going to look not just at creating efficiencies but at cutting services. You cannot continue to cut public services without creating those problems. We have to be able to ask ourselves, "At what point are we prepared to do that?".
Rather than taking an across-the-board approach in cutting public services, as has been done in some cases, it is far better to target inefficiencies and to look for specific areas that require some modification. It seems to me that a contribution has been made in this area in no small way by the estimates committees over the last three years. I look forward to working on the Estimates Committee this year. I hope that that process of scrutiny not only will add to efficiencies but also will ensure that the work that people do for us, the work that so many public servants do in providing services for the people of the ACT, will be carried out in an appropriate and efficient manner.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .