Page 2296 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 15 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR CORNWELL: Just a moment; one rooster at a time, please, in this farmyard. This included $2.4m in vacated accounts. They are people who have done a flit. In 1991-92 there was $2.4m outstanding from people who have done a bunk and, of course, another $2m that is still outstanding in current accounts - $4.4m in all. If you are looking for revenue, why do you not try to chase some of that?
Mr Connolly: Beat up the poor; throw them out of their public housing. The Liberal solution.
MR CORNWELL: I am glad that you said that. I am glad that you interjected. I will acknowledge it. If you need the revenue, if you are not pursuing that $4.4m, why are you also continuing to exempt Housing Trust properties from this tax on the ground that the Government would be taxing itself and the spurious assertion that the Housing Trust's non-subsidised rents are set at market levels? We have discussed this before, Chief Minister; but it is worth repeating because you do not seem to understand what you said on 12 September 1991. As recorded at page 3248 of Hansard, the Chief Minister said:
I say again that Housing Trust rents -
those that are non-subsidised -
are set at market levels. I presume that that means they reflect the general market for rent in our community.
She went on to say that if the people who are occupying those places "are not in a needy category or in some way disadvantaged, they are paying full market rent".
Mr Kaine: Now they are not.
MR CORNWELL: That is a fact. Well, it is not a fact.
Mr Kaine: If they are, the Government has a windfall profit.
MR CORNWELL: Of course they have. But it is not a fact that they are paying the full market rent anyway, because, as we know, in answer to question No. 26 of 25 May, we discovered that there were great differences between the market value in the private rental market and the Housing Trust rents. In fact the estimate is $4m in the last 12 months. So there we are; almost $8.5m in revenue forgone, and this Government is making no attempt to chase it up, no attempt to go after it. They would prefer to attack a small group of people out - - -
Mr Lamont: The rich.
MR CORNWELL: I acknowledge the interjection from Mr Lamont - "The rich". These are pensioners, superannuants, who have put their money into some rented properties in order to get a return, and you state that they are rich.
Mr Lamont: It is like your slash and burn approaches. It does not matter what it is. Social justice; slash and burn. That is all you are interested in - slash and burn.
Mr Kaine: I said that it was an ideological hang-up and I - - -
MADAM SPEAKER: Order!
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .