Page 2459 - Week 09 - Thursday, 17 September 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR STEVENSON (5.20): Madam Speaker, many members have talked about lost opportunities. Others have said that you can pay for only what you have the money to pay for. Both are fair enough comments. Something that we all agree on is that we have problems. All organisations or members talk about the increasing problem of Federal funding running out. One thing it presents us with, of course, is a wonderful challenge. We certainly have scope to create some marvellous things in the ACT.
Many people ask: What can be done? What should be done? What should we do? What difference can we make? In Australia 10 years ago one per cent of the population owned 10 per cent of the wealth. Today that same one per cent of the population owns 25 per cent of the wealth of this nation. Is that social justice? We are all involved in this. Mr Kaine mentioned earlier that we need to reduce the public sector. I think most people would agree that having 22,000 people in the public service in the ACT is no longer sustainable. But need there be concern if that area is reduced? Are there solutions that we could all agree upon? If we maintain such a high level of the public sector, what will happen?
The Canberra Business Council media release dated yesterday quotes Denis Page of that organisation. He said that he saw this as a budget which delays the inevitable. He said:
It is disappointing to note that the ACT businesses and the community are budgeted to yield to the Government a further 7.5 per cent increase in taxes since 1992 with those taxes rising from $430m last year to $462m. It should be noted that since self-government taxes have increased from $268.4m to $462m. One can only project that these increases will continue unless there are changes on the expenditure side and there is a danger that we will get out of step in developing trends in other states of looking to reduce state taxes, at least to encourage business growth.
Can the business sector solve the problem? Can the business sector increase to incorporate many people who are currently working in the public sector? Certainly, jobs in the public sector cost a great deal more than jobs in the private sector. There is a definition of "private enterprise" that I think is relevant. Private enterprise is the freedom to enter into trade, commerce and industry without restriction either by the state or by existing participants in a particular profession or trade. There, to a large degree, we can see the role of government. One of the major roles of government is to protect that right to ensure that monopolies are not created.
How are jobs to be created? Are jobs to be created by government increasing taxes so that people cannot spend and so that businesses cannot employ? I do not think so. I think the answer is clear. The answer is not so much for the Government, for politicians, to work to create new jobs, but simply to allow natural law, natural processes, to have effect. If you want anything done, give people incentive. If you want to encourage productivity, reward people for producing.
We do not do this when we increase taxes on business. You cannot say to a business, "We are going to tax you for the additional people that you employ" and expect them to employ more people. You cannot say to a business, "We are going to tax you on rewards to your employees, to tax you on fringe benefits", particularly when you say that you are going to tax the business, not the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .