Page 192 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 17 February 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR DE DOMENICO: For Mr Lamont to talk about the noisy demand of some members of the building industry and then to suggest that some members of the building industry do nothing except attempt to avoid tax is absolutely - - -
Mr Kaine: And you were supposed to have impugned somebody.
MR DE DOMENICO: Thank you, Mr Kaine. I was supposed to have impugned somebody else's character, which I do not believe I did. But here is Mr Lamont standing up here in this Assembly and in one fell swoop, on the one hand, when building approvals go up - - -
Mr Lamont: You said that the taxation commissioner makes a ruling one month and a different ruling on the same matter the next month. If that is not impugning his character, what is?
MADAM SPEAKER: Order, please!
Mr Lamont: It is outrageous and you should withdraw it.
MADAM SPEAKER: Order! Mr De Domenico, please proceed.
MR DE DOMENICO: Madam Speaker, I thank you for protecting me from that garbage. As I said before, Mr Lamont stood up here and suggested that the building industry or some members of the building industry do nothing else but attempt to avoid tax and have approached the Opposition simply to avoid tax. You should withdraw that, and you should read very carefully what you said. What you suggested is not the case. The Opposition did consult widely - unlike the Government, it seems. The Opposition consulted with the Canberra Business Council, the Chamber of Commerce, the Australian Information Industry Association, the HIA, the MBA and various other business groupings and individuals, who all said - - -
Mr Berry: And they all said that they do not want to pay tax.
MR DE DOMENICO: No. The AIIA seemed to support the Bill. They said, "It is not perfect but we can live with it". Naturally they could live with it, because they, the computer industry, are singularly exempt from the payroll tax. Everybody else was not very happy with the Bill at all.
Ms Follett said that the Opposition's amendment was unnecessary and dangerous. In the next breath she suggested that it could reduce payroll tax collections from the business community by $2m. We all know what her colleagues have said about that. Every Labor leader in this country, Federal and State, over the past 15 years has talked about the scourge of payroll tax and how it impedes employment. Yet Ms Follett calls this amendment unnecessary and dangerous. Ms Follett, in about four or five weeks' time - - -
Mr Kaine: It may result in a few more people being employed. That is how dangerous it is!
MR DE DOMENICO: Exactly. It may result in a heck of a lot more people being employed here in the ACT, probably in the building industry, probably also in the tourism industry - - -
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .