Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

None . . Page.. 116 ..

The principles of land tenure that were incorporated into the ACT at its beginning were simple. It was to be leasehold land. It was not to be land held by private interests, and land developers came in for a great deal of uncomplimentary remarks in all the debates. It was to be leasehold land vested in the people, administered on their behalf by the government. This principle would ensure that land was used for the benefit of the community. It would prevent exploitation and would control development. Revenue from the land asset would also fund the development of the ACT. A point of great discussion at the time of Federation was who was going to pay for a capital city that no-one seemed to want too much in those days. Perhaps things have not changed. The payment of land rent ensured that increases in land values were returned to the community. Higher values of land brought higher rents. That was on the basis that all land has a rental value and if the government, for the people, does not get this value it will be capitalised into land prices.

That system that was established has been much treasured over the years. I pointed out before that it is not the system we now have in its entirety. It has been very considerably changed, regrettably, and I wish that we could go back. If someone can show us the way, I will willingly support any moves in that direction. John Gorton was the demon at that time. I believe that, for political advantage, he changed the system of land rent and said, “We can increase rates to pay for the lost revenue”. It was a very serious blow to the system.

Let me point to financial impacts of any change. There will be lost revenue to the Government, to the people of Canberra, as a result of any moves that the Liberals might make. At the moment, the number of commercial lease renewals is not great. The leases, once they are 30 years from their expiry date, can be renewed. At this stage, there are not vast numbers coming through; but over the next decade, or over the next 20 years, that number will be accelerating very considerably. There is immediate loss of revenue to the Government. It is not a large amount; but, if this system were to apply, the loss of revenue to the Government, to the people of Canberra, over a very long period would be tens of millions of dollars. It would be very substantial, because that rate of renewal will be increasing. So, there is a revenue implication, and it is one that the Government should consider most carefully. The ACT Government is not overloaded with funds. We do not need to go into the debate on diminishing revenue from the Commonwealth.

The main purpose of my speech is to point to the tradition of the leasehold system in Canberra and the fact that it has been a very good system - even if less effective than formerly - and one that should not be changed. In particular, it should not be changed, because there is not the demand for that change. No-one is making an urgent demand for it. The present system is having no detrimental impact on the community. Indeed, I believe that the present system is generous to the property sector. We do not need to go overboard and just give them something for nothing. So, I would urge the Government to reconsider its election statements and I would urge members of this Assembly to examine this issue very carefully. Mr Speaker, I am not absolutely stuck on the words of my motion. My main purpose is to ensure that this matter is fully debated.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .