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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 7 Hansard (26 June) . . Page.. 2259 ..

MR WHITECROSS (continuing):

The other two main tools of the new rating system - the flat fee component and the $19,000 threshold - are also supported by Labor. However, Mr Speaker, I would like to say that a flaw in the flat fee component is that it is not linked to any explicit services provided by the Government. Such a link would have meant that the rationale for the charge was transparent, rather than its current situation, where it appears to be a charge plucked out of the air by the Government. I also need to make clear to the Assembly that the rates tools should not be manipulated in an arbitrary way by the Government. This system should be used to ensure that rates are fair, and not used in order to manipulate the system to get a result that suits the government of the day. Labor will not stand for this, and we will not do it in government.

The 85 : 15 split between commercial and residential property rates is supported by the Government as it appears to reflect the status quo; that is, that 85 per cent of rates are paid by residential users and 15 per cent by commercial users. We will monitor this issue, Mr Speaker, to ensure that it is not manipulated in the future. This new rating system has been a long time in coming - too long in coming, in my opinion, Mr Speaker - but Labor welcomes the fact that it has finally come and that the ACT will now enjoy a fair rating system.

MR MOORE (8.22): Mr Speaker, I rise to support this piece of legislation. I think it is an important improvement in ensuring an equitable rates and land tax system. As Mr Whitecross says, it has been a long time coming. I think that the compromises that are made here are compromises that, in the long term, will be of benefit to the community overall and recognise some of the problems associated with rating.

It has been interesting to me, Mr Speaker, to see that the Chief Minister has been using this legislation as an opportunity to say that the reason we have had an increase in rates in the Inner North and the Inner South and a decrease further out is that the vote was forced on them and it was not the Government's fault at all. This is the sort of spin that we are getting used to, Mr Speaker. Unfortunately, it was entirely unnecessary. The reason had nothing to do with the Government being forced to respond to the Assembly's vote - and there is no doubt about it, they were, and reluctantly - but the problem was much less than it would have been had it been allowed to go on for another year. It is as simple as that. This situation arose because the Government decided to peg the rates at a certain level. It was the pegging of the rates that created the broader discrepancy rather than allowing the percentages to continue or bringing in these changes earlier. So, I think we have to be very careful, when we are discussing these things, Mr Speaker, that we do not put just one slant on it, as opposed to another slant, because invariably there are two parts to the story. It was interesting to me to see how gullible some elements of the media were in picking that up and missing the real story.

Mr Speaker, it seems to me that the Government has brought before us a fair and equitable piece of legislation that is about ensuring appropriate revenue. I am happy to support it, but not without saying once again that this question of revenue is a very important question. It is something that we are going to have to look at responsibly.

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