Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .
Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 5 Hansard (5 May) . . Page.. 1401 ..
MR SMYTH (continuing):
Mr Berry is highly selective in the groups he mentions. While the Government accepts that some organisations in the industry support a levy, we would argue that generally it is not supported by the industry. The Housing Industry Association wrote to the Government only last week confirming its opposition to such a levy. They wrote:
Experience in other states suggests that there is a real danger of sectional interests capturing the fund and using it to fund their own activities and for their own benefit.
The letter continues:
HIA is concerned that an arbitrary levy would add to the cost of housing with a resultant decline in affordability ... one can expect that the full cost of the levy would be passed to consumers.
Mr Speaker, the ACT and Region Chamber of Commerce also opposes the Bill, claiming that the introduction of the Bill would increase the cost of housing in the ACT, increase commercial construction costs and encourage the industry to work outside the ACT. I quote:
Our priority is to encourage construction to return to Canberra, not drive it away.
That was said by the chief executive, Chris Peters, in a recent press release.
The ACT Chapter of the Royal Australian Institute of Architects is another organisation which does not support the introduction of a levy. In a submission to the earlier exposure draft, Tim Halden Brown, the chairman of the Practice Committee, wrote:
While a levy ensures that funds are available, imposed training may not result in good value for money, in respect of the trained operatives. A levy will be punitive to those wishing to develop or intending to build in the ACT, as it only adds to the cost of construction work ... This would appear to be morally indefensible, and is surely not politically attractive.
Finally, during that same consultation phase in late 1997, it was apparent that the Property Owners Council was opposed to the legislation, saying:
Council's view is that there should be no special funding impost on the industry of any sort.
These organisations represent a substantial sector of the industry.
Mr Speaker, the Government had decided not to introduce a levy, in part because of the lack of consensus within the industry. It is also not consistent with the Government's commitment to stimulate business activity and to reduce red tape. The proposed levy would impose a cost on residential and other building above $5,000. The housing sector
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .