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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 2 Hansard (29 February) . . Page.. 385 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

Of course, the Government in some respects is also a business and, like business, will have to face the implementation and ongoing compliance costs in meeting its GST obligations. The ACT Government will have to change its administrative systems to deal with the new tax regime. It will have to pay GST on goods and services it buys. What will be the cost to the ACT Government? The Treasurer suggests the implementations cost will be in the order of $2.5m in the next year.

Mr Humphries: No, $3.5m.

MR STANHOPE: The Treasurer tells us $3.5m, paid for from the Treasurer's Advance. Perhaps I have covered the point. Other costs estimated to be about $1m will be provided for. Labor is sceptical about these estimates. The costs to business are well researched and there seems no reason to assume that they will be less for government. Is the real cost of the ACT Government's GST implementation more likely to be the same as that suggested for business, about a third of the cost of Y2K compliance?

The Prime Minister and his mouthpieces, such as the Liberals in this place, insist that tax reform in the shape of the GST will dramatically improve the financial position of the States and Territories. Mr Deputy Speaker, one thing is certain: The GST will have an impact on the manner in which the Territory goes about its business, and the inequities of that impact will be felt by the Canberra community. On 1 February our Treasurer stated in a media release that Labor's claims of a substantial GST impact on the ACT budget could be dismissed because his Federal colleague Mr Costello had exempted ACT government fees, taxes and charges from the GST.

Mr Humphries' media release pointed to the Treasury web site and a large document listing the exempt charges. It was mentioned earlier that the list for the ACT runs to 30 pages and canvasses a broad range of government taxes and charges - but of course the list is as revealing for what it does not mention as for its bulk. As this place heard in question time today, in a question from my colleague Mr Hargreaves about the impact on the commercial sector as opposed to the community sector in relation to the hiring or leasing of community space, the hirers of sports ovals will be charged GST. Some commercial operations leasing government land will not be charged.

I look forward to Mr Hird explaining that to his sports constituency, particularly to those running junior sport and who come to Mr Hird and ask, "Mr Hird, why are we paying GST to hire this sports oval, when our colleagues down the street, who are hiring a bit of land for their cafe to utilise some pavement space, are not paying the GST?". I look forward to Mr Hird explaining that to his constituents. I will raise the matter with them and suggest that they approach Mr Hird with it - the champion of the GST and the champion of the imposition of GST on junior sport in the ACT.

There are a range of other issues that this Government has yet to explain to us, or to explain to this community, and, as they go about Canberra selling the GST now that they have embraced it so nobly, we look forward to the answers to some of these questions. Why is it that levies imposed on convicted people under the criminal injuries compensation scheme will be GST free, but payments made to victims under the

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