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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 2 Hansard (29 February) . . Page.. 386 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

scheme will not be? Good question. Why is it that a charge to replace a lost library card will be GST exempt, but not the fine on an overdue book? And what other ACT government charges are not exempt from the clutches of the GST?

The Government has not revealed the full list, even though we are in the process of debating a draft budget. But, of course, we all know about power bills, water and sewerage bills, parking fees, bus fares, grants to community organisations, and - as the Treasurer mentioned before - a ride on the Civic merry-go-round. We look forward to this Government committing to Labor's suggestion that all bills in relation to these issues be transparent.

The Chief Minister and the Treasurer have each adopted the Howard-Costello mantra that no State or Territory will be worse off under the GST regime than it would be under current financial arrangements. To that end the Commonwealth has committed itself to a transitional arrangement in the form of payments and loans while governments wait for the benefits to kick in. The shortfall between net GST and financial assistance grant revenue to the States and Territories for 2000-01 was estimated by the Commonwealth in last year's budget papers as around $1.2 billion.

Now, of course, there have been significant changes to the GST arrangements and the shortfall is estimated to be in the order of $3.5 billion. What is the ACT's share of this shortfall? What proportion of it will be delivered in the form of loans and in transitional payments in order to meet the Commonwealth's guarantee? What impact will these arrangements have on the ACT budget? Does the sheer size of the shortfall pose risks to the guarantee? Mr Humphries has not mentioned any of these things.

The rhetoric of the Government is based on a false premise that a Federal Labor government would not meet the cost of its pledge to roll back the inequitable GST. Why should Canberrans pay any heed to the false rhetoric of the Chief Minister and her Treasurer? After all, this is rhetoric that emanates from a man who distinguishes between core and non-core promises and makes "never ever" promises and never ever promised to introduce the GST. We are talking about the core and the non-core promise, and the never ever a GST under a Liberal government.

Canberrans are under no threat from the future Labor Government's commitment to roll back an inequitable tax. The threat Canberrans face comes from the impact of the new tax regime, an impact that the Chief Minister, as is her wont, is doing her best to hide. We have not, for instance, heard from the Chief Minister about her views on the imposition of a tax on tampons.

We have not heard views about other aspects of the implementation of this incredibly inequitable and regressive tax. What about its impact on education and the capacity of parents to purchase those aspects? I have no doubt that Mr Stefaniak will give us chapter and verse on the impact on parents seeking to educate their children.

What about the delivery charge for groceries to the elderly in the community? What about the fact that people with a disability, currently exempt from the payment of sales tax, will have to pay the GST? What about the impact on charities such as the RSPCA,

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