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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 2 Hansard (29 February) . . Page.. 389 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

Just as a matter of interest, I contrast that with the situation taken by Labor federally back in the early 1980s when Mr Hawke went to the 1983 election promising not to introduce a capital gains tax. "There will no capital gains tax under Labor", he said. Such a tax was introduced in 1985, as I recall. Mr Hawke said at the time, "Well, my promise in 1983 was only good until the 1984 Federal election. Then it expired".

In the few years subsequent to that we had a very vigorous debate within the Australian Labor Party about the introduction of a goods and services tax in Australia. We had many key figures in the Labor Party, including the former Prime Minister, Mr Keating, and, as I recall, Mr Beazley, arguing within internal party circles for the introduction of a goods and services tax. When members of the Labor Party come in here and tell us that Labor is absolutely opposed to this GST, that "we don't really want this money", this $216m, which is going to flow to the ACT, that "we can live without this", you have to ask what kind of reality check you impose on that kind of promise and those words.

But this is the real crunch, the real test, that I would apply to the Labor Party's position on this matter. They say that they are opposed to the goods and services tax. They think it is a bad tax. It is the most regressive tax ever seen, according to the hyperbole of Mr Stanhope. What are they going to do about the matter? If they ever come to office in this place, they will inherit the intergovernmental agreement which says that we are bound to implement the goods and services tax in this Territory. What will they do? Will they take that agreement and tear it up? Will they send back the money that is flowing to the ACT as a result of the new tax system? What will they do?

You know where the ACT Government is coming from on this. The Liberal Government has made it clear what it is going to do. It is going to accept this benefit to the ACT. It is going to implement the tax in the ACT and ensure that we fight to protect the ACT's interest in that process. What is Labor's position? The fact is we do not know.

MS TUCKER (4.44): I also am pleased to have the opportunity to talk about tax in this place. The Greens also do not support the current form of the GST that we have been presented with by the Federal Government. We have fundamental concerns about a tax on services. The Greens' position on taxation is that, first, it should definitely be a progressive tax; the GST is not. It should be part of redistribution of wealth. It should encourage and facilitate ecological sustainability. The GST does neither. It needs also to maintain a level of revenue which is adequate for government spending on essential services, and also support the possibility of socially responsible investment.

If you benchmark Australia with OECD revenue standards - and this Liberal Government likes to benchmark; we are very familiar with the use of benchmarking - you see that it would increase public revenue by around $15 billion. The problem is not that we are taxed too much; rather that we tax the wrong things too much and we do not tax other things enough.

We also need to try to look a little bit clearly at the issue of tax. Revenue acts are not the acts of some kind of hostile enemy; they are the means by which we ensure the overall wellbeing of our community. There is always a great reluctance to look at the question

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