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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2003 Week 6 Hansard (17 June) . . Page.. 1869 ..

MR SMYTH

Assembly, the Treasurer commented that the bill has the aim of making Canberra's rates system fairer for all long-term owners of residential and rural parcels of land.

Apparently, the government had undertaken detailed modelling of a number of rating systems prior to this bill being prepared, although the PAC did not receive any details of any of this modelling. When the committee raised with the Treasurer concerns that the proposed new system might create a disincentive for people to move-at least, in certain cases-the Treasurer commented that he would be prepared to entertain suggestions from the committee as to how he would facilitate the movement of people who genuinely want to move and somehow insulate them against the disincentive.

The committee was concerned with this response from the Treasurer, as it indicated that the issues that were closely related to the policy did not appear to have been fully considered by the government. The committee also raised with the Treasurer possible concessions and deferrals that might be available under the proposed rating policy. The Treasurer noted that the criteria for and circumstances in which concessions were to operate did not exist in detail.

These responses surprised the majority of the committee, as it would have thought that matters such as possible "concessions, exemptions and dispensations", to use the Treasurer's words, would have been considered in the drafting of the framework policy. The committee notes that it was subsequently provided with further details on the concessions, which dealt with situations where certain categories of people may be forced to move from their existing premises.

The committee was also intrigued that one community group was not aware of the availability of provisions in the current rating policy to permit the deferral of rates in appropriate circumstances. This suggested to the committee that some targeted promotion of the details of the rating policy could be considered.

Ultimately, the majority of the committee concluded that the need for the proposed new rating system had not been established, that proposals in the bill raise both equity and efficiency issues and that only limited assessment of the likely environmental and social impacts of the proposed policy appear to have been undertaken.

On the basis of these conclusions, the majority of the committee was not able to agree to support the bill. Consequently, the majority of the committee has recommended-and you will find this in the recommendations-that the Legislative Assembly should not pass the Rates and Land Tax Amendment Bill 2003, that further evaluation be undertaken of alternative rating systems and of provision for concessions of deferrals and waivers and that the results of this evaluation be presented to the Assembly.

In recommending that further evaluations be undertaken, the committee acknowledges that alternative rating systems operate in other parts of Australia and that some of these may contain useful characteristics that could be incorporated into a revised rating system in the ACT.

To conclude, the committee is disappointed with the overall approach of the government to the preparation of this policy and the associated legislation. It is reasonable to expect

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