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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 06 Hansard (Thursday, 24 June 2004) . . Page.. 2692 ..

Clause 159—reconsideration.

MS DUNDAS: I move amendment No 10 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 2756].

The amendment is on a sand coloured piece of paper. As members will note, an amendment has been circulated on a white piece of paper. Clause 159 has to be amended first and, if I am successful in that regard, I will move the amendment circulated on the white piece of paper. I thank members for their attention to detail in highlighting to me that there was a small error in drafting that required another amendment to be circulated.

The aim of these amendments is to ensure that the rate at which gaming tax is prescribed is kept in legislation, that it does not become a disallowable instrument. We have at other points raised the discussion about the problem with issues coming through in disallowable instruments. I think that this is especially relevant in relation to taxation, as we could have a situation where a tax is being levied on licensees and then the Assembly debates the issue and changes the tax, but for a period of up to six months the tax is being taken at one rate and after the Assembly has debated it the tax is to be taken at a different rate.

The provisions that I am seeking to put in here in relation to the prescribed percentage and how it is calculated for a licensee are identical to what is in the current act, so nothing is being changed there. I am not changing the regime or the levels at which the licensees are actually taxed. I am just maintaining this position in the law so that any changes being made to the tax regime have to come to the Assembly first.

MR STEFANIAK (6.13): The Opposition will be supporting Ms Dundas’s amendment and also, I flag, her amendment on the white piece of paper to the new clause 159A that she will be moving shortly if she is successful with this one. This one does put it back in the tax regime. As I flagged in my opening remarks, we see that as preferable. It is not something that the government changes all that often. I think that there would be a furore if they did, as these changes become very big issues. I think it is far more transparent to have the tax in the legislation. It has been changed on a few occasions but not all that often, so we are very supportive of that.

It was been pointed out by the gaming officials, and I thank them for it, that there was a technical problem with this amendment which Ms Dundas has very quickly fixed up with her proposed new clause 159A in relation to what would have been a double tax and making provision there for the GST.

Mr Quinlan: We wouldn’t want a double tax, would we, Bill?

MR STEFANIAK: We certainly wouldn’t; that would get them all absolutely up in arms, Ted. We are very happy to support both of these amendments.

MR QUINLAN (Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Business and Tourism, and Minister for Sport, Racing and Gaming) (6.14): It would appear that there is the possibility of this amendment getting up. The government is not keen on this amendment. It is actually a retrograde step in terms of what we have done with various

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