Page 3146 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 17 October 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR STANHOPE: I accept this as a legitimate and moot question. I accept the question as a legitimate issue in relation to issues around investment in housing and property in the territory. It is one of the issues—one of the leaders—in relation to, say, affordability that we need to take into account. I made the point to the property council last week that if there could be some objective basis on which it could be shown that land tax is the bogey, then of course the government would be moved to look at how we might then adjust the package or suite of taxes, fees and charges that apply.
Of course there are a lot of anecdotal views out there. Most certainly the property council, and perhaps the real estate institute, have a view around land tax. They have painted land tax as the bogey. They have said, “Here is the reason for the issues or difficulties in relation to affordability, which of course then leads to issues in relation to vacancy rates and levels of rent.”
You can move on. You can go down to the Housing Industry Association. They will say, “No. We do not think land tax is the problem. We think stamp duty is the problem.” But there is also a significant body of opinion around that moves made by the commonwealth some years ago in relation to stamp duty and the first home buyers arrangements in fact exacerbated the affordability issue—dragged purchases forward and did more harm than good—a concept of which Mrs Dunne is very aware. I believe it is now almost accepted across the industry that there was a very significant negative to some of the levers the commonwealth pushed in relation to first home buyers.
You can walk around the territory and get different responses. The property council and the real estate institute will say, “The problem is land tax.” If you go down to the Housing Industry Association, they will say, “No. The problem is not land tax; the problem is stamp duty.” You can then go out to the developers, many of whom are separately represented these days, and say, “What is the problem?” They will say, “The problem is land supply.” Then you will go somewhere else—you will perhaps go out to the airport—and the problem is the LDA. It depends on who you talk to.
I can walk around the town and talk to half a dozen groups. I will variously be told, “The problem is definitely land tax; the problem is definitely stamp duty; the problem is definitely land supply; the problem is definitely ACTPLA and the LDA; the problem is definitely the legislation.” It depends who you talk to. It depends what the particular vested interest is. But it is not a good way for governments to take decisions around the particular levers that might be pushed in relation to seriously addressing issues around affordability. That is why I appointed the affordability task force. We wanted a more rigorous analysis of what the range of pressing points might be in relation to affordability.
To some extent, of course, it is also about the market. It is about the fact that we have 2.7 per cent unemployment; it is about the fact that the economy within the territory is booming; it is about the fact that the commonwealth public service is expanding as significantly as it is.
Opposition members interjecting—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .