Page 1131 - Week 05 - Tuesday, 29 May 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I would be doing a great disservice to the Australian government if I did not highlight some of the other benefits to the ACT from the recent budget. The Australian government will provide $71.8 million over four years to develop Canberra’s infrastructure and provide ongoing maintenance funding in accordance with the Griffin legacy plan. The Australian government also provided an initial $14.1 million for the construction of the National Portrait Gallery, $12½ million for the Australian War Memorial—one of the greatest attractions in the city: not the arboretum, and it probably never will be the arboretum—$8 million for the Royal Australian Mint, $3.5 million for the High Court of Australia, and funding for a scoping study for a new building for the Australian Federal Police. The Australian government will also provide a range of funding initiatives, including family payments and payments under its new higher education endowment fund, which will greatly benefit ACT universities.
And let us not forget the initiative of the Australian government that continues to provide revenue for the ACT at a greater and greater rate—the GST. In 2007-08, the ACT will receive $823 million from the GST—
Mrs Burke: How much?
MR MULCAHY: $823 million from the GST—$55 million more than last year and an incredible $83 million more than we would have received under the previous system of assistance grants and inefficient territory taxes abolished under the intergovernmental agreement.
There is an example of the economic short-sightedness and ineptitude of the Chief Minister, and the Labor Party in general, in relation to GST. In this place, on 29 February 2000, the now Chief Minister pledged to work with his colleagues to facilitate the roll back of the GST. He mused over how much transitional payment would be used to cover the GST revenue of the ACT and the amount the territory would have received under the old system. Chief Minister, you have your answer: the territory is receiving $83 million more this coming financial year because of this allegedly regressive tax that your own party has now embraced.
In addition to the revenue from the GST, the specific purpose payments have increased by $42 million from last year. I have looked into some of the other payments in the intervening period. You can play around with the figures, of course. The Chief Minister tried to find a negative side in the growth of GST. He said that it was a small part of the GDP now. But in fact GST and total payments to the states for 2007-08 are 7.3 per cent of GDP—in the order of about $72.6 billion, I believe.
Reference was also made to payments for health. It is worth noting that in 2007-08, from the figures we have as of today, for health the increases for 2006-07 were $471 million, compared with $758 million for 2007-08, $918 million for 2008-09 and $1.02 billion for 2009-10—the figures for the extra spent. This is on top of existing expenditure. Total health spending for 2006-07 will be $40 billion and for 2007-08 will be $43 billion. Something in the order of 6.8 per cent of GDP is being distributed to states.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .