Page 3101 - Week 10 - Thursday, 18 October 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Given that it is now right in front of us, I certainly support the disallowance motion. I expect that the government will admit its mistakes. Mistakes are made. There is nothing wrong with admitting them. It is absolutely essential that it be corrected before cafes start to pay this. It is essential if we do go ahead, as I have no doubt we will, and complete the process of doubling, in effect, the fees that cafes and other organisations pay to have structures outside.
If it does remain at 100 per cent, then we leave it there for a good three to five years. Some of us who have lived in Canberra for long enough remember the repeal of that most ridiculous law, for which I believe Gus went to prison a number of times, whereby we were not allowed to have cafes outside. It prevented Canberra people from being like Melbourne people. It was a ridiculous law.
Anyone can see the cafe culture and pub culture that has arisen as a result. It is as though we were in jail, just waiting to get let out. Even in cold weather, cafe tables in the sun always have a clientele. We really should be encouraging this bringing to life of town centres and, more and more, our suburban centres. If we bring this kind of life to those centres, people will choose to go there for their entertainment. Instead of having coffee at home on their own, they will go down to the local cafe where they can read the paper. This is really good for building our social capital. We should not be taxing anything that increases this city’s liveability and increases our social capital. I urge the government to support Mr Smyth’s disallowance motion.
MR MULCAHY (Molonglo) (10.53): I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak in support of Mr Smyth’s motion today. It is a motion that seeks to provide some relief to Canberra businesses in the face of ever increasing government charges. This motion seeks to disallow Disallowable Instrument D12007-159, Roads and Public Places (Fees) Determination 2007 (No 1) and will, in the unlikely event, I regret to say, that the government sees sense and supports it, provide significant relief to the cafe and restaurant owners of the ACT.
In contrast to most fees payable under the Roads and Public Places Act 1937, which increased by the government’s controversial favoured method of indexation, the wage price index, this disallowable instrument provides for substantial increases to the cost of placing objects for outdoor cafes in a public place. Fees for the placement of objects for outdoor cafes in a public place have increased by 33 per cent from 1 July 2007. As Mr Smyth explained, this increase was made as part of a program supposedly to increase fees by 100 per cent over three years. I understand this is the final increase, at least for the time being. Over the last three years fees have theoretically doubled.
There is an underlying issue with this statement. I have been informed by the industry that this year’s increase of 33 per cent has been applied to the level of charges charged last year, and therein lies the problem with the mathematics of this exercise. That is, instead of the stated intention of completing an increase of 100 per cent over three years, this year’s increase is another third on top of last year’s level, which was two-thirds higher than amount three years ago, effectively compounding increases. This means that over the last three years fees have not just increased by 100 per cent. When I say ‘just’, as Mr Smyth pointed out, I think that this is excessive and highly
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .