Page 3637 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 21 November 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
numbers. So I stand by my comments. They were entirely and precisely correct, appropriate and valid. At least half of it is additional revenue from activity essentially within the residential market, and the rest is around market securities.
Go back to the evidence of the Property Council; it was about specific instances of alleged, almost duplicitous—the way in which the evidence was presented—non-specification or mention. They were wrong, and they remain wrong. If you go back to the evidence, you will see that it was about QEII, which is already in the budget. It is about section 63, which, if you understand GFS, as Mr Mulcahy does, is not relevant anyway. So I stand by the comment I made. It is true and valid.
MR SPEAKER: Is there a supplementary question?
MR SESELJA: Treasurer, what forecasting for stamp duty generated through recent land sales is factored in to assist in forecasting revenue collections?
MR STANHOPE: I must say, to the extent that I do not just have in my head the amount, that I am struggling to understand the thrust of the question. Is it about an amount? Is it about specific areas of stamp duty? I will take the question on notice. I must say that I will probably have to seek some clarification. I am not quite sure of the point that the member is seeking.
Taxation—revenue
MR PRATT: My question is also to the Treasurer—and I am not jumping the gun. The September quarter consolidated financial report again showed massive underestimation of taxation revenue, as predicted by business groups like the Property Council. Treasurer, when during the September quarter did you receive advice from your department that the ACT would receive another taxation revenue windfall?
MR STANHOPE: I received the September quarterly report, I think, a couple of days before I tabled it, which was last week. But of course—
Mrs Dunne: That’s an outrage. That’s an outrage to claim that that is the only time he received that advice.
MR STANHOPE: What is an outrage, Mrs Dunne, apart from you?
MR SPEAKER: Never mind. Mrs Dunne is on a warning and she won’t be interjecting anymore.
MR STANHOPE: I am not quite sure what is outrageous, but I think the strength of the current budget and the soundness of our finances would be outrageous to the Liberal Party as they sit back and continue to contemplate their $800 million of accumulated deficits over four years in government.
But to go specifically to the question, I received the formal document for tabling, I think, a day or so before it was tabled. I would have to check the record for that. So I tabled it last Wednesday and I believe I received it—I am not even sure whether I
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .