Page 1906 - Week 05 - Thursday, 6 May 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The other tax is the massive grab on homes. At a time when all parties in this place are committed to increasing the density of this city, we are having the anti-density tax put in place. If you are a young family trying to get into the property market, given that the median house price is about $550,000 and the median apartment price is just over $400,000, the only place you can go is to an apartment. Yet apartments are being slugged by this government with their anti-density tax hike.
The change of use charge as it stands reaps the government some benefit. But what we have heard from the Treasurer today is that there is no analysis about the impact. It is about to be done, the work is about to be done. She could not tell us what the impact was on renters. She could not tell us what the impact was on first homebuyers trying to get into the market. She could not tell us what the impact was on those downsizing, which is also critical to the effective functioning of the housing market in the city because the work has not been done.
What she can tell us through the budget papers is that the massive tax hike is 185 per cent this year and it is $89 million over the coming four years that the government will collect from change of use charge. She seems to think that it will not have any effect, so we will see what happens. Again, that shows how bereft of genuine policy reform this government is. Although I do note on pages 98 and 99 that the Treasurer’s advance has now been put in as a reduction method. We are going to take 25 per cent off the one per cent. I have visions of Mr Stanhope last year standing up here and saying, “Mr Seselja’s bizarre slash-and-burn plan that he took to the electorate last October included a reduction of the Treasurer’s advance”. So, last year it was bizarre and it was slash and burn; this year it is good fiscal policy.
Ms Gallagher: Yes, to pay for your stupid election promises. It was a 50 per cent reduction to pay for your reckless spending.
MR SMYTH: There you have it, Mr Assistant Speaker.
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Order, members! I know it was a funny joke; I know it was amusing, but Mr Smyth has the floor, all by himself.
MR SMYTH: Last year it was bizarre, it was slash and burn, this year it is good fiscal policy. We are pleased you have seen the sense of it, but we are also pleased that you have been caught out and hoist on your own petard. It just shows how appalling this government is.
We are often criticised for not giving praise where praise is due. There are a few things here that I am very happy with—for instance, the film investment fund. Mr Hargreaves will remember in 2002 when I called for a film industry in the ACT. It is great to see a Liberal idea being funded; that is very good. I am sorry Mr Corbell is not here, because after hammering him for almost two years on a new fire shed for the Tidbinbilla Rural Fire Service, the shed has arrived. There is $1.6 million for a new fire shed at Tidbinbilla. That is very welcome.
Of course, it is a shame Mr Barr, the automatic teller machine of the ACT Assembly, is not here. Members will remember in the debate on the racing industry earlier this
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video