Page 1909 - Week 05 - Thursday, 5 May 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
We have had those conversations, Mr Smyth. So it is no surprise that the property industry, representing property developers, is now trying to go out with their campaign and say to every mum and dad who have no intention of moving or redeveloping that this charge is going to affect the value of their house. It is simply not true and it is no surprise that the Property Council are going to maintain this scare campaign because they have been doing very well on the back of redevelopment opportunities in this city; very well. Yes, this increase in the change of use charge may actually impact on the very, very, very healthy margins that developers have been reaping over the last five to six years through the very low change of use charge that has been applied.
It may and because of that they may resist this change. We have picked that up. But this change is required. It is good from a business point of view. It provides certainty, it provides clarity and it provides to the community a rightful return on the asset which has been granted to someone else. It is interesting that the opposition, obviously, in light of this campaign from the Property Council, have decided that they too can join this bandwagon and that they too can deny the community a rightful share of our community assets so that we can put more money into social housing, more money into public housing, more money into concessions to support low income households. (Time expired.)
Opposition members interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Order! Mr Smyth has the floor for a supplementary.
MR SMYTH: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Treasurer, what has your government done to ensure that this change of use charge will not lead to a drop in value of existing homes in redevelopment areas?
MS GALLAGHER: I did not accept the proposition put that it would. But what the government has done is, in light of and in the interests of working with industry across the ACT, in partnership we have agreed to some very, very generous transition arrangements, starting at 75 per cent remission of the actual value of the benefit. We are saying, “This is the actual value of the benefit and we are going to give you a 75 per cent remission.” Indeed I see here a note that has gone out from LJ Hooker recently, in light of the announcement in the budget, saying:
Is your property currently in a redevelopment zone? Yes, you need to know about this …
Finally, the ACT Government has announced, through the 2011/2012 Budget, the legislation that will apply for any Change of Use Charge for residential land being developed.
It goes on about the reports that have been done and what the new fee will be. It then goes on to talk about the remissions and says that, if you were going to do a development in Dickson, where a redevelopment would be for 11 to 20 units a lease variation charge of $50,000 per unit would apply. It continues:
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video