Page 2187 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 21 June 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
think many in the community would say $20 million was minor—of $20 million will result in changes in behaviour. That is why this tax should be defeated this evening.
MR COE (Ginninderra) (9.24): I, too, would like to briefly put on the record my objection to this unfair change of use charge cum tax. As has been said already, whilst there is fairly broad agreement that codification is welcome, the devil is very much in the detail. The devil is in the rates.
At a time when the ACT Labor government claims to be seeking to address housing affordability issues, this cash grab will hurt Canberrans in many ways. Whether it be in slowing down construction, this creating fewer jobs, whether it be in driving up the cost of redevelopments in areas where this government supposedly wants urban infill to take place, whether it be in further restricting the market to be able to keep up with housing demand or whether it be simply in driving up the price of housing, this is vintage Labor tax policy at its worst. It is a policy motivated by the short term, because Labor cannot manage our budget. It is a tragedy that Canberra families and the property sector should have to plug the holes in ALP deficits.
When it comes down to it, the problems are simple: the level of the rates is unreasonable and the uncertainty it creates will paralyse the sector. The Canberra Liberals are rightly opposing this unreasonable cash grab.
MS GALLAGHER (Molonglo—Chief Minister, Minister for Health, Minister for Industrial Relations and Treasurer) (9.25), in reply: I was not sure that other members had finished.
MR SPEAKER: No, the floor is yours.
MS GALLAGHER: Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank other members for their contribution to the debate this evening. There are obviously a number of speakers who have spoken tonight whom I do not agree with. I do not think that will be any secret, considering we have been discussing this and disagreeing with this over the last two years.
The thing that no member has touched on tonight is that the significant change in what people are paying for lease variation charges has occurred already. It occurred in May last year, when the government responded to an audit report where it was clear that a fixed-fee arrangement, contrary to the legislation, had been put in place, and the government moved to respond. Independent valuations have been required since May.
What we have seen since that time is that there has been no change to activity levels and, indeed, the average price per unit being paid has gone up, I think, to the end of April this year, to $10,000 per unit. So that is the significant hike that has happened. It has gone from $1,750 per unit to $10,000. And that is the difference. In regard to rectification, nobody in this place in the past 12 months has sought to come in and change it.
Mr Smyth interjecting—
MR SPEAKER: Mr Smyth, please!
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video