Page 1887 - Week 06 - Thursday, 9 May 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Statistics; if so, (a) what was the impact of this change on the ACT for each budget year, including this year and over the forward estimates and (b) as a result, have there been any changes to scheduled health services for the 2012-13 year.
(2) If funding decreased in 2012-13, has the ACT Government made up this funding gap to allow services to be delivered.
(3) If funding has decreased, has the Minister made representations to the Federal Health Minister regarding any loss of funds.
Ms Gallagher: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:
(1) There were revisions in funding through the National Healthcare Specific Purpose Payments due to changes in population estimates by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. a) The impacts are: a reduction of $1.844 million in 2012-13, which includes an adjustment of around $0.6m in relation to the 2011-12 Financial Year; a reduction of $1.290 million to the published 2013-14 estimate and increases to the 2014-15 and 2015-16 published estimates of $0.730 million and $3.129 million respectively. The overall adjustment to the ACT is positive over the four years to 2015-16. b) There is no change to scheduled health services in 2012-13.
(2) ACT Health and Treasury will work together to ensure that the appropriate level of funding is available in 2012-13. Historically increases or reductions to national agreements have not been routinely on-passed to directorates.
(3) The forward estimates are positive over the four year period. I have discussed this matter with the Federal Minister for Health.
Taxation—stamp duty
(Question No 89)
Mr Smyth asked the Treasurer, upon notice, on 21 March 2013:
In relation to the ACT Supreme Court’s recent ruling on the Government’s application of stamp duty under its affordable housing schemes, can the Treasurer provide details on (a) how many people could be entitled to a similar stamp duty refund as a result of the recent ACT Supreme Court ruling, (b) what were the causes of conflicting advice being given to eligible concession homebuyers, (c) what is the potential impact to the Territory’s finances should the Government decide to refund eligible homebuyers, (d) when did the Government begin applying stamp duty to the land and house components of affordable housing schemes and (e) which affordable housing schemes was stamp duty applied to both land and house values.
Mr Barr: The answer to the member’s question is as follows:
(a) There are currently 2 legal representations before the ACT Revenue Office in relation to this issue.
(b) It is unclear what conflicting advice is referred to in the member’s question.
(c) The exact financial impact of the ACT Supreme Court decision is still being investigated.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video