Page 2583 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 7 August 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Is there room for improvement? Undoubtedly, but the simple suggestion that the budget does not deliver and exactly what that means, I think, is again an area where I simply disagree with Mr Smyth’s analysis.
Another reason given in the motion not to pass the budget is the “deceitful plan to massively increase commercial and residential rates”. The tax reforms are complicated, and pretending you can catch them in a three-word slogan or even a whole sentence really is a disservice to the depth of the policy and the thinking that has gone into it.
The Canberra Liberals do seem to be the only political party in the whole country that cannot accept that stamp duty is an inefficient tax and that it is in our economic interest to get rid of it.
Mr Smyth: We never said that.
MR RATTENBURY: But you certainly oppose the tax reforms, Mr Smyth? Madam Speaker, I observe the interjection Mr Smyth has made, and in response to that interjection I observe that there does not seem to be any support for getting rid of stamp duty.
As we said during the campaign on many occasions and as WIN news managed to work out from information publicly available, rates across Canberra will rise by an average of about six per cent per year as insurance tax and conveyance duty are phased out. As I have said in this debate, and as some of my Greens colleagues have said in previous debates, we do believe this is a responsible long-term tax reform, one that will provide stability for the ACT in its revenue base and provide for a more transparent tax system.
Mr Barr has made a number of comments about the ICRC issue that Mr Smyth has raised. I concur with those comments and I would add simply that the nature of a budget, in bringing forward the appropriation bills, is that it is a budget; it is an estimate; it is a plan forward. Things will of course happen, things will change, and that is what the various updates are for—the midyear update, the end of year updates, these sorts of things.
I do note that the $20 million variation that we are discussing sits in the context of a $4 billion budget and so I think that we need to see that for what it is. It is certainly an important part of the budget, but other things will change as well. On the GST revenue, for example, the Treasurer provided some numbers in question time yesterday which indicate the quantum there.
These are the challenges as we seek to manage the financial state of the territory on an ongoing basis. I do not think that is a barrier to passing the budget at this point. The budget gives a clear indication of the executive’s intent, and that is the basis on which we should be debating it.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video