Page 3060 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 16 September 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
In the city it is even worse. In 2011-12 it raised $45,000; in 2012-13, $84,000; in 2013-14, $147,000. Year to date when answered it was $41,000. From 2011 to the year to date in June this year it raised in Civic $318,000—not really your perfect tax. Any wonder that it is not achieving what it was purported to achieve! It is the same for Gungahlin: in 2011-12, zero; in 2012-13, $127,000; in 2013-14, $52,000; year to date, to June this year that is, $367,000. In Gungahlin, the lease variation charge over the four years, raised $546,000—just over half a million dollars.
In Tuggeranong in 2011-12 it raised $215,000; in 2012-13, zero; in 2013-14, $0.003 million, $3,000; year to date, $4,000; a total of $222,000. In Woden, it is exactly the same story—no, wait, Woden was slightly better: in Woden in 2011-12, nothing; in 2012-13, $69,000; in 2013-14, obviously one building went ahead for $3,030,000; year to date to June this year, $70,000. Woden is the outstanding town centre at $3.106 million.
I can hear those opposite who will jump to their feet and say, “There is no demand. It is those dreadful federal Liberal cuts.” This tax came into effect before those cuts were started by the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd government and the 414,453 jobs that went under Rudd and Gillard. This tax started well before that. You can see in the first couple of years it was a disaster. It did not deliver what it said and it has, in that regard, distorted the market.
What we have to do is look to the future. What we have to do is work out how we get the density that we all agree should be in particularly Civic and the town centres. How do we make that happen? Clearly the impediment, according to the Business Council, Consult Australia, the Master Builders, the Planning Institute, the Property Council, is the distorting lease variation tax. It is time that we had action on this and that is what the Canberra Liberals have done.
We note the Chief Minister’s comments. The Chief Minister did not think it was a high priority. It is funny that, on the day that 300 people sat in the theatre at the convention centre—Mr Rattenbury was there, nobody from the Labor Party was there; Mr Rattenbury but not the Labor Party—saying, “We need to do something because Civic is dying,” Mr Barr’s comment is: “I don’t think it is a high priority at the moment.” Three hundred people versus the Chief Minister! Three hundred people in a room saying, “We need to do something in Civic,” and the Chief Minister saying, “I don’t think it is a high priority at the moment to give a tax cut to wealthy international and interstate property owners. In large part it would create a distortion within the market in Canberra”
It has created a distortion within the market. It has in effect in Civic and the town centres destroyed the market. I wonder who the interstate property owners are. Who is the big developer in the ACT that owns interstate property? Who would that be? That would be Foundation 73. I am sure Mr Hanson will have more to say about that. We will hear his comments.
The Chief Minister, through you Madam Deputy Speaker, misses the point completely. It is his lease variation charge, his tax, that is causing the market distortion. No
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video