Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 2 Hansard (29 February) . . Page.. 394..
MR QUINLAN (continuing):
In relation to Mr Beazley's promise - he has promised a roll-back - I think Mr Beazley does realise, whereas Mr Humphries does not, that the cake is so big. I think even Mrs Carnell has said that, defending one government initiative or another, you are going to carve it in a different way.
MS CARNELL (Chief Minister) (5.02): Mr Speaker, I will finish quickly by saying I find this debate really amazing because if there is one part of Australia that can benefit from a GST it is the ACT. The thing that is wrong with our current tax system in Australia is that it relies very definitely on PAYE taxpayers like the workers, the people who live in the ACT;. not the big end of town, not the people who can arrange their tax business in different ways, but those PAYE taxpayers who predominantly make up our environment in Canberra.
What we see with the GST is a move away from total reliance on PAYE taxpayers. We see tax cuts, significant money in the back pockets of people who are currently PAYE taxpayers, and a move to a broader based tax system where everybody, including the big end of town, pays on the basis of their consumption of goods and services. Therefore, Mr Speaker, if you buy a Mercedes you are going to pay more than if you buy a smaller car, and so on.
Mr Quinlan: A Celica, for example.
MS CARNELL: A Celica. Mr Speaker, this is a good deal for Canberrans.
MR SPEAKER: The time for the discussion has now expired.
MR HIRD (5.04): Mr Speaker, I ask for leave to move a motion to alter the reporting date for the Standing Committee on Planning and Urban Services inquiry into betterment and change of use charges.
MR HIRD: I move:
That the resolution of the Assembly of 1 July 1999, as amended on 26 August 1999 and 25 November 1999, referring the inquiry on betterment and change of use charges to the Standing Committee on Planning and Urban Services be amended by omitting from paragraph (3) "by the first sitting day of March 2000" and substituting "by 2 March 2000".
The reason for this alteration is that one of my colleagues, unfortunately, is not well at this time and we will be unable to comply with the wishes of the house and report on 1 March. By giving us the extra day - that is, reporting on or before 2 March - I am sure