Page 2027 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 28 May 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Commercial Leases
MR CONNOLLY: My question is to the Chief Minister. I refer to your claims that the dispute between you and Deputy Chief Minister Collaery over commercial lease renewals can be resolved by focusing on the financial aspects of the decision that you announced at the CARD luncheon to abolish the distinction between commercial and residential lease renewals. Can you tell the Assembly of the projected revenue to the Territory from renewals, into the next decade, assuming the current system remains? What level of land tax would need to be set to adjust and compensate for the loss of premiums?
MR KAINE: There is a cause and effect implication in that question which, of course, is entirely irrelevant. He talks about a dispute between the Deputy Chief Minister and me. This is just another area where, within the Government, there has been a difference of opinion expressed. I have consistently told you that we do not - - -
Members interjected.
MR KAINE: This is not the Communist Party, nor is it the caucus of the only Stalinist party left in the world. Do not quote me on that; somebody more authoritative than I am said that. We have a system of democratic government, and people can express differing views. As I said before, when the Bill comes before you in the next few days you will see what the one clause in the Bill that deals with this matter really says.
To move on, you asked me for the forward projection for the next decade. All I can tell you is that for the last four years the revenue from lease extensions - not lease renewals, lease extensions, and what the Bill talks about is lease renewals, so let us be clear that there are two different things here - was about $700,000 a year. The high point was about $1.2m four years ago, and it dropped to something of the order of $400,000 in one year. It averages out at somewhere around $700,000 a year.
So, if one could argue that revenue is forgone by the clause that is implicit in the Bill - and we can argue that at an appropriate time - then that is the order of magnitude that I would suggest for the next few years, just as it has been for the last four. It is still some 30 years before any significant number of commercial leases will expire and will be subject to renewal. We are still 30 years away from that occurring. If you check it, you will find that that is quite factual.
As I tried to say - and the argument has been a bit obscured - there are a number of ways in which the Government collects revenues from commercial properties on behalf of the community. The first is in terms of the premium that is paid initially for the lease. Secondly,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .