Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 05 Hansard (Wednesday, 5 May 2010) . . Page.. 1752 ..


report. The government has not received the final report and some of the extra work that has been done through that—for example, a cost-benefit analysis that the government will consider before moving to codification.

I have met, over the last day in fact, with a range of stakeholders who are concerned about this. I have given them my commitment that I will work with them over the next 12 months to see whether we can address their issues to their satisfaction. That is the way I have always worked. That is the way I intend to work on this. But in the meantime we cannot ignore the fact that we do not believe—and if you have read the report, and I do not believe anyone in the opposition has read the report—

Mr Smyth: I’ve read the report.

MS GALLAGHER: So you just ignore all the parts of it that say you have not been collecting enough revenue, do you? You ignore those parts and think that that is not correct? I do not apologise for the fact that we are responding to an anomaly which appears that we have not collected as much revenue on change of use as we should have and that we have put in place steps to fix that.

MR SPEAKER: Ms Le Couteur, a supplementary question?

MS LE COUTEUR: Treasurer, do you believe that this change of use charge will change the balance of development between infill and greenfield sites?

Mrs Dunne: On a point of order, Mr Speaker, that is asking an opinion and therefore out of order.

Mr Hargreaves: On the point of order, Mr Speaker, it is reasonable, in fact, for any minister to be asked about the implications of the impacts of a given government decision. That is all we are talking about here. Mr Speaker, I would remind you that, in this instance, what Ms Le Couteur is asking for is the impact of the budget on this particular issue.

MR SPEAKER: There is no point of order. Treasurer, the question.

MS GALLAGHER: I am allowed to answer the question?

MR SPEAKER: You are allowed to answer the question.

MS GALLAGHER: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Again, the government’s view is that this is not changing the policy; this is not changing the way change of use has been set out to operate. It only affects residential where it appears that a fixed charge arrangement has been in place and that that has undermined the revenue that should have been coming to the community in terms of the additional granting of those development rights. This does not change the system at all.

I accept that industry and developers are concerned about it. I guess that comes as no surprise, because they have been, I think, enjoying a fairly profitable situation where, for a dual occupancy which may sell for $1 million, they have been paying $3,750 for


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video