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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 05 Hansard (Thursday, 6 May 2010) . . Page.. 1868 ..


added cost of a unit in Braddon, for a small unit complex, is likely to be $52,500. Could you explain how this will not impede housing affordability and, further, how it provides an incentive for developers and owners alike to move closer to the city centre?

MS GALLAGHER: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for the question. As I outlined yesterday, the government has not adopted a new system on change of use. We have not adopted the schedules outlined in the codification draft report. I have merely indicated that you should have a look at them. I did not say we had adopted them. There is further consultation—

Mr Seselja: You said that is how much it is going to cost.

MS GALLAGHER: No, I did not. I said there is further consultation underway. Indeed, we had extended the consultation based on some industry concerns. But I also draw Mr Seselja’s attention to sections within the draft report, which I am sure he has read. In fact, there is a whole section in the draft report called “The levels of revenue leaking under the current system”. In that report it clearly says:

… the ACT community has forgone revenue from its share of the increase in the value of public leasehold. The revenue base for the CUC is very broad (potentially every established residential and commercial block of land in the ACT) and the volume of DAs requiring a lease variation is significant and reasonably stable at around 200 to 300 …

Mr Hanson: We can all read, Katy.

MS GALLAGHER: This is the important bit here, if you just listen for a second:

… while the underlying leasehold assets have appreciated in value significantly over the past few years the revenue from CUC—

the change of use charge—

has not risen proportionately.

It goes on to say that this is specifically the case in relation to dual occupancy developments where a fixed charge of $3,750 applies. It states:

As a result, the ‘windfall gain’ has been made by all applicants. However, the windfall gain in some inner city suburbs have been significantly higher than for applications in other suburbs.

The government is simply looking to rectify the current system and allow site-by-site valuations, as set out in the Planning and Development Act, to apply.

MR SPEAKER: Mr Seselja, a supplementary?

MR SESELJA: Yes, thank you, Mr Speaker. Treasurer, what effect will this new approach have on the affordability of units in the ACT?


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