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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 13 Hansard (Tuesday, 16 November 2010) . . Page.. 5428 ..


MR SPEAKER: Mr Coe, you are now warned for repeated interjections.

MR BARR: Given the sheer volume of the Chinese market, all regions within Australia clearly benefit from Tourism Australia’s marketing efforts in China. Anyone who has been to that country would appreciate that the sort of money required to have a tourism campaign of any effect is well beyond the means of the territory. So we would have to work in partnership with our international marketing arm, and that is Tourism Australia.

Taxation—change of use

MR HANSON: My question is to the Minister for Planning. I refer to a question on notice No 1173 which asked:

What was the average amount of change of use charge paid by developers, per unit, from (a) 2003 to May 2010 and (b) May 2010 to date, and how many units has this been applied to.

In response, you answered that “no change of use charge for residential development has been paid since May 2010”. Minister, on 28 October this year you made a statement that contradicted the clear and unequivocal answer to the question on notice. You said, “$2.8 million in charges have been paid since May 2010.” Leaving aside your transparent attempt to wriggle out of this contradiction by referring to the time that the charges were assessed, can you explain the obvious contradiction between your written answer that stated no charges were paid when in fact $2.8 million was paid during the period in question?

MR BARR: As I indicated to the Assembly at the time, the question from the Leader of the Opposition related to particular dates in relation to rectification of change of use charge, so I interpreted the question as seeking information in relation to change of use charge paid after the period of rectification had begun. It is an ongoing matter, as amounts are paid on a regular basis. I recognised that there could be some confusion in relation to that answer, so I came back to the Assembly and sought to clarify that information and have subsequently provided full detail, a full reconciliation, of all change of use charge paid, both residential and commercial.

The question that Mr Seselja initially asked appears to refer to residential change of use charge and he was not interested in commercial. Mr Hanson appears to have quoted an amount in his question that relates in fact to commercial and residential. But, just to clarify matters for everyone, I have provided a full table of all commercial and residential change of use charge, both in terms of when the assessment was made and when the amount was actually paid. There is often a period of some months between when an assessment is made and when a change of use charge is actually paid. That information is on the public record and is there for all to see.

MR SPEAKER: A supplementary, Mr Hanson?

MR HANSON: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Minister, given that you did today provide a written response that outlines in precise detail how much was paid, how can you


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