Page 3952 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 9 November 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MS FOLLETT: I thank Mr Stevenson for the question. Mr Stevenson is correct in saying that the previous concession on the registration of farm vehicles was removed; and it was done in the context of a review of the whole of the ACT's concessions regime. Members might recall that at the time the purpose of that review was to target our concessions to those most in need in the community.
Madam Speaker, I recognise, as do all members, that farmers, particularly in times of drought, do it tough; but I also recognise that, in general terms, they could not be said to be the most in need amongst our community members, and that there are other people - unemployed people, people on sickness benefits and so on - who, generally speaking, are far more in need than our farmers. It was a conscious decision, and it was a matter on which the Assembly voted, to the best of my recollection. I recognise that many members were not in favour of that move, but it was taken in the context of better targeting of concessions.
Madam Speaker, it is a fact that the concessions have to be counted as a cost to the whole community, and a very large cost. It runs into many millions of dollars. We have to try to spend that money in the fairest way possible, and the way that does address the neediest in our community. It was a conscious decision. I recognise that some people do not agree with it, but that is the rationale for removing that concession.
MR STEVENSON: Madam Speaker, I have a supplementary question. If I could put it in a different context: Rather than look at it as a concession, look at it as a tax. Vehicle registration is a tax, for certain reasons, such as the wear and tear on roads, et cetera. The farmers and graziers are not using the vehicles on the roads. In one case, a farmer has a paddock across the road; so, he has to take his vehicle across the road and back. Instead of a $35 permit in New South Wales, he pays $175 in the ACT. One other farmer has used a truck for 12 years, and has travelled 24,000 miles in those 12 years. Would the Chief Minister re-evaluate that in light of the fact that it is not so much a concession to somebody but an unfair tax? They are paying an unfair tax at the moment, particularly with the hardships that they have. Would the Chief Minister re-evaluate that?
MS FOLLETT: Madam Speaker, I will need to consult on that matter with my colleague the Minister responsible for transport, whose portfolio actually includes responsibility for those issues. I should say to Mr Stevenson that the vehicle needs to be registered only if it is to be driven on a public road. I realise that there are some farm vehicles that are not driven on public roads at all and others that cross or use public roads only very occasionally. In the case of those vehicles, special arrangements are possible for them; they can get very short-term licences to undertake that kind of activity. As I say, it is a matter on which I will have to consult the relevant Minister and advise Mr Stevenson as soon as I can.
I ask that further questions be placed on the notice paper.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .