Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 2 Hansard (25 February) . . Page.. 418 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

The fixed charge of $220 and the residential to non-residential ratio of 85 : 15 are unlikely to change, as they have been set to achieve better equity in the distribution of the rates burden and to minimise the difference between this year's and last year's rates bills. The rating factor and the level of a threshold may be adjusted once the 1997 values are obtained and incorporated into the three-year rolling average.

I would like Assembly members to consider today the features of the proposed system, rather than the actual amounts, and to give support to the new system. We have certainly seen that members have, at least in principle, done that. I think that everybody has already indicated that there has been significant work done in the preparation of this new model. The way it has been put together has been supported generally.

Mr Speaker, when I present the final Bill in June, I do not want to be accused of forcing members to make a hasty decision, particularly as the delay really has been caused by the Assembly's insistence that the 1997 values be included.

Mr Moore: That is not true, of course.

MRS CARNELL: It is true. We actually cannot present the Bill finally until we have the valuations on the table, because the bits - - -

Mr Moore: You should have done the valuation in January.

MRS CARNELL: I am sorry; we made it clear, Mr Moore. Turn to page 2 of the exposure draft presented in December, which made it very clear - - -

Mr Moore: We made it very clear from our vote earlier that you were to do the valuations.

MRS CARNELL: Fine, okay, spot on. Mr Moore, the decision taken by the Assembly to have a 1997 valuation was taken last week. We immediately put in place a requirement to do a 1997 valuation. Mr Moore, as you know from discussions that you and I had, you and other members of the Assembly had not made a decision on whether you were going to support it until Monday of last week. Therefore, it was impossible for us to go ahead with a 1997 valuation until last week. Mr Speaker, we made it very clear that it would take three months for the valuation to be done. Until that valuation is done, the final Bill cannot be put on the table. I made all these points last week in the debate. Mr Speaker, that means that the capacity to actually put a Bill on the table is impossible until we get the valuations back.

Mr Moore: I understand that.

MRS CARNELL: Okay. That means that we are going to have a Bill on the table, probably in June, Mr Speaker, or maybe in late May - I do not know whether we even sit in late May - but certainly in that timeframe. We will then have to pass this Bill very quickly. So, I think it is very important for members to understand right now that that is the reality. We do not want to have a situation in June where we table the Bill in June, require it to be passed in June, and have members say, "Shock, horror! It is all being done too quickly".

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .