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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 5 Hansard (13 May) . . Page.. 1337 ..

MRS CARNELL (continuing):

Do you see what she did? She announced it in September, as I did, and brought it in in the following July, in exactly the way I am doing it, because you cannot do it in any other way, Mr Speaker. You cannot bring down a budget in September and introduce it at any other time than 1 July, because that is the new rating year.

MR SPEAKER: Of course. That makes sense.

MRS CARNELL: That makes everything quite relevant. Mr Whitecross commented that there was something funny about our introduction time. It is very much in line with the way that Ms Follett was planning to do it. Mr Speaker, Ms Follett then went on to say:

This will bring the ACT into line with practices in other States, but will remain one of the most generous rates concessions in the country.

Mr Speaker, the same comments were made about revenue initiatives. I can table the statement by Rosemary Follett for the 1993-94 budget. But, most importantly, Mr Speaker, this approach came from ACTCOSS. It came from their budget submission, for probably both last year and this year. In recommendation 17 of their budget submission they recommend that concessions on rates be abolished - not just grandfathered, but abolished - except for those with dependent children, and that a rates deferral scheme be established for those who find it hard to pay. Mr Speaker, we have a rates deferral system in place. We have upgraded that. We have made it more accessible for pensioners.

In line with our consultative approach on our budget, listening to all groups, including ACTCOSS, we believe that this is an appropriate approach. It was certainly not an easy decision, as Rosemary Follett found when she attempted to do it. It is a decision that will mean that people who become pensioners after 1 July will end up with a cap on the amount of rates rebate that they can claim. But the cap that we have put on is very much in line with other States, Mr Speaker, and any pensioner who has trouble paying will be able to defer their rates against their estate. I think that is a very appropriate approach. It means that no pensioner will be in a position where they might have to sell their house to pay their rates. They are in a position to defer them against their estate. Mr Speaker, I am not sure that we should be giving tax breaks to people that basically will be passed on to their children, but obviously those opposite believe that that is an appropriate approach.

We have also spent some time speaking to the Council on the Ageing on this and they agree as well. You have not heard the Council on the Ageing out saying, "Shock, horror; pensioner capping", the reason being that they were consulted and they actually - - -

Mr Whitecross: They would not be game.

Ms McRae: They were told.

MRS CARNELL: No, not at all; quite the opposite, Mr Speaker. They believe very strongly that these sorts of concessions need to be targeted to the people who need them most, as do ACTCOSS, and as do most other organisations.

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