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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 7 Hansard (27 June) . . Page.. 1967 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

determine what should be the appropriate level of value for the purposes of land tax and rating. That is the effect of this legislation.

I have only just seen Mr Quinlan's amendments that deal with the removal of the right of appeal, Mr Speaker, and I am getting advice about this. It seems to me that what the bill does is to replace an existing discretion by the Commissioner for Revenue with a formula which determines what the liability will be based on evaluation. A formula is set out quite clearly in the bill and it would seem to me that that removes any discretionary power exercised by the commissioner. What then would it be that a person would appeal against should there be a desire to object to that particular valuation?

I have to get further advice but as I understand it there is a capacity already in the legislation for people to be able to object to things which are subject to external factors such as the level of valuation of a property. For example, if a person's property overall is valued at a certain amount, a person has a right to appeal against that valuation, and people often do. But the provisions in this bill, as I understand it, replace the capacity of the commissioner to make a discretionary decision with a formula which sets out how the determination will be made.

I would like Mr Quinlan, in his speech during the detail stage of the bill, to explain what part of that formula could be appealed against. I am not sure how he gets to that point. I would like to hear what the arguments are for that. It seems to me that the formula is perfectly straightforward, and the idea of having a right to appeal against the formula does not make a great deal of sense; but, again, I am in Mr Quinlan's hands about how that would work.

I do not particularly wish to reduce people's rights on appeal from decisions of the Commissioner for Revenue, but it seems to me that if people, for example, are given the right to appeal against the formulation of the formula, the provisions that appear in the formula, then they are appealing against a decision that has been made by the Assembly that this formula will apply in these calculations. If it relates to the valuation that underpins the formula, they can already appeal against that, as I understand it. So I am not sure what the appeal right gives rise to, and I ask Mr Quinlan to explain in detail how that would work.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Clause 1 agreed to.

Clause 2.

MR HUMPHRIES (Treasurer, Attorney-General and Minister for Justice and Community Safety) (10.58): Mr Speaker, I move:

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