Page 2889 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 19 September 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Mulcahy: Who else has got a wage price index? No-one.
MR STANHOPE: We will go to that in a minute. The Commonwealth Grants Commission assesses the taxation effort of every jurisdiction in the context of its capacity. The ACT, as we all know, because of the overwhelming presence of the commonwealth within the territory, has a far lower relative capacity to tax than other places around Australia. Essentially, of course, we cannot impose payroll tax on half of our work force and cannot levy rates against all those commonwealth properties.
The latest figures from the Australian Grants Commission on relative fiscal capacity show that in 2006 the ACT’s own-source revenue is average. In fact, it is lower than in Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania and the Northern Territory. The ACT is not a high-taxing government. We tax at a lower level and a lower rate than Western Australia, South Australia, Tasmania and the Northern Territory. They are on Grants Commission figures.
But let us go to the heart of this debate. It is all right to stand up here today and talk about the outrageous impost of rates and taxes. It behoves the shadow Treasurer and the Leader of the Opposition today to have the courage that the shadow minister for police had in the debate on the budget, the appropriation bill, to stand up and claim definitively, “In government we will abolish the fire levy.”
Mrs Dunne: The prison. The arboretum.
MR STANHOPE: No, the fire levy. At least Mr Pratt had the courage to say it. He had the courage to make an announcement. He said unequivocally, “In government we will abolish the fire levy.” There is $20 million or so. I admire the shadow minister for the courage he showed in the debate because he got up and said, “We will abolish that. That is $20 million which we will simply do without.” He did not then go on and say, “We will not say what we will do without when we abolish the fire levy.” He will not say what they will cut. He will not say whether they will take the $20 million out of emergency services or whether they will take the $20 million out of health or whether they will take the $20 million out of education.
Then again, we get to the position where the shadow minister for education stands with her leader and announces a 12-month inquiry into education, but we do not see much in the way of what a future Liberal government will do about any school that may be closed. How many schools will you reopen?
I prefer the shadow minister for police on this matter of emergency services, a shadow minister with the courage to say, “We will abolish the fire levy. We will not accept that $20 million a year in government.” I urge Mr Pratt to tell us whether or not he is going to replace the $20 million in any way, whether he is going to cut $20 million out of emergency services. It is hard to imagine that he is going to cut the $20 million out of education in an environment where the shadow minister for education essentially has to accept that the Liberal Party’s position at this stage is that the Liberal Party will reopen every school that may be closed. It is going to be difficult to take that $20 million, which Mr Pratt has announced will be abolished and taken from the budget, from education in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .