Page 4158 - Week 13 - Thursday, 14 December 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In its briefing to my office the ACT Treasury conceded that the method of imposing this new charge on utility providers was considered too complicated and impractical in its original form in the June budget. It had to be modified from a permit to a tax to have any chance of being remotely workable. Even now, the government are still not able to confirm the exact methodology by which the key measurement of utility network route length will be taxed. Instead—and I am using their words—they are relying on informed guesswork, coupled with assurances that agreement with the utility providers will eventually be achieved.
It is now mid-December and the tax is expected to be effective on 1 January. I think Treasury had better get a wriggle on in finalising these somewhat important details before letting it loose on an unsuspecting ACT public. As I understand it, as of yesterday they still had not sorted out how on earth Telstra is meant to go and measure the length of every telephone cable in Canberra.
Finally, Mr Stanhope has indicated that he intends to proportionally increase funding for pensioner rebates on energy, water and sewerage bills in order to reduce the impact of this tax on pensioners and Department of Veterans’ Affairs gold card holders. Yet, strangely, there was no mention of doing this in respect of the extra telecommunications costs these people are expected to endure. Consequently, it seems that pensioners and Department of Veterans’ Affairs gold card holders, who are some of the most vulnerable members of our community, will simply be forced to cover the full cost of this new tax applying to telecommunications.
How about those people on fixed incomes and families with already cash-strapped budgets, thanks to the increased rates and charges introduced in the ACT 2006-07 budget, being reflected in new bills almost every day as we sit this week, which will see their costs of living go up dramatically? It seems that this Labor government is happy for them just to wear the extra costs. Let us hope they remember this treatment come 2008, when the arrogance behind this budget can finally be brought to account by the people of Canberra.
What is the expected revenue return from all this confusion, grief and upset? The government’s current estimates on financial returns as a result of this tax are $7.967 million in the first six months of operation, rising to approximately $16 million in future years. Is an extra $16 million in revenue worth all the trouble and adverse publicity that we have received from one end of Australia to the other? Surely, if this Labor government tried a little harder in making its service delivery more efficient and stopped pouring money into bloating the public sector, it could easily find this money without slapping a new tax on the people of Canberra, which is estimated to amount to an extra $137 per household.
Our opposition to the passage of this bill is entirely consistent with our opposition earlier this year to the 2006-07 ACT budget in its entirety. We believe now, as we did then, that this legislation represents part of that horror budget that aimed to tax Canberrans out of existence and perpetuate the management of inefficient government in this territory. Our belief in a smaller approach to government that focuses on providing the community with efficient services in core areas fundamentally conflicts
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .