Page 166 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 6 March 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR STEFANIAK: What do the businesses think, Chief Minister? Their views are mixed, but what about the chamber of commerce and what about the 400 or so businesses that have signed petitions and things in relation to this levy? Chief Minister, for what are you going to use this levy? It all seems very vague. Are you going to extend it to other areas of Canberra? Are you that cash strapped? This is not a good levy. It is not fair. It is not something that induces business confidence in Canberra and it is all very vague. Given the record of this government, I say again: watch this space. Where is it going to be extended to?
The Liberal Party, as my colleague Mr Mulcahy said, will be voting against this bill. I was pleased to see Dr Foskey indicate that she may do the same. I am not 100 per cent sure there, but I doubt very much that the government’s explanation will be satisfactory.
Mr Smyth: It is an each-way bet.
MR STEFANIAK: I hope it is not just an each-way bet. I heard initially that she was thinking of actually supporting it, but I was heartened to hear that she may be voting against it. I certainly hope she will, because this is just another case of having an additional tax. The tax would be unnecessary if you knew how to run the place properly, especially in the very strong economic times that we have, thanks to the very competent federal government on whose coat-tails you are riding in terms of business in Canberra, with very little effort of your own. In fact, you are more likely to put in a whole lot of impediments to business rather than assist it. This is an unfair and unnecessary levy and I would urge other members to oppose it.
MR CORBELL (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for Police and Emergency Services and Minister for Planning) (11.12): Mr Speaker, it is very disappointing to hear today from those opposite their opposition to this proposal. It is disappointing because the government would not be proposing this new levy unless it had widespread support in the property sector and the business sector in the city centre. The answer to that, Mr Speaker, is that it does. It does have strong support from the very people who will be asked to pay it. It has the support of the Property Council of Australia, which has been on the record consistently, including as late as this morning, as urging the opposition to adopt a bipartisan approach and support this legislation. Mr Speaker, it is incredibly disappointing—
Mr Stefaniak: They could do it voluntarily. We wouldn’t mind that.
Mr Mulcahy: It must rankle Mr Speaker—a Labor government. Unbelievable!
MR CORBELL: Mr Speaker, I know that they do not like it that a leading property entity in this city, the entity that represents the interests of large and small building owners, says, “We want to pay this levy and we want this levy put in place in this way.” I welcome the support of the property council.
One of the key reasons that the government is prepared to push forward this levy is that is has the support of the people who, at the end of the day, will be paying it. We also have the support of other entities; in particular, the City Heart Business
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .