Page 232 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 6 March 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
first couple of months of this year we will have released another additional 500 blocks. So we are putting our foot on the pedal when it comes to land release and we will continue to do so. Further releases are proposed in areas of Gungahlin this calendar year, as well as the redevelopment opportunities that continue to exist around the city.
Ultimately, the causes of the housing affordability crisis are many, and I think all speakers in the debate have reflected on the complexity of this matter. Land supply is a factor, but it is not the only factor. I would argue that one of the more significant factors over and above land supply is taxation policy. In particular, the provisions for negative gearing and capital gains encourage speculative activity in the housing market so that people can get a windfall return in a short time from buying and selling property.
I think we should have a look at all of those policies because they are not serving us well. They have led to massive escalation in house prices because of a very high level of speculative activity. These are matters that we should consider. (Time expired.)
MR STEFANIAK (Ginninderra—Leader of the Opposition) (5.08): I do not know how long I have to speak; it is probably about three minutes.
I beg to differ with Mr Corbell. For a start, given that the housing shortage is not unique to the ACT, there may be some reason for a revised capital gains tax to encourage people to invest in property. Sydney, Melbourne, Perth and other cities have a similar problem at present and we should acknowledge that.
Any change to negative gearing would affect a lot of mum and dad investors. About 78 per cent of people who own property apart from their own home own only one extra property. Then there are about 10 per cent or more who own two to five. You are talking about a lot of mum and dad investors there that I would have thought you would want to encourage to invest. It is not an easy question and there are no absolute quick-fix solutions.
To give a little history, Mr Corbell, when we came to government back in 1995, we inherited a glut of properties on the market. The previous cash-strapped Labor government had been trying to get a bit of revenue in, and it took about three or four years to get the market back into sync. One thing I could say about your government is that you have been very slow to do a lot of things, and I do welcome at least some land releases now, but quite clearly, as Mr Seselja has quite eloquently pointed out, you have not done that particularly well.
In the short time I have, I will offer just a few ideas for you to look at. For starters, as Mrs Burke has indicated, there were a lot of recommendations made back in 2002 by the housing affordability task force. I just wonder how many of those have actually been actioned. There are some things you can do. You can provide better stamp duty concessions to first home buyers. Why decrease the threshold when average house prices are increasing? I can recall—I think it was in 2004, under Mr Quinlan—a threshold of $374,000. Someone sent me an email a couple of days ago saying that has now decreased to $331,000.
Mr Seselja: Prices must have gone down in that time. They must have gone down.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .