Page 2284 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 28 August 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Despite its vast budget, the problems with the Department of Treasury continue without any evident end in sight. Indeed in estimates hearings the Treasurer was quite critical of anyone who dared to question his government’s performance in this area. I fear that this attitude does not bode well for the future.
The Treasurer has continued to demonstrate that he does not understand the flow-on effects of high taxes. For example, he talks continuously about his commitment to affordable housing, but he does not see any connection with the exorbitant property charges that affect property owners and renters alike. He has rejected that on many occasions. The Treasury has continued its unofficial practice of drastic underestimation of territory revenue. This has been used by the government to justify its continuing increases in rates and charges, which continue to cripple ACT residents.
Contrary to what the government would have us believe, this year has seen more increases in taxation and more attempts by the government to obfuscate these increases simply as a way of placating the public. We have seen the Treasurer painting an inaccurate picture to the public in relation to his government’s budget performance. He has continued to cite an incorrect surplus figure, which has been widely criticised as an accounting sleight of hand.
We have also seen the reaction of the Treasurer to criticism of his government’s profligacy. This has been clear in Mr Stanhope’s dealings with the property sector, who have voiced criticism of the tax burden on property owners in the ACT. Instead of listening to these concerns—concerns which are quite legitimate—the Chief Minister and Treasurer has denigrated with all manner of names and descriptions those who criticise his government’s punitive taxation increases, the most popular of which is his reference to the property council as the “daytime branch of the Liberal Party”.
I mentioned it to Tony Hedley last night. I asked him how he was as chairman of this. I think he finds it amusing. But he also thinks it is pretty puerile when they do represent such a substantial group of investors and developers in this city. It is a pity that, when people want to seriously engage in debate, we do get to that level. They have a very important contribution to make—they are very much part of the economic development that the Chief Minister seeks to claim credit for.
I also reiterate the concerns I have about superannuation and operating performance. Despite the massive taxation, the ACT government is projected to achieve only a small surplus this year and then go back into deficit in the subsequent three years.
I have repeatedly raised objections to the false claims of a surplus of $39.3 million in 2006-07 and $103 million in 2007-08, based on including expected long-term capital gains and superannuation assets in its operating performance. Without including these expected gains, there was a deficit of $29 million in 2006-07 and an estimated surplus of only $13.5 million in 2007-08, with a projected deficit totalling $140.1 million in the forward years, notwithstanding the changes that occurred recently.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .