Page 2597 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 25 September 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
would be to increase this scheme which would apply to everyone, rather than just to designated properties. The December 2006 median price was $398,000, and, given that house prices have increased significantly since then, it would not be unreasonable to extend the scheme to $398,000. Alternatively, if the government would prefer to offer greater assistance at the lower end of the market, it could just reduce the duty payable from $17.40 per $100 for houses between $295,000 and $365,000 to a lower amount that reflects the cost of the current initiative.
Mr Deputy Speaker, stamp duty and land tax are instruments which the government has at its disposal and which have, I believe, greater potential to deliver flexibility and affordability at the lower end of the market. As well as this, the government can also offer the deferral scheme for those who might prefer to defer it if they could be given the option at the current rate, or take the discount rate if they pay it now.
If the government have money to spend to help first home buyers there are other ways that they could have a long-term benefit, rather than simply adding to the home buyer’s debt. The scheme could be tied in, for instance, to sustainability initiatives. Five-star energy efficiency housing requirements are a good first step and ensure that all the basic principles are covered, but they do not consider the embodied energy of your house, and there is certainly a lot more that could be done to reduce the ecological footprint of new homes.
Rather than taxing people for the number of windows that they have—which of course may mean that they are consuming more solar energy—the Greens would have a proposal which would actually reduce stamp duty and other charges where sustainability is part of the design of a house. So rather than stamp duty concessions we could be offering building subsidies for energy efficient construction, and that way people could spend a little more on the land, especially if they knew that it delivered good solar access. If they know that the government will then help them build a good house, a house which will reduce bills in time, it will make it easier for them to make these repayments on stamp duty and so on in the future.
Alternatively, the government could be spending more money on public transport and infrastructure for the new suburbs to make them able to cope with energy decentralisation, water schemes which send grey water from individual houses out into community parks and so on, and other future challenges which I am quite sure that the government is going to need to be introducing in the very near future.
If the government wants to spend public money, this will achieve two aims: to help individuals realise home ownership as well as deliver community benefit that will help those individuals in the future, rather than just lumping them with some extra debt. This achieves real outcomes for the individuals in the community and encourages good building practices and innovation and uses our resources more wisely.
Of course, the other part of the legislation which the Greens do support without reservation and congratulate the government on is the stamp duty exemption for community housing. It is a good initiative, and we applaud the government for it. We support the action plan. We believe that encouraging an increase in community housing will be a good thing for the people of Canberra and will deliver more housing,
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .