Page 1751 - Week 05 - Wednesday, 5 May 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR SPEAKER: Mr Seselja, a supplementary question?
MR SESELJA: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Treasurer, will your massive tax on homes assist or hinder the long-term approach to sustainable public transport?
MS GALLAGHER: As I have already outlined, I do not believe there will be negative impacts from applying the law as it is now, and we have done some pretty rigorous work around this. This revenue forecast is based on looking back five years, applying a site-by-site valuation, applying the legislation as it stands now, and putting a bit of conservatism in it. That is what we have done with the revenue forecasts around change of use. I do not apologise, and I do not think the community would expect me to ignore advice that says, “You are not recouping as much revenue as you should under change of use.” If you do not like change of use then bring the legislation forward and have an honest debate about it. But this is legislation that has been debated in this house and approved by this Assembly.
Mr Seselja: Mr Speaker, on a point of order, I know she does not want to answer specific questions, but it is on relevance. It is about whether or not this tax and the enforcement of it through the budget will hinder or help the long-term approach to sustainable public transport. She has not addressed the question.
MS GALLAGHER: I have, Mr Speaker. Whether it is the answer he wants, I have said that we do not expect to see negative impacts from applying the current change of use arrangements across the board. We will work with industry and we have heard what industry have said about concern about development. I have listened to them and I have met with them and we have had many discussions about change of use. And do you know what? Industry accept that they need to pay more around some of these developments. They have said that to me. They have acknowledged in person that they have been getting it pretty good under the fixed charge arrangements and they understand the government’s need to respond. The disagreement, I think, is around how much the increase is, and there are mixed views around that. But I do not believe that this government can ignore the law as it stands, and that is what the opposition wants me to do.
MR SPEAKER: Mr Hargreaves, a supplementary question?
MR HARGREAVES: Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. My question to the Treasurer on this issue is: how is the government working with industry to address this change of use charge?
MS GALLAGHER: I thank Mr Hargreaves for the question. We have been working with industry on the change of use charge codification project since last year’s budget. There is a draft report that has been put out that has received mixed responses from industry. I think if anyone reads it they can see in the attachments at the back what industry is saying about it.
In response to industry concerns, we have not sought to codify in this budget. We have extended the consultation time allowed for submissions to be fed into the draft
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video