Page 2181 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 21 June 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Not only is it initially set by the Treasurer at a time of her choosing, but, because it is set by regulation, the Treasurer can change that fee, that tax, without notice. For instance, the Treasurer could choose to change the fee on the last sitting day of the Legislative Assembly in a particular year. It would be impossible for this Legislative Assembly to disallow that charge, that tax, until late February or early March, meaning that there could be four months whereby a fee, a tax, could be levied and the people of the ACT would have no recourse. We could eventually disallow that fee or tax, but the people who had already paid it would have no recompense. They would have no recourse to a refund.
This is an entirely inappropriate process. It is unconscionable, for members of the Legislative Assembly to vote away their responsibilities in setting taxes on behalf of the people of the ACT and to derogate that responsibility to the Treasurer. This is the worst part of the legislation as far as I am concerned. It has real constitutional implications for the ACT Legislative Assembly. This provision alone should be sufficient for us to oppose this legislation.
This is bad legislation from go to whoa. The handling of it by this government has been appalling. The fact that we are here today debating this significant change in legislation without seeing all of the regulations which underpin it, without seeing the fee schedules which underpin it, is a repetition of what we have seen constantly from this government over the last few years. We saw it with the liquor licensing regime that came in: “Trust us. Pass the legislation and then you’ll see the fee schedule and the regulations.” It should not be done like this.
With major pieces of legislation which impact so significantly on the people of the ACT, it should be all on the table together. Like the government’s health promises before the last election, it should all be on the table so that the people of the ACT can see it as a whole, so they can see all that it does and the whole impact before we agree to pass it in this place.
That the Labor Party and the Greens will collude together to pass this legislation today shows that they have no regard for the people of the ACT. They have no understanding of their powers and responsibilities as legislators. That they are prepared to derogate this important responsibility from this place to the office of the Treasurer is entirely inappropriate.
MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (9.09): Any time your explanatory memorandum is longer than the act that you are attempting to explain, you are probably in trouble. The problem with this bill is that the explanatory memorandum is longer than the bill. If you looked for a more convoluted, clunky, dishonest piece of legislation that has ever come before the Assembly, I would be very surprised if you could find such an act.
There is a famous judicial quote relating to statutory drafting that claimed that the legislation was so unclear that it would defy the oracles of Delphi to interpret it. I do not think that judge has seen this particular piece of proposed legislation. For a law that is supposed to bring certainty to the industry, you could not find a better way to hide the true intent than in the language and structure of this bill.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video