Page 2480 - Week 06 - Thursday, 23 June 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
This provision was singled out because it is one instance where there really was the real prospect of additional tax being levied on landowners and the Assembly may not agree with it. Further, there is arguably the capacity, within the power provided, for it to go beyond the objective of the bill to charge the value of the right being assigned. It is for these reasons that we have specifically included an alternative commencement provision.
There are 25 amendments and I make the point to members, given that there appears to be some concern about debating them together, that 17 of the 25 are about moving definitions or omitting clauses based on the other changes. Whilst for drafting purposes there are 25 changes, this is simply not the reality in terms of the operation of the scheme. As I said, there are seven substantive changes.
I would also like to acknowledge the very constructive process that has occurred between my office and the minister’s office and the department officials who provided very constructive feedback on our proposed amendments, which we have responded to. I would like to express my thanks and hope this sets a precedent for future engagement and collaborative approach to making laws. (Time expired.)
MS GALLAGHER (Molonglo—Chief Minister, Minister for Health, Minister for Industrial Relations and Treasurer) (8.26): The government will be supporting the amendments put forward by Ms Hunter today. We believe they are a demonstration of what can be achieved when two parties work together to deliver a particular outcome. As Ms Hunter said, there are seven main amendments with a number of consequential amendments, and they really do cover the areas that were due to be covered by regulation under the government’s proposal. But we accept that there is a balance to be found between flexibility and certainty that is provided by including elements of what we had intended to be in regulations into the main body of the legislation. I think the discussions that have been had between my office and the Greens have been very good in trying to find the right flexibility balance and in providing that, and certainty, in the legislation.
It is important when we are implementing improvements to the old change of use charges, now to be known as lease variation charges, that we make it clear that processes around how the lease variation charges are to be levied are open and transparent. I think the amendments around disclosing remissions and providing that information on a register are very important improvements which I am very happy to support.
The legislative reform which has been undertaken in this area has never been around trying to create a system where, as I think Mr Seselja indicated yesterday or on Tuesday in the in-principle stage, corruptions or deals could enter the property market with the government. This started as a journey where we identified that a fixed charge was being applied and arrangements had been done without the knowledge or authority of any member in this place which has resulted in a significant windfall gain to the property sector. We identified the problem. We are fixing the problem. The problem was fixed. It was not—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video