Page 1833 - Week 06 - Thursday, 9 May 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
This bill proffered up as a tax reduction bill by the Treasurer betrays the trust of Canberrans. Let us look at the basic impacts. It is cold comfort that Canberrans will be left with the consolation that 10 or 20 years from now they will no longer have to pay stamp duty. In many cases they have already paid that duty, yet are left now with tripled general rates charges. It is worth while reminding members in this chamber that Canberrans already pay some of the highest rates in this country—and, even with that, they are constantly having to remind this government to cut the grass, fix the roads and pick up the rubbish.
I think the recent incident involving the grassfire in Macarthur is very instructive. Residents kept asking for the nearby pasture to be mowed, but were simply handballed from one department to another. What happened? Of course, the fears of the residents were realised; there was a grassfire there and who knows how far that might have gone. The problem for residents is that their requests were not met by their government; the rates that they paid for services did not deliver.
In exchange for the government’s indifference on this issue, rates are rising, and they will continue to do so under this government’s tax reform. To date, over the last 12 years of this government, general rates have more than doubled in some suburbs. Banks has had an increase of 152 per cent, Charnwood an increase of 158 per cent, Chisholm an increase of 130 per cent and Spence an increase of 148 per cent.
The truth is that the government’s tax reform and their plans to increase general rates are on top of the increases I have just mentioned. The Treasurer himself could not give any assurances or certainty to Canberrans regarding their rates. We recall last year when he said, “The capacity to predict that far ahead exactly what the rates will be at that point is not possible at this time.” It raises the question: why not? If you know what you are getting rid of and you know what you have to allocate to cover that loss then surely you must have some knowledge as to what your reforms will do. The truth is that as we are debating this bill today Canberrans still have no certainty on the future of their rates in relation to the Treasurer’s tax reforms. The initiatives in today’s bills are a smokescreen to bamboozle Canberrans into accepting his plan to simply triple their rates.
Let us look at the insidiousness of Mr Barr’s tax reforms. One of the key reasons the Canberra Liberals opposed the Treasurer’s tax reforms was the impact of unreasonable general rate increases on Canberra home owners, especially those on low or fixed incomes. We were also concerned that it would make it more difficult for retirees to continue to live independently. In this regard, it is worth noting that section 46(2)(f) seeks to expand the eligibility criteria for rates deferral for households with at least one owner who is 65 years old or older.
The problem with that, of course—it is worth noting—is that these deferrals are indefinite and incur an interest charge, all of which is payable on the sale or often the death of the owner. In effect, you have a de facto death tax: just keep putting it off and we will take it when you are gone. This is insidious; it foretells that general rates will increase to the extent that more seniors will have problems paying them. You put this provision in because you know the effect. The effect is that it will get harder and harder for older Canberrans to stay in their homes. In this light, this initiative to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video