Page 4225 - Week 14 - Tuesday, 26 November 2013

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

and the 2013-14 budget and all of the associated papers that have been released, they clearly show a detailed analysis of the impacts of tax reform.

Let us remind the Assembly and the shadow treasurer that taxation reform involves more than just changes to stamp duty and rates; it also involves the abolition of insurance taxes that we have talked about today. And for those who are interested, it also involved a cut in payroll tax.

So if you look at the documents contained within the taxation review, the 2012-13 budget, the five-year tax reform plan that was tabled then, the government response to the taxation review, all of the answers to questions on notice over the last 18 months, the additional information that was provided in response to the Assembly motion, new and updated modelling reflecting decisions taken in the 2013-14 budget that was published with the 2013-14 budget, we have provided the Assembly and the community with all of the information in relation to taxation reform.

I need to turn to the fact that this issue was given precedence. In the letter to the Speaker, the Clerk went on to say:

My advice is that the matter does not merit precedence over other business.

So, instead of having a robust debate about tax reform, the opposition is resorting to stunts, rehashing lies and the same, sad, tired, three-word slogans that—

MADAM SPEAKER: Sit down, Mr Barr. It is clearly unparliamentary to imply that the opposition has lied. And there have been plenty of rulings that the accusation that a group of people have lied is the same as saying that each individual member has lied. So I ask you to withdraw “rehashing lies”.

MR BARR: I withdraw, Madam Speaker. They are resorting to stunts and three-word slogans, tired, discredited three-word slogans that see them still on the opposition benches. The Assembly deserves better, the people of Canberra deserve better.

Whilst the opposition will resort to stunts, the government will get on with the job of reforming tax, abolishing stamp duty, abolishing insurance duty and making the territory’s taxes fairer, simpler and more efficient. The government will not be supporting this reckless stunt from the opposition. It should be treated with the contempt it deserves, and we will be voting against it.

MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (4.31): The question here at hand today—and I think it is the threshold question about whether this motion should be supported—is whether or not the Treasurer refused or failed to produce documents or allow the inspection of documents in accordance with the motion that was passed here in this place. The motion called on the government to table by 31 October 2013 any other analysis of the impacts that the taxation reforms implemented to date are expected to have over time.

The intent of the amendment that I moved during that debate was to refine the call for documents that Mr Smyth initially tabled to only include documents that related to the

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video