Page 1929 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 3 June 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
from stamp duty in this budget over the forward estimates, you see that by the end of these forward estimates this government is going to be taking $259 million in stamp duty. That is this tax that the government said it was going to remove. Remember back in 2011-12: “We are getting rid of stamp duty.” That was the promise. It said, “There will be pain on rates but we are getting rid of stamp duty.” What we see is that in actual fact during the budget period stamp duty goes up by $39 million. So the revenue taken by this government on stamp duty continues to rise. This is a government that said one thing at the last election and is doing entirely another.
The problem is out there in the suburbs for tens of thousands of Canberrans. They feel this pain every year. They have to pay their rates year on year. There are many people out there on fixed incomes—they might be pensioners—or on low incomes who, on top of the licence fees, on top of the rego, on top of every other fee and charge, have rates that are going through the roof. That is simply unfair.
Although the grab of stamp duty is going up from this government, I would make this case about the reduction, if it ever comes in any substantive way, in stamp duty. Firstly, that will have to go onto people’s rates; the remaining $259 million will be paid by people in rates. But the stamp duty is a relatively small portion in terms of the reduction when you purchase a home. That often is paid off over 25 years. People do not buy a home every year, but people pay rates every year. The decision about when people buy a home is not made every year.
The great irony from those opposite is that they say, “We want to help people get into the housing market.” So do we. In this budget, they are ripping millions of dollars out of the first home owner concession. They are saying, “We really want to try and help first home owners. We want to help people get into the market. That is part of the objective of removing stamp duty.” At the same time, they are ripping millions of dollars out of concessions, out of support for first home owners. It makes an absolute nonsense of much of the government’s rhetoric.
When we look across the budget, other than the tens of millions of dollars there for light rail, the cuts for first home owners and the rates, we do see some elements that we support. As I said, we do want to see money to go into health; we do want to see money going into education. But we see this sneaky agenda from the government where the minister coming in here talking about his commitment to health is the same minister that has just cut 60 beds from the University of Canberra hospital and then tried to say, “No, they were never beds; they were exercise equipment. A pool is a bed; a gym bike is a bed.” That is the sort of spin that Labor has.
Mr Corbell interjecting—
MR HANSON: Madam Assistant Speaker, he is a bit sensitive over there. Mr Corbell is a bit sensitive.
Another classic is the extra funding for police. The way this works is that you rip $15 million out of the police capital budget. That is to go. You go and rip $15 million out. You then put $2 million or $3 million back and you say, “Look: extra funding for police.” It is a clever way of doing it, isn’t it, Madam Assistant Speaker? You rip $15 million out, put $3 million back and call that extra funding for police. I can tell
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video