Page 1251 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 3 April 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
There are other things to be positive about. I am glad that the ACT government has been proactively promoting its existing rates deferral scheme as a result of my motion last November. I have spoken to a number of people who have been recipients of the letter from the government pointing out the existing rates deferral scheme. I truly look forward to hearing about increased training and better guidelines for staff in the revenue office to recognise people who are suffering from financial hardship.
This is something which we have talked about in the past and I have had a number of constituent representations about. I look forward also to, as a result of my motion last year, the ACT government working with the federal government and with other states and territories to introduce systems so that states and territories can have access to more Centrelink and tax information, so that they can determine the eligibility of their residents for concessions. I would also like to see as a result of the motion the improved cost of living statement in the budget papers. Progress against all of this is due to be reported in August this year.
Another thing that is happening as a result of continual pressure from this chamber, both from the Liberal Party and from me, and from committee inquiries, is a review of the rates system. That review of the rates system is now including mention of land tax. I note that land tax has been increasing faster than rates. This review is to be made public. I think that this is really important.
The Greens support the basic thrust of moving from stamp duty to rates, which could otherwise be described as moving from a transactional rates government revenue system to an annual government revenue system. When you put it like that, it makes total sense. The government has to pay for its costs on an annual basis, so it is fair enough that that is what its revenue base is based on. However, it is not clear that it is fair that we have removed stamp duty, which was a market value based system. The rates system is a land value based system. All the evidence that we are aware of would suggest that a market-based system is fairer than a land value based system. That is something I have been pushing, and it is something that I believe will be looked at in this review, which will become public, by the government of rates and land tax.
Moving on from rates, there are currently two programs that assist low income Canberrans to pay their traffic and parking fines. The first allows people to pay in instalments. The second, the work and development program, allows people to work off a fine by making an alternative contribution to the community or getting help for the problems in their life which may well have led to the fine. For example, they can work at not-for-profits such as Ted Noffs or Vinnies, attend workshops run by Care Financial Counselling Service or have one-to-one counselling with them, or participate in residential drug and alcohol programs.
To the best of my knowledge, this has resulted in the fact there have been no incarcerations in the past 10 years in the ACT purely on the basis of inability to pay a fine. As a jurisdiction, we are faring better than others in this regard. I imagine that many members are aware of a recent crowd-funding campaign raising funds for women in Western Australia who have been incarcerated because of an inability to pay fines. Thankfully, that is not the situation here in the ACT. I guess we are also all
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video