Hansard debates

Brad ROWSWELL (Sandringham) (16:40): I also rise to speak on the government amendments to the State Taxation Acts and Other Acts Amendment Bill 2023. At the outset, Deputy Speaker, may I indicate to you and to the house that the opposition supports some components and opposes others within the government amendments package. Therefore I ask that when the question is put the person in the chair at the time splits the question at the conclusion of debate.

I have a couple of points on the amendments before us today. Firstly, the timing of the amendments – I do not blame the Treasurer’s staff for this by any stretch; I know that they have been working night and day to get these amendments to the Parliament for us to consider here. But I do think it is highly unusual, perhaps unacceptable, for these amendments to be provided at such a late stage in the day. I want to remind the house of just how we have come to this point in time. This bill was announced by the Treasurer at a Property Council of Australia breakfast unbeknownst to the property council. The Treasurer was invited to address the media, who had legitimate questions about this particular bill, and squibbed that opportunity until very late in the day when he did address the media.

Now we are discovering how this government does business, as this government shares with the Victorian people just how it will increase new taxes 52 and 53. These two new taxes are taxes that the Victorian people simply cannot deal with at this time. We know that Victoria is the highest taxed state in the nation. We have known that for some time. Those are not my words; they are the words of the independent Parliamentary Budget Office, which this side of the chamber supports wholeheartedly. We know that we have a higher amount of debt than any other state in the nation. We know that we are paying a higher amount of interest per day than any other state in the nation, and we know that that those interest repayments are subjected to Reserve Bank of Australia decisions. But equally those interest payments mean that the state of Victoria cannot spend and invest the money at this time on the infrastructure that our community needs and the services that our community needs. If I look around the chamber and around the state, all I see, frankly, are the needs of our fellow Victorians.

Specifically on the amendments before the chamber that we are considering at the moment that the Assistant Treasurer introduced – he is no longer here, but hopefully he will keep us company in the not too distant future – I think they are a little bit untidy, and this has only been brought to my attention in recent moments. The way that they are drafted means that I will need to move a couple of amendments to the amendments before the chamber at the moment in order to articulate the opposition’s position on the amendments before us. I draw the house’s attention to amendment 1, 27A, which increases the land tax amount from 1 per cent on a vacant residential body to 3 per cent over successive years and 3 per cent consistently thereafter. Still on clause 1 of that amendment, 27B, the holiday home exemption is, as I have indicated to the Treasurer’s office, something that we do support. Clunky as it may be, because the government’s drafted amendments include a clause that we oppose and a clause that we support all within the same amendment, I move:

That the words ‘New Clauses to follow Clause 27’ be omitted and replaced with ‘New Clause to follow Clause 27’ from further amendment 1.

I am doing this for a very sensible reason, and that is that on this side of the house we do not believe that Victoria should be imposed with new taxes. We do not believe that without a plan to pay off our debt – and again, do not ask me, ask the Auditor-General, who released his report last Friday – there should be no new taxes introduced in this state. This bill introduces a new vacant residential land tax, it introduces an expanded land tax and it introduces a tax on unimproved land. For as long as this government does not have a plan to pay down the debt – not my words, but what was intimated in the Auditor-General’s report of last Friday – and for as long as this government continues to waste at the rapid rate at which it does – every major project they have touched is either over budget or over time, that is their record over the last nine years – for as long as they do not have a plan to address waste, no new taxes should be introduced. Just as households, just as businesses right around this state are required to do, we should, as a state, be able to live within our means. I am sorry to say that under the leadership of this government that is simply not possible.

In relation to the holiday home exemption, we believe that this is a sensible amendment. In fact we will be supporting this amendment. We will be supporting this amendment because it expands the requirement for occupancy of a holiday home from simply the owner of that property to the owner’s family as well. We think that is an entirely sensible amendment, and therefore we will be supporting that, which is why I have moved the amendment that I have.

I have further bad news for the house – and again this is the state of things, and I am frankly sorry that it is the state of things – but I also need to move a second amendment in relation to amendment 2 proposed by the government to simply separate out two of the new sections, 88EA and 88EB. I am doing that because in amendment 2 proposed by the government we do not agree with new section 88EA, we do not agree with 88EB but we do agree with 88EC. Therefore I further move:

That the words ‘New sections 88EA to 88EC inserted’ be omitted and replaced with ‘New section 88EC inserted’ from further amendment 2.

The reason why I have moved this motion, untidy as it may be on the last sitting day of this parliamentary year, is because we disagree with 88EA, we disagree with 88EB but we support 88EC. 88EC addresses the publication of the report on exemption and concession. Frankly, any opportunity for there to be reporting on public matters when it comes to public cash – that transparency is something that we do support. Further, I indicate that we intend to support amendments 3, 4, 5 and 6 but oppose, in whole, amendment 7. Again, amendment 7 introduces or increases tax on vacant residential land from 1 per cent to 3 per cent over successive years.

I will not speak for much longer other than to say this: we would not be in this situation, considering on the last sitting day of this year a tax bill that imposes an unnecessary burden, in my view, on our fellow Victorians, if it was not for the dirty deal that was done between the government and the Greens to get this through. Frankly, the dirty deal that was done between the Greens party and the Allan Labor government to get this through – no Victorian should be surprised that it took this dirty deal to be done for new taxes 25 days before Christmas to be imposed upon Victorians, but that is the matter that we are considering here. I know that at this point in our history, at this point in our calendar, moments before Christmas, there are families right around this state who are struggling. There are families right around this state who are struggling to make ends meet and who want to do the very best that they can for their family, for their children, for their neighbours within their community. That is what they want to do: they want to celebrate a happy Christmas, perhaps even a holy Christmas. But because of taxes imposed on them by this government, some 53 new or increased taxes over the last nine years, their aspiration to live their best lives, their aspiration to have the very best Christmas that they can, is going to be that much harder.

Mary-Anne Thomas: On a point of order, Deputy Speaker, on relevance, the member is using this opportunity to stray far and wide, and I would ask that you bring him back to speak to the amendments to the amended bill that he is seeking to prosecute.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Sandringham to continue on the amendments.

Brad ROWSWELL: Indeed I will, because there are new taxes introduced in this bill.

Members interjecting.

Brad ROWSWELL: There are – there are new taxes introduced in this bill. Someone has got to pay for those new taxes. It probably will not be the minister at the table, but it might be someone else who can least afford it. And that is the point: weeks before Christmas, at a time when families are trying to make ends meet and put food on the table during a cost-of-living crisis, it is on the heads of government ministers and government members over the last nine years who have presided over 53 new or increased taxes that are making life that much harder for Victorians, and that is something that this government should hold its head in absolute shame over.

I encourage the chamber to consider the amendments that I have moved. I say to the government – and I believe that the Treasurer’s office will concur with this point – that what I have tried to do, leading this matter on behalf the coalition, is work constructively with the government when the opportunity has been presented. It would be helpful if the government would agree to the amendments that I have moved during the course of this contribution, which would provide a much cleaner and clearer way of indicating where the government sits on matters which it believes to be true and where the opposition sits on matters as well. I am just sorry to say that that was not considered when these amendments were presented to the house moments ago. I look forward to making a further contribution when the time permits.