Skip to content Skip to main navigation

ACT Budget 06: revenue raisers and savings

Kerces 6 June 2006 15

There has been much talk of this year’s budget being a “tough” one, despite a lack of leaks to back this up. Not even the Opposition was given access to the budget papers before today, which has apparently happened in the past (I was told with some surprise by a mainstream journalist that I was lucky to have gotten into the lockup under the auspices of the RiotACT given the treatment we’ve handed out to the government [and everyone else] over the years). Well tough the budget may be, with a range of rises in revenue-raising taxes and levies, but it seems to me that it is a big change in direction (disclaimer here: I am in no way an economist and am basing my assessments on a probably haphazard reading of the mass of material that was dumped in my arms earlier today).

This year’s budget represents a change for the government because it is based on Government Finance Statistics (GFS) rather than Australian Accounting Standards. The main difference this makes to the bottom line is that operating revenues no longer include money made from land sales and unexpected stock market gains on superannuation investments. In the past, these one off income amounts have been included in operating revenue and thus decisions about recurrent spending have been made taking these amounts as granted. Under the GFS system the ACT has a forecast deficit of $80.3 million in 2006-07, another deficit of $40.7 million in 07-08 and then surpluses of $18.3 million in 08-09 rising to a surplus of $67.7 million the following year.

Mr Stanhope’s main point of the day was that the ACT has services which cost 20 per cent more than the national average and a tax rate which is 11 per cent below the national average, and that these two numbers just plain do not work together. To fix this there are a number of measures to cut back on expenditure, including combining departments, cutting jobs (it was strongly emphasised that this will happen through natural attrition and voluntary redundancies), closing schools, decreasing superannuation payments to new public servants, new MLAs, senior executive service, MLA staff and the judiciary. There are also a range of increased rates and levies.

The revenue raisers in the budget are:
* a 6 per cent increase in rates as well as future rate rises being indexed to the Wage Price Index. Mr Stanhope said this would amount to an average increase of $1 a day per household;
* a new fire levy of $84 per year which will be included in each household’s general rates notices. It is expected this will raise $20 million a year. People on low incomes will only pay half of this;
* changing the eligibility criteria for the Home Buyer Concession Scheme (presumably meaning less people will be eligible);
* a new call-out fee for false alarms for the fire brigade of $200 per residential and $500 per commercial building;
* an increase in the ambulance levy currently charged to health funds for individuals and families who have ambulance cover. This levy will now be $85 per individual and $170 per family. People on pensions will not be charged this levy;
* full cost recovery for ACT Workcover’s services and successful prosecutions;
* a Utility Land Use Permit will be introduced for sewerage, water, electricity, gas and phone lines;
*development application fees will be raised; and
* a water fee will be introduced “through an increase of 30 cents per kilolitre in the water abstraction charge” (I couldn’t work out what this meant).

The Emergency Services Authority is to become part of the Department of Justice and Community Safety, although Minister Simon Corbell said this will not affect the autonomy of the fire brigade, ambulance services, rural fire services or state emergency services. A new department called the Central Regulatory Office will be created, combining the Office of Fair Trading, the Registrar-General’s office, ACT Workcover, licensing and regulations currently done by the Independent Competition and Regulatory Commission and approvals and administration for business activities using public land (I imagine this is mainly licensing cafés for outdoor tables).

Other minor reductions in spending will come from things like changing the government’s vehicle fleet from six-cylinder cars to four-cylinder ones and reducing the number of advisory boards and committees (one wonders if this means there will be less “community consultation”). Mr Stanhope’s pet project, the arboretum, has had $4.7 million of its fund reallocated into consolidated revenue and will be left with only $6 million over two years to start basic work. Apparently six different species of trees will be planted on the site this winter and spring.


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
15 Responses to
ACT Budget 06: revenue raisers and savings
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
VYBerlinaV8 9:09 am 07 Jun 06

Of course if you live in Queanbeyan (or NSW in general) you’re already paying higher rates that we in the ACT do.

No real surprise there. At least our car rego is cheaper…

areaman 12:43 am 07 Jun 06

nah Pany your insurer should still cover you as long as your registered address is the ACT.

Pandy 12:15 am 07 Jun 06

So if I dont have ambulance coverf on my health insurance, I do not need to pay the ambo levy?

My health fund is based in SA.

terubo 9:43 pm 06 Jun 06

‘Budget of the Beast’? I’d say the ‘Folio of the F*ckmuppeteer’.
BTW, good work, Kerces.

johnboy 7:17 pm 06 Jun 06

At 666 pages and released on 6/6/6 this is the budget of the beast!

I love a Government in it’s fifth year announcing they’ve been living beyond their means.

caf 5:24 pm 06 Jun 06

Re: the fire levy. It would seem that only low income earners who own their own property will be paying half of the fire levy – those low income earners who rent their house from a high income earner will have to pay the full amount (passed on through rent increases).

areaman 5:23 pm 06 Jun 06

Yeah a slight increase, but I’d think not as much as the gold coast could pay if they were really keen.

The release is here:
http://www.treasury.act.gov.au/budget/budget_2006/files/press/73_press.pdf

seepi 5:17 pm 06 Jun 06

Areaman – is the AFL funded?

areaman 5:08 pm 06 Jun 06

Looks like Canberrans will be paying more rates! Glad I live outside the ACT!!

Of course if you live in Queanbeyan (or NSW in general) you’re already paying higher rates that we in the ACT do.

areaman 4:58 pm 06 Jun 06

But apparently not spell papers.

areaman 4:58 pm 06 Jun 06

Is the dragway funded?

Wow years in the APS mean that I can now read and understand Budget Papapers.

Yeah it get 4 mill 06-07 and another 4 mill in 07-08, getting in done by the election I’d guess :).

bonfire 4:53 pm 06 Jun 06

If i was CM, i’d put tollgates into the act for people who commute each day to work.

VYBerlinaV8 4:39 pm 06 Jun 06

Hope the dragway’s funded, then we can give those new 4 cylinder vehicles a run!

Looks like Canberrans will be paying more rates! Glad I live outside the ACT!!

seepi 4:14 pm 06 Jun 06

Thanks for this.
Is the dragway funded?

Thumper 3:48 pm 06 Jun 06

Beat me by that much… WOuld you believe this much?

Would you believe…

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site