Thursday, 26 May 2022

Bills

State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022

Second reading

Debate resumed.

Mr SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (14:49): I rise to make a contribution on the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. I want to focus my contribution today on the concerns around Victoria being the highest taxing state in the nation. We need, particularly after what we have seen over the last couple of years of lockdowns and unfortunately being the longest locked-down state in the world, to do something to encourage investment and encourage people to set up shop here in Victoria. But instead, because of our taxation policies, where we used to have people come here, set up a business and grow a business, people are leaving and going to other places. Ultimately that does nothing in terms of creating jobs and opportunities going forward. So in looking at the taxation bill before us and in looking at some of the taxes that we have and the big taxes that this government relies on, unfortunately all we are doing is reducing those opportunities for more investment and more growth, and people are going elsewhere.

I want to draw attention to a few things. I am going to get to payroll tax, which is a real disincentive to actually employing people. I know for many businesses that I talk to it is just beyond belief the fact that we are providing a disincentive to encouraging more employment. Then I also want to talk about some of the property taxes. But before I do that, this government, when they came to power, preached very strongly from the rafters and when they were interviewed on TV—and we have said this on many occasions; I think it was on Channel 7 from memory—said, ‘There will be no new taxes under a government I lead’. That was the Premier’s commitment. That is what the Premier said, and as soon as he got himself into power, the Andrews government and the Premier just went off on their merry way to create what are now 42 new taxes. It just keeps going. It is like somebody who is drunk on power; this government is drunk on tax. When you get used to something and you do not look at other creative ways of doing things, then you just do what you know, and unfortunately all that does is create no opportunity for investment and no future for our state and ultimately turns away the very people that we are trying to encourage to come here.

We look particularly at things like payroll tax. The government came into power, and since they have been in power we have seen payroll tax go up 32 per cent, up from $5.1 billion to $6.8 billion. Again, we do expect obviously things to rise more generally, but when you look at payroll tax, as I stated, it is a disincentive; it does nothing to encourage those people to actually employ more.

There are also the issues around property taxes. Many of these businesses pay property taxes, particularly land tax—and land tax for both commercial and residential. I know many people in my electorate of Caulfield who have a commercial property or a second property, which is effectively their retirement, that they have saved long and hard for. They are really struggling to meet the land tax bill that they get each year, and every time the land tax period comes along there is a long procession of people in my office. I can tell you that those people that are coming to my office are not wealthy people. They are people that are coming to my office with their tax bills. They have saved every dollar, they have gone without and when it comes to paying that tax bill they are making more sacrifices. Just at the time in their life when you would think they could actually enjoy their life, they are having to sacrifice a whole lot of basic things just to pay the land tax bill. So many residents have come to me and said that all they feel like they are doing is working for the government. We have seen land tax go up since this government has been in power from $1.9 billion to $4.8 billion—that is 154 per cent.

I want to make the point—and this is particularly during the COVID period and relates very much to this budget—that during the COVID period a lot of these businesses have been on properties for which land taxes have continued to increase, and many of the landlords, some of whom are self-funded retirees that are not wealthy, have not received a dollar when it comes to rent because they have had to defer rent during this period of time. We have been very much advocating for a deferral of rent in terms of the commercial tenancy relief scheme. That is important. That has been important because we know there have been a lot of small businesses that have not been able to pay rent, particularly during the lockdowns, because their businesses were closed. We knew that it was important for the government to come up with a scheme to ensure that those businesses did not go to the wall by having some relief for many of those small businesses in the form of a commercial tenancy relief scheme. So that was fine, and we actually called on the government to extend it.

I know there was some landlord tax relief for land tax, but it went nowhere near far enough. And the hurdles were so high for many of those landlords that rely on that effectively as their retirement plan. Again, I am not talking about a large corporate superannuation scheme, I am talking about a second property—pretty much their house and one other property—where they rely on that rent to effectively live. They have gone without for two years during COVID, and they have still had to pay the land tax bill. It is not like the government has given them a holiday on their land tax bill. That is where you get the pressures, and that is where I know there are so many people in my constituency of Caulfield that have found it really, really tough when it has come to actually making ends meet to pay that land tax bill. They have looked at deferrals, they have had arrangements with the land tax office, but can I say it has been really, really, really tough. I feel for them, and this government has done nothing over the period since it has been in government to provide any relief when it comes to land tax relief. And so I do say, when you combine that and payroll tax you have seen a real impost on people.

We have seen land transfer, or stamp duty, up from $4.4 billion to $8.2 billion, or 85 per cent. Again, property taxes really are big part of propping this government up. And we are now seeing a windfall gains tax, which this government is using to effectively tax people on property. Again, part of a windfall gains tax is it ideally should be taking a lot of land and encouraging that to provide housing stock into the market. We know that housing affordability is a huge issue, and we should be doing everything we possibly can to encourage more stock onto the market. You provide more housing stock—that is one way of lowering prices of housing. It is a basic supply and demand matter. This additional taxation on housing is certainly doing nothing to encourage more housing stock onto the market. When housing affordability is a real issue, particularly for many young Victorians—again, many young constituents in my electorate are seeking their first home—this is not the way forward in terms of being able to do that.

Can I say it has been a very, very tough period, as we know, over the last few years. Victoria has gone from top of the pops to the bottom of the heap when it comes to so many things, particularly when it comes to business confidence and investment. So many people have left the state and gone elsewhere. So many businesses are closed because of a government that lacks any forethought when it comes to encouraging people. All this government wants to do is tax people. It is doing nothing in terms of investment and creating opportunity and hope in this state. And I do say it is an important thing. Cost of living is a huge issue. Jobs and businesses are huge issues. We are the party on this side of the house that backs small businesses and jobs. We believe in them. We believe in those people because at the end of the day they are mums and dads and families that have a go. They are mums and dads and families that put their lives on the line. They are the last ones that get paid—when their businesses do not make a dollar, certainly they are the ones that do not get paid—and they always put their staff and others above themselves. It is hard to run a small business at the best of times, let alone during a pandemic.

I respect that others have been through the same right across the world, but this state has had it tougher than anyone else—the longest lockdowns, the hardest lockdowns and the toughest laws that go with it. All of that has impacted small businesses, all of that has impacted Victorians and all of it has impacted investment in this state. More taxation is not going to help, and the tax increases that we are seeing before this budget will not help many of those Victorians either.

Mr RICHARDSON (Mordialloc) (15:00): It is great to rise and speak on the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022 and cover off some of the key points that are made in this bill. But let us cut to the chase. We have not heard one member of the opposition detail how they would take a different path or do anything differently under state taxation other than having a rant about taxes. Let us dig down deeper into what that means. That means that they would cut the revenue base to then cut services and cut deep into Victorians, because when they attack the revenue base of Victoria they are talking about taking revenue away from vital services, which we have seen. If you do not believe me, let us go back a decade. What happened this time 10 years ago? Right in the media at the time:

Hundreds of police, justice and health workers will be sacked with the Baillieu Government sneaking out details after public servants had gone home.

Hundreds of police, hundreds of job cuts in justice, hundreds in VicRoads, hundreds in human services—essential services in our state that were cut a decade ago as they cut the revenue base in our state. So when those opposite talk about taxation and lowering the revenue base, what is that actually code for? That is a deep cut to services that Victorians desperately rely on. It was only 10 years ago that the minister for TAFE at the time, Peter Hall, thought that it was better to resign. That is what he told TAFE leaders—it was better to resign than go and gut TAFE.

Victorians know that Labor governments invest in essential services, invest in education and invest in our health services, so it will be interesting whether any of those opposite in their descriptions of the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill will detail what they would do differently. What would they do differently? Because some of the revenue in taxes that they refer to they supported through this house of Parliament—they put their name to it in both houses. So when they say and list various taxation arrangements, put their name to it and then claim they are opposed to it, that is an extraordinary outcome.

Then there is the reference to the 2014 campaign, which is an extraordinary reference. We have had an election since then—one that was a substantial affirmation of the Andrews Labor government’s delivery for all Victorians. It was a substantial result where we saw a substantial endorsement, a massive swing to our government during that time. It was raised at the Treasury hearing, and the member for Gippsland South as a Public Accounts and Estimates Committee colleague of mine raised this as well, referencing that 2014 campaign as if we want to go back in time to a better time where the Liberal-Nationals had 43 seats, when their primary was around 35, when teal was only a bad choice of colour. But now the changes in circumstances could not be any further from the truth. You see, they are not talking to Victorians, they are talking to fringe interest groups. This is where those opposite are still living in the past and hoping for a better yesterday while we are delivering for Victorians for tomorrow.

Some of these arrangements, some of these taxation measures, go to the heart of inclusive government practices and to supporting Victorians who need it most. I want to cover off on the motor vehicle duty exemption for wheelchair-accessible commercial vehicles. This is something that was raised in questioning by a member for Eastern Metropolitan, Rod Barton, in the other place—Transport Matters Party—who obviously is very passionate about the taxi industry and the commercial vehicle industry. This is a question that was raised with the Treasurer, and this change is significant and important, because where we have a need for inclusive transport and supporting people with disabilities or additional needs, what we see is a clear gap in the market in supporting people. That is particularly around people that have a disability and need to get around to their appointments and to be supported in our community as well.

So a key measure in this bill is the introduction of that exemption for wheelchair-accessible commercial vehicles from motor vehicle duties. That is in line with the 2022–23 budget announcement that from 1 July an exemption from motor vehicle duties will apply to new or near-new wheelchair-accessible vehicles that will be registered as a commercial passenger vehicle and meet the relevant requirements to provide unbooked services. That is a really important measure, and I think that goes to some of our inclusive practices in this government of supporting people who need that additional support and are living with disabilities.

It also goes hand in glove with the land tax—the specialist disability accommodation dwellings under construction—amendments. In building on the taxation changes to support Victorians with a disability the bill also provides an exemption from land tax for land on which a specialist disability accommodation enrolled dwelling is being constructed. Obviously those supported accommodation places are so critical. We know that supported care, whether people have carers or are able to live on their own with support and care, is a really important area where we need more construction and more investment to support people with disabilities in our communities. This construction-phase exemption will be available for a maximum of a two-tax-year period and will operate retrospectively from the 2020 land tax year onwards. It is something I greatly support which will be greatly supported by our community as well.

There is also some of the rhetoric that was put forward by the member for Eildon in a bit of banter across the chamber with the member for Bentleigh about the windfall gains tax exemption for universities. I am glad the member for Bentleigh was able to once again correct the record. The member for Bentleigh has done a substantial amount of work engaging with the university sector. We listen to them, we engage with them and we invest in education and support them. While the former federal coalition government went running, slashed their budgets and took them absolutely to the brink, we support our university sector, we support indeed our TAFE sector and all those sectors that do such an important piece of work in our community. They went to the bone during the pandemic, and no-one was there to support them from the federal coalition government. No-one was there. These measures in the budget are an example of us consulting, engaging and working with our training sector and our university sector.

It is important to reflect on why the windfall gains tax was even in place. ‘Why was that?’, people might ask—those tuning in, the thousands tuning in online. They might ask, ‘Why did an arrangement like the windfall gains tax even need to happen?’. Well, I will tell you. It was the Fishermans Bend saga, the rezoning saga down the road where land was rezoned for Liberal mates and donor mates at a massive cost to the Victorian taxpayer—a massive cost. It meant we had to go back at a tenfold premium to buy school land and open space to support such a dynamic community that is coming online. You will never hear an apology from those opposite for the absolute travesty that was inflicted on that community—10 times the rezoned value. And when was it? Was it mid term? Was it maybe in 2012, 2013? No, it was right on the edge of the election, when they were sitting around the tables carving up the fundraising allocations. This was a rezone that was an absolute scandal, and it took the Victorian taxpayer tenfold the investment from that rezone—an absolute travesty. So this is why the windfall gains tax is in place, to make sure that we take the sugar off the table and ensure proceeds are returned to the community and we avoid situations like Fishermans Bend, which is the Leader of the Opposition’s legacy, then Minister for Planning—a travesty. They never apologised, those opposite, never—not raised at all. They never clarified what on earth was going on down at Fishermans Bend—nothing at all.

Ms Britnell interjected.

Mr RICHARDSON: I can see the member for South-West Coast might have a perspective for us. I mean, she was not on the scene at that time. Maybe the member for South-West Coast might apologise to Victorians on behalf of those opposite for that horrendous planning decision that cost taxpayers tens of millions of dollars on each individual—land that we had to go and buy back to create schools, health services and childcare services.

Those opposite have got a few more speeches to go. They will do the waffle about, ‘Oh, it was 2014 that this happened’, despite the landslide victory in 2018. They have moved on. They are down to a few less seats than in 2014. I know they want to be the yesterday party. They have gone back to the future with the federal leader that they have put in over the course of this week nationally. But let us just get something straight: what will you cut? What will you change in the revenue base? Victoria has been the engine room—

Mr Angus: Stop the waste.

Mr RICHARDSON: The member for Forest Hill said, ‘Stop the waste’. There was no waste under those opposite because they did nothing. They did nothing, and they still cut services. They did not have an infrastructure project.

Members interjecting.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Richards): I will ask people to stop interjecting.

Mr RICHARDSON: Remember what Minister Hall said? Minister Hall said, ‘I would rather resign than gut TAFE’. At least he had the integrity to stand up when there were cuts.

And let us just go back. A decade ago, on this day 10 years ago, hundreds of police were cut, hundreds of justice staff were cut, hundreds of health workers were cut and hundreds of public service staff, 3600, were cut. It is in their DNA. They do not do anything. They cut. They want a small government. They are not on the side of Victorians, they are on the side of their warped ideology. Tell us what you will cut and what you will leave Victorians behind with.

Mr ANGUS (Forest Hill) (15:10): What a rant that was from the member down there in Mordialloc, trying to rewrite a bit of history there. Anyway, I will not waste my contribution trying to rectify all that. But I am pleased to rise to make a contribution on the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. We can see under the purposes, clause 1, of the bill it amends seven bills, and I just want to touch on a couple of those today. In particular I want to start off by looking at the minister’s second-reading speech, in which he said the bill was:

… to increase the Government’s support for the provision of wheelchair accessible transport options and empower wheelchair users to access the transport method that best suits their circumstances.

I note that is a very noble objective, but it is a sad reality that I have been trying in this place to get the government to address some serious issues in relation to public transport in my patch out in the Forest Hill district in relation to wheelchair- and disabled-friendly public transport. The situation we have got specifically is the route 75 tram from the city to Vermont South. We have had all the great big so-called super-stops built along the route in various parts of the route, but all the trams that come on that route, every single one of them, has got a step in it. So it is a typical Labor project, really, that you build all the fancy new infrastructure you can cut the ribbon on and then you send a tram out there that cannot to this very day enable a disabled person, a person with a pram or a shopping trolley or someone in a wheelchair to access the tram.

Mr Riordan: The whole suburb.

Mr ANGUS: The whole length, from the city all the way out. There is a big gap there between the theory and the practice. That is what we are very used to in this place under this government, and that is why the minister’s words ring so hollow in my view in relation to that particular claim that he made.

The other thing too that we are dealing with that is a live matter in our office at the moment is we had a call from a constituent who has had some dealings trying to get a wheelchair-accessible cab for his mother, whom he looks after. He rang 13CABS just recently and tried to order a wheelchair-accessible cab for his mother, who is confined to a wheelchair, and he was unable to do so. The system did not allow him to specify, so that was a huge problem for him, his mother and other family members. So that is a matter that I have written to the minister about, and I am trusting that the minister will respond to me and that that situation will be indeed rectified in the not-too-distant future, because obviously my constituent and his family are not the only ones affected by that particular situation. As I said, the fact that we have got those empty words, I would argue, at the start of the second-reading speech is a disappointment for certainly the residents out in the eastern suburbs and in the Forest Hill district.

I want to talk now about state taxes, because obviously it is a key area, and it is an area, like much of the whole Labor budget, we have seen grow extraordinarily over the last period of time the government has been in, the last eight years. I note back in 2015–16, Labor’s first budget, they forecast total taxation revenue to be $19 billion. In the current budget it is estimated to be $30.5 billion, which is a 60.5 per cent increase, and then by the time we get to the 2025–26 budget, at the end of the forward estimates, it is estimated to be $35 billion, a further 14.8 per cent increase over the next four years. So what we see over those 10 years is an incredible 84.2 per cent increase in taxes over those Labor years. That is something that all Victorians would be well aware of and all Victorians would be feeling in a whole range of ways, and I am going to go in and break them down a little bit more in just a moment.

But if we look at what has happened just up until the current budget, we can see that the average increase over those seven years was 8.64 per cent, and for the forward estimates the government’s average that it has put in there is 3.7 per cent per annum. As I said the other day in my budget reply speech, I think it is quite fanciful to have an increase that is so small, given the unequivocal evidence that shows what has happened in reality under the Labor government. So for them to go from an 8.64 per cent per annum increase down to a 3.7 per cent per annum increase is quite delusional and will never happen.

If we look at some of the specific components of the taxation revenue—and they are referred to within the bill that we are looking at—we have got the motor vehicle taxes, registration fees and stamp duty. Again, if we go back to 2015–16, that was $2.2 billion in Labor’s first budget. In 2022–23 it is $3.1 billion, so it has gone up by 40.9 per cent. And by the end of the estimates, 2025–26, it is up to $3.5 billion, a further 12.9 per cent increase. So just in that section alone it is a 59.1 per cent increase in taxes over 10 years. We know there has certainly been increased traffic congestion and probably more vehicles around, but I do not think it has gone up to that extent. Again, for seven years they are averaging a 5.8 per cent increase per annum, and then in the out years they have got an average of 3.3 per cent per annum. I think the likelihood of that being reality is extremely low, and all Victorian motorists need to fasten their seatbelts, so to speak, for significant other increases in relation to motor vehicle taxes, registration fees and stamp duty. There are going to be a lot more black holes to be filled by this government.

If we look at taxes on employers’ payroll and labour force, again in 2015–16 we can see the budget was $5.4 billion. In 2022–23, the current year budget, it is $7.6 billion—a 40.7 per cent increase over time, or 5.8 per cent per annum. In 2025–26 it goes up to $9.2 billion, which is a 21.1 per cent increase over the next four years. That averages out at 5.3 per cent. But over the 10 years from 2015 to 2025 it is a 70.4 per cent increase in taxes over those 10 years under Labor. We have there a huge impost on business, and that is one of the things that hurts business so much: having to pay payroll tax and other taxes of a similar nature when that is such a disincentive. I know there have been some amendments to the rates and so on, but there is still a lot more work that can be done to encourage businesses—small, medium and large.

If we look at land transfer duty, we can see in 2015–16 the budget was $5 billion. In 2022–23 it is $8.2 billion, a 64 per cent increase. In 2025–26 it is estimated to be $8.7 billion—just a modest 6.1 per cent increase—but over that whole time, for seven years, it has averaged a 9.1 per cent per annum increase. Now, we know that property values have certainly gone up during that time, but there has certainly been a fair bit of gouging because of the so-called bracket creep. There have not been any adjustments to speak of in relation to land transfer duty, and that has caught up with people very, very significantly. Over the next four years the average noted in the budget papers is only 1.5 per cent per annum. I find it quite extraordinary that the government can realistically think they will keep it down that low, because we know the government loves to tax land and property-related matters. The budget papers are there for all to read and see, and that is one of the key areas they source their revenue from. Just in this area alone we have got a 74 per cent increase in taxes over 10 years under Labor. It does not augur well for property owners.

I know, like me, Acting Speaker Richards, you have probably had many constituents—or maybe you have not. Maybe they do not want to come and see you, but they have certainly come and seen me in relation to their stamp duty problems and their land tax problems. Particularly some of the passive sorts of investors that perhaps might have had a property as their superannuation now—and particularly in the last two years, with some very difficult times for tenants—have perhaps had to have forgiveness on rent as landlords and other things. They might not have had the revenue source they had but they have still had the massive outgoings, particularly in relation to land tax, and that has really, really hurt the community. I have had so many people come and see me about that. Numbers of those investors, whether they be self-funded retirees with self-managed super funds or other sorts of vehicles like that, are in a situation where they are facing the issue that they have got an asset but their outgoings of cash flow do not keep up with that. So they are going to have to sell the asset, and that is going to be an issue for them—for their subsequent retirement and so on—as well as for the broader community.

Just in conclusion, we can see, I suppose, that the whole basis of this bill and of all Labor tax matters is that everything keeps going up. And the galling thing about it, as others have mentioned on this side, is that there has been such huge waste by this government—$28 billion of blowouts on major projects. If that burden was not there, we could have lower taxes and charges and we could have less debt for all Victorians.

Ms CRUGNALE (Bass) (15:20): I rise to speak on the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022, and I am pleased that this bill builds on the Andrews Labor government’s record of implementing a progressive taxation system. I wish to acknowledge a verifiable piece of information: that across our term of government we have cut or abolished taxes and fees 57 times.

A key measure in this bill is the introduction of an important exemption for wheelchair-accessible commercial vehicles from motor vehicle duty. An exemption from motor vehicle duty is in line with the 2022–23 budget announcement, and from July 2022 it will apply to new or near-new wheelchair-accessible vehicles registered as commercial passenger vehicles that meet the relevant requirements to provide unbooked services—for example, taxi rank and hail work. This measure will provide a $2.7 million cut. Having wheelchair-accessible transport options that empower wheelchair users to access the transport method that best suits their needs and circumstances is a core value of the Labor government and is achieved through this measure. It is our hope that through measures like this this number will grow and give people with a disability more transport options, which translates to greater freedom of choice. This measure expands and complements the current suite of motor vehicle duty exemptions and concessions for the transport of people with a disability or injury and builds on the Andrews Labor government’s body of work supporting Victorians with a disability.

Another key initiative in this bill is ensuring fairness across the gaming industry and that a casino the size of Crown does not have an unfair advantage over small gaming venues. To do this as part of the government’s ongoing response to the Royal Commission into the Casino Operator and Licence, we will also ensure Crown is paying its fair share with an electronic gaming machine measure that will generate up to $30 million a year. This is something that we are working on. The first tranche of the Labor government’s response to the royal commission included the removal of arrangements with Crown introduced by the previous coalition government which prevented the state from changing regulations without having to pay compensation. It is a fair and reasonable change that will pave the way for fairer taxation arrangements due to legislation again passed by the previous coalition government on ideological grounds. Crown for too long has benefited from preferential tax treatment.

SDA—specialist disability accommodation—is a dwelling that has been specially designed to cater for the needs of people with sensory, intellectual, cognitive or physical impairment, and building on taxation changes to support Victorians with a disability, the bill also provides an exemption from land tax for land on which an SDA-enrolled dwelling is being constructed. This construction phase exemption will be available for a maximum of two tax years and will operate retrospectively from the 2020 land tax year onwards. This builds on the previous initiative on motor vehicle duty to ensure the tax system works in a way that supports Victorians living with a disability.

As announced as part of the 2021–22 budget, our government is introducing a windfall gains tax on rezoning decisions that create a land value uplift of more than $100 000. The windfall tax has come under criticism from those in the other place and on the opposite side of this chamber, but this is an important integrity measure that takes sugar off the table and ensures proceeds are returned to the community and we avoid a situation like we saw at Fishermans Bend with the Leader of the Opposition when he was Minister for Planning. The windfall gains tax, now to come into effect on 1 July 2023, will ensure that the community receives a fair share of the value generated from government rezoning decisions. Since its introduction the government, led by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasurer, has been consulting widely with industry ahead of its commencement. As part of this process the government has agreed to an up-front exemption from the windfall gains tax for land owned by an Australian university in certain circumstances, because Labor will always consider the impact on education institutions in decision-making.

On land tax this bill replaces the current refund model for a recently constructed or renovated principal place of residence with an up-front exemption from land tax, including a clawback mechanism if the exemptions requirements are not fully met. The new exemption does not require the land tax to be paid up-front and will reduce financial burden and red tape for landowners. It will also be consistent with the rest of the PPR exemption provisions, which provide an up-front exemption rather than a refund. The amendment will take effect from 1 July this year, and this means that if a construction or renovation of a principal place of residence is completed on or after 1 July, the landowner may apply for an up-front exemption for the 2023 tax year onwards.

The bill confirms that an exemption from payroll tax applies to certain wages paid under employment agency and other related arrangements. The amendment is intended to confirm the longstanding policy position in Victoria that an exemption from payroll tax is available for wages paid to service providers by an employment agent where the agent supplies their common-law employees to a client who is exempt from payroll tax, like charities and public hospitals. This initiative seeks to strengthen Victoria’s existing law and brings it into line with New South Wales, where a similar exemption is provided for wages paid to service providers that are the common-law employees of the employment agent.

As an important note, the bill amends the Taxation Administration Act 1997 to permit the disclosure of protected information to certain specified commonwealth enforcement bodies and to enable further commonwealth enforcement bodies to be prescribed by regulation. These bodies include the Australian Financial Security Authority, the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre and member bodies of the Phoenix Taskforce where the disclosure is in connection with their law enforcement or public revenue protection activity. This change also seeks to authorise the secondary disclosure of protected information with the consent of the person to whom the information relates. The amendment also authorises secondary disclosure to one new situation where the person to whom the information relates gives consent to a secondary disclosure by the recipient from a tax officer.

In closing, on the points those on the other side are making regarding raising taxes, I ask that they bring some provable facts to the table. The Andrews Labor government has cut or abolished taxes and fees 57 times since coming to government, and this includes increasing the payroll tax free threshold twice since coming to government so that fewer small to medium-sized businesses pay any payroll tax. This was a key part of the drivers of business support measures our government offered during the pandemic. And last July we cut the regional payroll tax to 1.2125 per cent, just one-quarter of the metropolitan rate and the lowest in the nation. Additionally, we supported businesses through the worst of the pandemic with payroll tax cuts that saved Victorian businesses around $1.7 billion up to 2021–22 and about $4 billion over the forward estimates.

It is interventions like this that have seen the regional unemployment rate fall to 3.2 per cent, the lowest in the nation and less than half of what it was when those opposite were voted out of office. Within their list of 42 alleged new or increased taxes, it is of concern that those opposite include the point-of-consumption wagering and betting tax, which they not only voted for but supported vocally. They also include the mental health levy, which they now apparently support, but they are contrary on this so it is plausible this position will change as well. In closing, I am just going commend this bill to the house with a minute left.

Ms BRITNELL (South-West Coast) (15:29): I rise to speak on the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. This is a bill that does a number of things. The bill amends the Duties Act 2000 to give an exemption to accessible commercial passenger vehicles such as taxis from motor vehicle duty. I might discuss disability access a bit later. I will not focus on that, however.

The bill amends the Land Tax Act 2005 to replace the refund model for recently built or renovated principal places of residence with an exemption from land tax. It also exempts land on which specialist disability accommodation is being constructed from land tax. It amends the Payroll Tax Act 2007 to ensure certain wages paid under employment agency contracts are exempt. It is also a bill that amends the Windfall Gains Tax and State Taxation and Other Acts Further Amendment Act 2021—just last year—to allow land owned by a university in certain circumstances to be exempt from windfall gains tax. This may be a good initiative in some circumstances, but it certainly will not make a difference in my region, the electorate of South-West Coast. The windfall gains tax, if I can just take you back and remind people of what this is, will see the government take 50 per cent of the windfall after land is rezoned as residential and sold off. It is expected to make the government an annual income of $40 million a year. The government says it is targeting greedy developers, but the tax will actually impact farmers who are now on the urban fringes of growth areas in South-West Coast in areas like Warrnambool, Portland, Port Fairy and Koroit. There is already a massive shortage of available land in South-West Coast, and this tax will only make things much worse. The people who are involved in real estate and understand the market tell me that you could not buy a block of land in Warrnambool or its surrounds for two to three years if you wanted to, so the shortage is extreme.

When the land is rezoned and sold and developed, the costs are going to be passed on, and this will actually drive up the price of land. This will turn people away from the market. We see that with developing properties there are about 21 taxes on a property, so when someone goes to build a house there are 21 taxes—and this is from a government that said there would be no new taxes. The Premier in 2014 said, ‘Under my watch there will be no new taxes’, but we hear not only of a windfall gains tax—it is only one of 42 taxes. I am sorry, it just makes no sense when you could not get a block of land for two to three years because there are just none available. When land is unavailable, why would you introduce a new tax which will disincentivise and raise the price? It is just nonsensical. We need to be fast-tracking land. We need to be reducing the red tape associated with the development of land.

We have a massive housing crisis. All this government is doing is making that worse. The Andrews Labor government clearly do not understand how markets work and the flow-on effect this tax will have. I will tell you now, there will be farmers, most of them, who will say, ‘I’m not selling’, and they will just sit on that land. Why would you sell your asset and lose half of it? You are better off sitting on it and waiting for this madness—

Mr Pearson: Do you understand how rezoning works?

Ms BRITNELL: Well, that is how the farmers—

Mr Pearson: Do you understand how rezoning works? If it is at $100 an acre and it gets rezoned to $1000, it just makes sense.

Ms BRITNELL: I think I am speaking. I am just making the point that I am the one who is actually speaking.

Mr Pearson interjected.

Ms BRITNELL: I am very confident that what I am saying is quite accurate, and the reality is generational farmers will not sell. They will be severely disadvantaged, and the land will not become available—

Members interjecting.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Richards): Order! The Minister for Creative Industries! The member for Polwarth! I am having trouble hearing the member speak.

Ms BRITNELL: The government sees this as a river of gold that it is easily going to tap into, but it is not going to do anything except create more long-term problems around affordability. I have people coming into my office every day saying they cannot get a rental property and they cannot move to the area and take on jobs. Women who have left difficult family situations are sleeping in their cars. The social housing need is extreme. We have over 800 people waiting for a place on social housing lists. We cannot keep people in houses when we do not make land available so we cannot build more, we cannot then rent and we cannot then have people in social housing. It is the whole of the flow-on effect that is affected. We are in a desperate situation for more houses, and this is doing the exact opposite of what we need to do. I cannot stress more clearly that if you want to keep wasting money and keep taxing, you are not going to provide opportunity. You are going to make the cost of living greater.

This government has put 42 new taxes into the system since they made that promise to Victorians. The Premier, when he spoke to Victorians the night before the election in 2014, said, ‘I guarantee there will be no new taxes under my watch’. So it is really, really shameful that we stand here with a state taxation bill and we talk about a windfall tax that is going to get money from ‘greedy developers’. It is not greedy developers; it will be passed on through the chain, the people purchasing land will actually pay more and that will put the price of housing up. There is no other way of actually explaining that. When you have got a community in Warrnambool, Portland and Heywood desperate for houses and when you have got 1 per cent unemployment and people desperately looking for people to come into the region to fill jobs and you cannot house them, you need to do more to fast-track land. You do not tax land and make it more expensive. It makes it unavailable. It will not bring through more land to the market, and if I have not had that made clear to me by the community around me, who are trying to solve this problem, I do not know. They are certainly sharing it to me, so they must be telling the government this is madness as well.

I will go now back to the disability access part of this bill, which makes services more accessible. I will raise the point of the VLocity trains that are supposedly coming to Warrnambool. They will have disability access, but we have been waiting since the promised VLocity trains were—

Mr Riordan: 2017.

Ms BRITNELL: mentioned in 2017. That is right, member for Polwarth. In July 2017 the government announced that they would build these VLocity carriages for the Warrnambool line. Now in 2022 we finally see it allocated in the budget but with absolutely, again, no understanding and no time line of when this will finally be delivered. There is a government here that says it cares about the disabled community. Well, I will just tell you a story about a 21-year-old young man who went on the train; it did not have a disability access toilet, and his father had to pick him up and carry him through three carriages so he could be placed on and use the toilet. How demeaning for a 21-year-old young gentleman to have to go through that. We are in 2022. To have a disability and be put through that shame is totally unacceptable, so it is time to deliver those VLocity trains—not in another five years, like we have been waiting five years now, but today. It is so disgraceful that you cannot access a disabled service to get to Melbourne for any appointment or any activity you want to do and you cannot even use the toilets in the train station in Warrnambool—the door opens the wrong way and traps you if you are in a wheelchair. So it is a disgrace that we are living in this day and age and we have got more taxes to deal with and no accessible services for people with a disability who deserve the right to respect and who want to get on with living and should be able to get on with living. This Labor government continually says it is assisting with that, and it is not delivering.

Again, I recommend quite strongly that this windfall tax be removed and we find ways to fast-track more land, cut the red tape and deliver more land for the community so we can house the community and solve some of the problems we have got. We have got desperate people wanting and needing housing so we can grow our regions and get on with a better Victoria when we recover and rebuild this state from the mess Labor have created.

Mr HAMER (Box Hill) (15:38): It is terrific for me to rise today and add my contribution to the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. I do want to talk about the windfall gains tax in time, but I do want to start by just addressing some of the other elements of the bill. As has been mentioned, one of the acts that the bill seeks to amend is the Duties Act 2000 to provide an exemption from motor vehicle duty in relation to certain wheelchair-accessible motor vehicles that provide the unbooked commercial passenger vehicle services. That is an exemption that currently exists for privately owned vehicles which have been modified for use to transport either the owner or a family member with a disability but will now be extended to apply to a commercial passenger vehicle so we can support the provision of more unbooked taxis available for service and give those who use a wheelchair more transport options.

I know, as the member for Mordialloc said, it is an issue that Mr Barton of the other place has been pushing and will be an important reform for those who need it most and those in our community who rely on accessible transport. It will save eligible commercial passenger vehicle owners who provide unbooked services between $2700 and $4700 in motor vehicle duties, depending on whether concessions were to apply, and that is on the purchase of a $90 000 wheelchair-accessible commercial passenger vehicle. There are only 975 wheelchair-accessible commercial vehicles registered with Commercial Passenger Vehicles Victoria, and Victorians who need a wheelchair take more than 1 million commercial passenger trips per year. So this measure will hopefully expand that number and enable more vehicles to provide that offering to those people living with a disability.

The bill also proposes a number of changes to the Land Tax Act 2005, including replacing the provision for a land tax refund for land where a person is absent because of the construction or renovation of a residence, and it provides an exemption from land tax for land on which a specialist disability accommodation enrolled dwelling provided by a provider is being constructed. SDA-enrolled dwellings have been eligible for land tax exemptions since the 2020 land tax year but only once construction was complete, and now this change will be expanded to include up to two years of construction and will apply retrospectively so anyone who paid land tax duty since 2020 may be entitled to a tax refund. Again, this is about changing the tax system to help Victorians with a disability and relieve the financial burden of land tax while the future disability accommodation is under construction, and it will bring the treatment applied to these dwellings in step with other specialist accommodation types, including supported residential services. In relation to the exemption for recently constructed or renovated principal places of residence, it replaces the current refund-based system so that rather than having to pay the tax and applying for a refund once owners have moved in, these changes will reduce red tape by applying an up-front exemption, as well as a clawback mechanism if the exemption requirements are not fully met.

I do want to talk a little bit about the windfall gains tax and particularly how it applies to my electorate of Box Hill. I know there were a couple of examples over the last five or six years where land was sold at an extraordinary premium. There was a car park which was sold for more than $50 million—just a car park in Box Hill—and there was also an old haberdashery store, a single-level haberdashery store of 4000 square metres, which was sold at about the same time for about the same amount, about $50 million. The windfall gains tax is precisely looking at that type of engagement. People, if they were lucky enough to own a property in Box Hill for many, many years—10 years, 50 years, however long it might have been—and due to changes in the planning in Box Hill over years that value has gone up, are obviously going to get some increase in value and sometimes a massive increase in value. But with that value also comes a responsibility to be able to provide the community facilities that are going to come with the development that proceeds on those sites. All of those sites are now earmarked for very large developments, only a portion of which is collected through an open-space development levy which applies at the end of process on the development side.

Allowing a mechanism to capture some of that value is of critical importance to being able to put that back particularly into the local area, where so much growth is occurring. We have seen what happened when this did not occur, particularly in Fishermans Bend, where the land was all sold off and then the government, at significant cost, had to go back and repurchase land that had been already rezoned as a residential zone to allow for community facilities to be built and allow for education facilities to be built. This argument has been very well prosecuted previously. It was supported at the time, obviously, by the government and me, and I continue to support it today.

In relation to the changes that this bill does propose in relation to the windfall gains tax, I guess the challenge with the windfall gains tax is that some beneficiaries from the property price rise, the property price uplift, would not necessarily be private developers or private institutions. The amendment reflects the government’s agreement that Australian-owned universities that profit from rezoning decisions can apply for an up-front exemption from the windfall gains tax on land that they own as long as they can satisfy the commissioner of the State Revenue Office that the revenue generated from any rezoned land would be used for the university’s charitable purposes, such as reinvesting profits into education offerings. This is an important exemption and allowance. Particularly I think of some of the land around Deakin University, which is very close to the seat of Box Hill, and I know there have been some discussions with the university about other parcels of land in and around that vicinity. They do need to keep growing. I remember, having gone to school next door, when there were really just one or two campuses on that site. It has really grown enormously, and having that, I guess, flexibility within the taxation system will certainly be of benefit.

Just finally, the bill also provides some clarity for certain wages paid under employment agency or other similar arrangements and confirms that an exemption from payroll tax applies. Where an agency supplies workers to a client who is exempt from payroll tax, the payroll tax exemption is available for any wages paid to that employee. I strongly commend the bill to the house.

Mr RIORDAN (Polwarth) (15:48): I rise today to contribute to the debate on the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. Listening to the contributions from the government on this bill, it will come as no surprise to the people of Polwarth that this government fundamentally misunderstands its responsibility as a prudent, sensible, forward-thinking government. Contributions today have talked about the fact that government is good because it continues to increase taxes, it does not cut services and it provides for Victorians. What they leave out of that narrative of course is value for money in the way it spends the taxes that it collects. This government has seen more than a doubling of its tax take from Victorians through a couple of key tax measures that it has—payroll tax and land tax and other duties. In recent times, despite its promises back in 2014 that it would not increase taxes, it has in fact increased 42 taxes here in Victoria, and one of the most egregious ones of course is the windfall gains tax, which is again mentioned in this legislation that we are debating today.

Now, the government is making much of the fact that it is making things a little bit easier for universities—those institutions that are long-suffering and underfunded, those institutions that have no money—but they are not thinking about hardworking Victorian families, particularly those in regional Victoria. The windfall gains tax is going to be one of the single biggest obstructions to getting affordable and accessible housing in regional Victoria. Unlike this government, I understand that most of the land in rural and regional Victorian is controlled not by big wealthy developers, not by big corporations, not by big government, but by small landowners, by people who have often scrimped and saved and have small parcels of land around the fringes of our towns. They will now not be in a position to do the subdivision that they want to do to provide the land that community needs. In fact in my home town of Colac I know there are many, many families, small groups and small landowners who are being stifled by the uncertainty that this tax has inflicted upon them and the community. This government fundamentally misunderstands that home availability, accessibility and affordability come from supply. Increase supply and you put downward pressure on prices and costs and you make things more available to the community. With the windfall gains tax amendment in this piece of legislation before the Parliament they are thinking about the universities. They are giving them a bit of a free kick, but they are making mums and dads at home pay the cost for the incompetence that is now rife in the Treasury here in Victoria.

This windfall gains tax has been sold by the government as the government’s fair share from a big gain to be put back into the community. If only that was true. In my own community and across the district of Polwarth and throughout regional Victoria millions of dollars will be collected and transferred from rural and regional Victoria to the big smoke, to Melbourne. And why? Because this government has fundamentally lost control of its budget. It has fundamentally lost control of its big projects in Melbourne. We are hearing it regularly. We thought it was going to be about $24 billion worth of overspend and out-of-control projects in Melbourne, but it is actually going to be $28 billion. And in a government in a time when its revenues have more than doubled it has not just doubled its debt, it has not quadrupled its debt, it has increased its debt exponentially with no end in sight. Victorians are expected to pay the price for that. They are going to pay with less available land, less accessible land and most importantly less affordable land.

It is not only those wanting to get into the housing market that will pay through the taxation incompetence of this government but the older self-funded retirees—those that have scrimped and saved to have a small nest egg, a small commercial property or a couple of tenancies where they are providing a small but modest income for themselves over time. They are being taxed out of their retirement. They are being taxed out of their own self-reliance and the provision that they have made for superannuation, to the point where there are now commercial properties in high streets around rural and regional Victoria, around the state, where the tax bill is almost more than what they can collect in rent. That is simply unfair, and that is an impost that this government wilfully inflicts on people who have worked hard all their life, who have made provision for their future, who have paid their fair share of tax.

This government regularly talks about a fair share. Well, it is about time people who have contributed throughout their lives, who have made provision for themselves into their retirement, get their fair share, because at the moment this government is absolutely without question taking way more than its fair share. And it is taking its fair share and it is having to use it to cover up for the waste and mismanagement and the ballooning of projects right across Melbourne. This government has unleashed an absolutely irresponsible raft of projects without the proper control and prudence that Victorians absolutely expect it to have.

There is also the fact that payroll tax is another huge dampener. This government has not implemented the reforms it needs to in payroll tax. There has been some tinkering around the edges for some regional businesses, and while that has been very welcome in rural and regional Victoria, the fact is the thresholds are way too low. At $700 000 a modest business on a payroll of around $1 million in Melbourne will be forking out the best part of another full wage in tax, and that tax is a tax on business. It is a tax on employing people. It is a tax on making Victorian businesses more efficient. What that payroll tax does is it incentivises businesses to leave the state or, even worse, leave the country, and we have heard lots about businesses that have call centres and other services now conducted overseas. That is how they get around it. It is a disincentive to employing and growing the workforce here in Victoria.

This State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill sadly makes no reference to something the resources industry has been talking to this government for a long time about, and that is reform for the gold tax. The gold tax is yet another hit on the industry. It is a short-term vision, this tax, because what it does is it hits an industry that needs and relies on research and investment. It does not incentivise anybody or any company, any resource company, to put the investment into developing further gold resources. We know Victoria is rich with gold. We only have to look around this magnificent chamber to realise the wealth that our state has benefited from. But this government is using its taxation measures, its lust for more cash, because they have lost control of the budget. They are doing whatever they can to put their big, long, sticky fingers into every possible pie of cash that they can find in the state of Victoria, with no vision on what their responsibilities are as a prudent government. They are not coming back to the people of Victoria and saying, ‘Oh, guess what, people of Victoria? We’re actually undertaking a project, and not only are we going to deliver it on time’—which is a basic courtesy of government—‘but we’re actually going to deliver it on budget. And if we say it’s going to cost $1 billion, it’s going to cost $1 billion’. But not these guys. They are actually shameless. They are perfectly happy to stand here in this magnificent chamber and admit to the fact that they are not only $1 billion over or $2 billion over or $3 billion; they are happy to stand up there with a straight face and admit to projects blowing out by $10 billion. And they do not think twice about it because of those big, sticky Treasury fingers that they are happy to put into the pockets of hardworking retirees and of people seeking to find affordable land for their first home. They are happy to continue to tax businesses and payrolls.

So this State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill is just a confirmation that this government has not got its priorities right. It does not prioritise prudence over waste. It does not prioritise fair taxation over putting heavy taxation burdens on certain people. This government has not been responsible. Its spending continues to be out of control.

Ms CONNOLLY (Tarneit) (15:59): It is a pleasure to rise to speak on the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. It is a greater pleasure to follow the member for Polwarth in his contribution. I am smiling over here because I am someone who lives in one of the largest growth corridors in this country and we most certainly benefit from major infrastructure projects that are being paid for through contributions to tax—absolutely reformative projects. I say that and I am pointing to the 11 new schools that we will have built, if re-elected, come—

Mr Riordan interjected.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Richards): Order! Member for Polwarth!

Ms CONNOLLY: I am sorry, member for Polwarth, you have had your time. We have spent it on schools, hospitals, $1.8 billion on roads. And, yes, we are going to spend it on the West Gate Tunnel, which is costing more than initially we thought, but we know in the western suburbs we need this tunnel more than any other projects probably in the history of families moving out west. The West Gate Tunnel will absolutely be one of the biggest reformative projects that this government could have and will have delivered for families in Melbourne’s western suburbs.

When I reflect on the debate that has gone on in this chamber this afternoon—I have listened very carefully to those opposite—it can sometimes be a little bit tough. Listening to the member for Polwarth there at the end, I almost thought he was going to stand up and say he stands for a fairer, more equitable Victoria. And then I realised what side of the chamber, member for Polwarth, you stand on, and that most certainly could not be true, whether you are talking about tax or any other project that is delivered in this state. I have listened to those opposite go on and on about our government and accuse us of raising taxes, and sometimes I feel like we have got a little bit of an old-fashioned tune happening here and maybe a little jingle that they want to get up and sing. You know, the one we have just heard recently that did not have any sort of effect in the community—the ‘There’s a hole in your budget’ type jingle. I imagine that they would sell the point that they are trying to make much more effectively if that jingle was not so annoying and emphatically rejected right across Victoria and indeed Australia.

The reality is of course that our government has not raised taxes 42 times, as those opposite continue to assert. In fact we have cut or abolished taxes and fees 57 times since coming to government in 2014—57 times. Now, those opposite might be surprised to know that our government on this side of the house, the Andrews Labor government, has a very strong record of cutting taxes and making things easier for Victorians, because on this side of the house we are all about a fairer and more equitable Victoria for all Victorians. We have raised the tax-free threshold for payroll tax twice, making things easier for small and medium businesses in Victoria to get by.

I was sitting in my office just a while ago listening to the member for Caulfield make his contribution, and I absolutely reject the notion that the Liberal Party and the National Party here in this state stand for and stand by Victorian small businesses. We saw that at no greater time than during the last two years and the global pandemic. This government and this side of the house stood by small businesses in a way that we have probably never seen before in this state. The amount of money that was injected to small businesses, to mums and dads and to those families right across Victoria in their time of need, in their darkest hour, was extraordinary. Whether that was through constant grants and funding that were put into their bank accounts or whether it was through mentoring and mental health programs, whatever they needed, we were there to help them get by.

But what made me angriest when listening to the member for Caulfield make his contribution about small business and how we have somehow not stood by them and ruined them—you know, the member for Caulfield talks about the longest lockdowns in the world here in Victoria—is that he fails to recognise that the lockdown last year was caused because the Prime Minister, his mate in Canberra, failed to follow the advice and order enough vaccines before COVID really hit this country. We should have been vaccinated. Victorians and Australians should have been vaccinated before we ended up in that last lockdown, and that is what made me angriest.

Of all the lockdowns, we should not have been in that situation, because the Prime Minister failed Australia and failed Victorians. They failed small businesses. Small businesses were hurt because of the time that it took for us to deliver the vaccine rollout. And when the vaccines arrived the Prime Minister, the Liberal Party and the coalition government could not even get the messaging right. An education awareness campaign—again we had to step in and do their job for them. The best thing that the Liberal and National Party here on that side of the house could have and should have done, which the member for Caulfield should reflect on, is that they should have picked up the phone and spoken to their mates in Canberra, begging them to get those vaccines into the arms of Victorians so we could open back up and small businesses could get back on their feet. I bet not one of them made one of those phone calls.

Now, I want to talk about regional payroll tax. We have cut the regional payroll tax to just a quarter of the metropolitan rate. That means regional businesses have been able to thrive, giving us the lowest unemployment rate in this country at less than half of what it was when this government came to office. That is not even mentioning the tax relief that businesses received during the pandemic, and as I said before, that was extraordinary. Huge amounts of money went into helping businesses during the pandemic.

I want to look at some of these tax increases that the opposition keep talking about. Might they include the point-of-consumption wagering and betting tax which, let us remember, they voted for and emphatically were in support of? Might they include the mental health levy to support rebuilding our mental health system? Well, you will forgive me for not knowing or not being able to recall whether or not they actually supported that one. I think I saw absentee landowner surcharges for foreign purchasers listed six times in their list—a seventh of these new or increased taxes. And let me remind those opposite that tax on foreign purchasers is not making life tougher for ordinary Victorians. Rather, this tax makes it easier for Victorians to buy a home in an increasingly difficult market so that first home buyers or local property investors, if you are worried about them, are not being outbid by foreign developers. So for the life of me I cannot wrap my head around this dodgy list that the opposition have cooked up and continue to cook up about taxes.

I think the federal election has now shown us how Victorians reacted to their rhetoric on tax. That ‘There’s a hole in your budget, dear Labor; more taxes are coming’ I remember hearing them singing on the news—well, I hate to break it to those opposite, but after Saturday night, ‘There’s a hole in your party, dear Liberals, and more and more and more losses will be coming at you. I think we will see how this rhetoric does play out and what matters to Victorians in November, because ordinary Victorians are not listening to this kind of nonsense that is constantly put before the house by those opposite.

But I want to draw back, in the 90 seconds that I have, to make a contribution to this bill, because there are actually some hidden gems in here. So for all this talk about tax increases, if we have a look at what is in the bill, there is actually an exemption for wheelchair-accessible commercial vehicles from paying motor vehicle duty. Now, the Andrews Labor government believes in creating a fairer, more equitable Victoria, and that is for everyone. If you are in a wheelchair, if you have special needs, if you have a disability, we have introduced significant legislative reform to help improve the quality of life for you. This tax will do the same thing. We are talking about having a new wheelchair-accessible vehicle tax exemption, and we know that for Victorians in wheelchairs it is really difficult to find public transport to take them from here to there. There is a struggle to find taxis and Ubers that can accommodate their wheelchairs, and hopefully through this change in this bill this tax will help improve things for people in wheelchairs looking to catch taxis and Ubers and private modes of transport to get them to where they need to go.

This is a great bill. It is going to help improve things for people, whether we are talking about people in wheelchairs being able to access better transport or measures and things like that. This is another great bill that we are introducing to the house to make Victoria fair and equitable.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Ms Crugnale): The member for Rowswell—no, the member for Sandringham.

Mr ROWSWELL (Sandringham) (16:09): Call me what you like, Acting Speaker. I am here and on my feet and ready to take down the government with this contribution on the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. It is all right; we all make mistakes, and I am about to admit a biggie. I did make a mistake in this chamber historically. I once during the course of a government business program debate said that the government’s only economic plan for Victoria was to tax and spend, tax and spend, tax and spend, trying to echo the sentiment of Mr Squiggle, a childhood character of mine. But I was wrong. I am happy to admit that I was wrong. It has become clearer to me since I made that contribution in this place some time ago that the government’s only economic plan is really to tax and waste, tax and waste, tax and waste. You need to measure that with the following: Victoria at the moment is carrying the largest debt of all states and territories. Victoria’s debt is heading to a combined total of New South Wales, Queensland and Tasmania’s. There has been a whopping $24 billion—$24 billion, with a ‘b’—that has been blown out in government projects. That amount of money could have paid for some 1600 new schools or, at a time when we are experiencing a health and hospital crisis in this state, 120 000 new ambulances, fully fitted out, on the road, there to help our fellow Victorians at a time when they need it most. The situation in Victoria’s economy is nothing to gloat about; it is particularly shameful.

My interest in matters of taxation goes way back to my first speech in this place. From a philosophical perspective I do not like tax. This side of the house does not like tax. When we say there will be no new taxes, we mean there will be no new taxes, unlike the Premier in that famous interview with Channel 7 on—

Mr Battin: With Peter Mitchell.

Mr ROWSWELL: Yes, with Peter Mitchell on Seven News—thank you, member for Gembrook—on the eve of the 2014 election. When we say there will be no new taxes, we absolutely mean there will be no new taxes. In December 2018, when I made my first contribution in this place, I said:

Let me be clear: payroll tax is a tax on employment. It is a bad tax that prevents enterprising individuals from expanding their business horizons. It is a barrier to more people being employed. It should always be the aspiration of the Liberal Party, in opposition or government, for the payroll tax in this state to be zero. When Robert Menzies founded the Liberal Party he did so in the belief that our party would be the party of enterprise and of the individual. There is no greater barrier to employment and the dignity of work than the burden of taxes and over-regulation.

That final sentence especially—‘There is no greater barrier to employment and the dignity of work than the burden of taxes and over-regulation’—is truer now than it has ever been before. We look back to the last two years: a one-in-100-year event, as we are continually reminded of, and yes, there have been significant health implications. But equally there have been significant economic implications as well, and the solution in these times is not to simply tax more and spend more, tax more and waste more; the solution is to remove the tax burden so enterprising individuals can create jobs. The phrase ‘the dignity of work’ is not some sort of esoteric thing that is far removed from the realities of our daily lives. The dignity of work means that people do not just have a job but have an opportunity to feel worth, to feel dignity, to provide for themselves, to provide for their families, to pay their school fees, to pay their mortgages, to save up and to take their families on a holiday. Very often in this place we talk about numbers as if they are far removed from reality, not recognising the impact that those opportunities actually have on the lives of people. I think it is important for us to be reminded of that.

Victorians hoping for a bit of hip pocket relief in the Victorian budget this year are sadly disappointed, and they will be hit with billions of dollars of increased taxation, including an increased $603 million in land tax, up 14.2 per cent; $1.5 billion in stamp duty on land transfers, up 22.6 per cent; and $1.1 billion in payroll tax—that dreaded payroll tax—up 17 per cent just in the coming year.

I would like to spend the final time that I have articulating for those who may be interested just some of the new and increased taxes and charges introduced by the Andrews Labor government since November 2014: a new stamp duty on property transfers between spouses; an increased stamp duty on new cars; a new stamp duty on off-the-plan purchases; a new so-called vacant home tax; a widening of vacant residential land tax to uninhabitable properties; retrospective increases in insurance duty for overseas-based insurers; a new annual property valuation to increase land tax; a cladding rectification tax; an environment litigation levy; an increase to the luxury car tax; increased land tax for homes with contiguous blocks on a separate title; an increased fire services property levy not only in 2015–16 but in 2019–20; a new point-of-consumption gambling tax; a tripling of brown coal royalties; gold mining royalties; a new tax on Uber and taxi fares; a new corporate restructure duty; increased foreign stamp duty not only in 2019–20 but in 2016–17 and 2015–16; an increased absentee landowner surcharge for foreign property; an increased absentee owner surcharge for foreign property in 2019–20, 2016–17 and 2015–16; a new city access tax for the West Gate Tunnel; a new on-dock rail charge on imported shipping containers; an increase to the municipal and industrial landfill levy, the bin tax; a road occupation charge on construction companies; a numberplate tax; an electric vehicle tax—I am just two-thirds of the way through; a new affordable housing tax; a windfall gains tax on rezoned land; number 32, an increased land tax on taxable landholdings above $1.8 million; increased stamp duty on property transactions; an expanded point-of-consumption tax on gambling to keno; a 10 per cent increase to Victorian government penalty units; an expanded land tax on gender-exclusive clubs; a mental health payroll tax surcharge; an increased wagering and betting tax; an increased fire services property levy in 2021–22; a 50 per cent increase to Victorian Registry of Births, Deaths and Marriages fees; a new family homes tax; and number 42, a proposed levy on employers to fund five days of sick leave for casual employees, initially a government-funded trial but which no doubt will be followed up with a new tax after that two-year trial has concluded.

I conclude where I began: the government’s economic plan is quite clearly tax and spend, tax and waste. That is not good for Victorians at this time in our history. That is not good at a time when our community and our economy need optimism and hope, need certainty for the future and need government to frankly get out of the way so private enterprise can get about doing what it does best, and that is creating opportunities for Victorians, giving people a go and giving people an opportunity to work so they can provide for themselves and provide for their families. It is fundamentally who we are as Liberals, and Labor should get out of the way.

Mr KENNEDY (Hawthorn) (16:19): I am delighted to be following the member for Sandringham in these matters. It gives me pleasure to speak on the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. We all know about the Andrews Labor government’s record on the implementation of a progressive taxation system, but I would like to reiterate the fact that across our term in government we have cut or abolished taxes and fees 57 times. Who is counting? I think both sides are doing a bit of counting, and that is my contribution to the count. The member for Sandringham indicated that he did not like taxes, especially payroll taxes, and then he went ahead and named all the taxes that are here in this state of Victoria. He then offered that notion of tax as waste, with an emphasis on the tax and no elucidation on the waste.

When I came into this place, once I worked out what the hell I was doing here I had to think about what would be the mantra for me, and the answer was to look for a Victoria that is fair, productive and compassionate. I keep repeating that, and I quite understand that there is no good wanting something compassionate if there is no productivity to support that compassion, and the same with fairness. But I do have a problem with some of the rhetoric, if you like, that one hears from the other side here and then federally about tax. The late Prime Minister was fond of saying—and I have repeated it actually, so I am as bad as him—and kept saying ‘It’s your money, it’s your money, it’s your money’ and variations on that theme like ‘It’s your money. It’s your money. It’s your money’. That to me was problematic because at no time was there any attempt to say ‘Well, with these taxes we will be producing these goods’. Instead of that we salve our conscience by saying ‘All you’ll be producing is waste, and therefore, because you’re producing waste, taxes are wrong’. It is a fairly vacuous argument in my opinion. One really has to say that taxation is there and, while no-one would say they highly embrace taxation, we have to recognise that there is a common good being served in taxation. I would simply repeat that in responding to the member for Sandringham and his dislike of taxes.

Let us talk about the Andrews tax cuts. We have increased the payroll tax free threshold twice since coming into government. Maybe I need to repeat that: we have increased the payroll tax free threshold twice since coming into government. Now fewer small to medium-sized businesses pay any payroll tax at all. Last July we cut the regional payroll tax to 1.2125 per cent, just a quarter of the metropolitan rate and the lowest in Australia. After all, it is because of measures like this that we have seen regional unemployment fall to 3.2 per cent, the lowest in the nation. Even in the pandemic our payroll tax cuts saved Victorian businesses $1.7 billion up to 2021–22 and will save them around $4 billion over the forward estimates. These are more than just bland statistics; they are the results of an approach that has balanced the needs of business, individuals and our government to create Australia’s best economy.

Now let us turn to the farcical coalition list of 42 new or increased taxes. This appears to have captured their imagination, and they have gone on with monotonous regularity almost to the point of actually believing it. It is genuinely beyond me how the opposition can count the point-of-consumption wagering and betting tax, which they both voted for and supported vocally, on this list. They have also chucked in the mental health levy, which they have finally decided to support after wavering for yonks. How desperate can the opposition get? I understand being scared after the weekend’s results, but this is patently absurd. How about the absentee landowner surcharge for foreign purchasers being on the list six times? I did not think it was such a controversial idea that we should work to improve housing supply. For those opposite: it is a fact that taxes on foreign purchasers are not taxes on Victorians. I know by now that we are used to these bad faith arguments from the opposition, but it is clear to all of us that the Andrews government has been a fierce advocate for all Victorians and all Victorian businesses.

What about the increased tax on electronic gaming machines? Now, this is an interesting one. One of the key changes within this bill is that from 2023 Crown’s electronic gaming machines will be subject to the same tax rates as those operated by not-for-profit community-based venues like RSLs—fancy that. I would like to take a moment to speak about the harm of these gaming machines. In 2019 Victorians lost $2.7 billion on these machines. They lost $460 million in Crown Casino on the pokies alone. I am sure we are familiar with the scourge of pokies in this state. The addiction and ultimate consequences that these machines can visit upon their victims is a modern tragedy, and now the first group of changes in our response to the royal commission includes the coalition-introduced laws that prevented the state from changing regulations in respect to Crown without having to pay compensation. This is a change that makes our tax system fairer. Crown does not deserve preferential tax treatment.

Indeed I am going to read to you a selection of Ray Finkelstein’s words used to describe Crown Melbourne, which formed a headline in the Age: ‘Disgraceful, illegal, dishonest, unethical, exploitative, alarming’—otherwise everything is okay. These are not words used to describe an organisation that deserves preferential tax treatment, and indeed I am thrilled that this government has boosted funding to the new regulator, the Victorian Gambling and Casino Control Commission. Crown may have kept its licence, but it is vital that it comes under intense regulatory scrutiny and that the ramifications are felt not just at Crown but across the entire gambling industry. I am sure we have all seen recently that they already commenced disciplinary proceedings against Crown Melbourne. It is not just one regulator taking issue with Crown, though, as a statement of claim was lodged by the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre for contraventions of anti-money-laundering and counterterrorism financing laws. The case for this change is clear, and I am glad that oversight of Crown is not a lottery anymore.

The windfall gains tax is another one that it just surprises me people are shedding—well, probably crocodile—tears over. As we are aware, the 2021–22 budget saw that the government introduced the windfall gains tax on rezoning decisions that create an increase in land value of more than $100 000. This will allow the community to receive their fair share of the value from the government rezoning decisions. It will allow us to avoid a Fishermans Bend situation, as we all know how the Leader of the Opposition rezoned this area, granting a huge profit to a litany of Liberal cronies. It is no surprise that the remnants of our Victorian Liberals’ federal counterparts have been opposed to a federal independent commission against corruption with their state branch up to this kind of mischief.

As part of our consultation with stakeholders during the process of developing this measure, we as a government agreed to an up-front exemption on land by an Australian university in certain circumstances. To apply, the university must satisfy the commissioner of state revenue that any revenue derived from the rezoned land will be used for the charitable purposes of the university. I am glad that this state government backs universities, and I am excited to have a federal government that appreciates these institutions as well. Whilst many elements of this bill may appear to be incremental, together they combine to significantly improve our taxation system.

Ms GREEN (Yan Yean) (16:29): Unlike the pearl clutchers just around this side of the house a little bit further from me, who have been expressing their shock and awe over the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022—the quite reasonable taxation measures that have been introduced within this year’s state budget—I welcome these changes, and I simply do not see why you could not welcome measures like, in particular, the motor vehicle duty exemption for wheelchair-accessible commercial passenger vehicles providing unbooked services.

I have spoken a number of times in this place about loving the High Country and wanting it to be accessible for everyone, and I am looking forward to the opening of the ski season in a couple of weeks time and reconnecting with Disabled Wintersport Australia, of which I am a member. After two long years of not being able to volunteer I am really looking forward to volunteering and helping participants with a disability achieve their goals in the High Country. Whether they have a mobility disability, are vision impaired, have Down syndrome or are on the spectrum, Disabled Wintersport takes all comers, but a lot of the focus is mostly on those with mobility issues. We have seen a number of those people go on and represent Australia in the Paralympics, but it takes a lot. I have seen in my volunteer work particularly with people with disability the courage and bravery of those with a mobility disability, and for them to come to the High Country or participate in any sport is much harder. It is also harder to participate in work, so this is a fantastic budget measure.

In the budget what is changing—if this bill passes this house and the house next door—is that from 1 July 2022 an exemption from motor vehicle duty will apply to new or near-new wheelchair-accessible vehicles that will be registered as commercial passenger vehicles and meet the relevant requirements to provide unbooked services—that is, taxi rank and hail work. If the vehicle is not new—that is, it has been registered before in Victoria or another jurisdiction—the exemption will only apply if it has been less than two years since the vehicle was first registered. We want the safest and best vehicles on the road carrying around people with disability. Currently an exemption from the motor vehicle duty is available for a privately owned motor vehicle that has been or will be specially converted to provide wheelchair access to the owner or a family member, and a commercial passenger vehicle converted for wheelchair access may also qualify for an existing $24 000 reduction in the dutiable value of the vehicle if the vehicle is new—that is, previously unregistered.

The amendment expands and complements the current suite of motor vehicle duty exemptions and concessions for the transport of people with a disability, handicap or other injury by providing a new full exemption for a vehicle that is converted for wheelchair access to be used to provide unbooked commercial passenger vehicle services and such services as are currently provided by the traditional taxi industry. Accordingly, this measure is directed at supporting more wheelchair-accessible taxis. I think that particularly at a time when we have a massive skill shortage in Australia—there are many jobs in Australia and Victoria that are being unfilled—and I know that when I have travelled in Europe it is really much more common to see people with disability in the workplace, it needs to be more common in Australia and in Victoria. Australia has the lowest rate of employment of people with disability in the OECD, and it is measures like this that can turn that around. We want people with disability to be able to get to work, whether it is driving themselves or whether it is getting on an accessible bus or in an accessible taxi.

So I am just not from the school that the minute you say the word ‘tax’, that tax is bad. Exemptions from tax are good, like this one, but our taxes actually fund the services that our community needs. I note that the opposition are apparently a late convert to the mental health levy, but I simply am not very trusting of them when they say things like that, given how long they have been opposed to it.

Other measures in this State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill include replacing the current refund model for recently constructed or renovated principal places of residence with an up-front exemption from land tax, including the clawback mechanism; expanding the exemption for land under construction to include land on which a specialist disability accommodation enrolled dwelling is being constructed—yet another measure where we are seeing how we assist people with disability to live and work in our community; confirming that an exemption applies to wages paid by employment agents who on-hire their common law employees to clients that are exempt from payroll tax; clarifying the point in time at which a deemed assessment, for land transfer duty purposes, is taken to have been made and served where the dutiable transaction is processed using the online payment system; and confirming that an estimate of duty is not an assessment of tax.

The bill makes further amendments to permit the disclosure of protected information to specified commonwealth enforcement bodies and enable further commonwealth enforcement bodies to be prescribed by regulation. The bill proposes to remove the prohibition on secondary disclosures of protected information where the person to whom the information relates consents to the initial disclosure. It places a maximum five-year time limit on the discretion to permit late lodgement of an out-of-time objection and provides an exemption from the windfall gains tax for rezoned land owned by a university in certain circumstances. The bill also amends the Borrowing and Investment Powers Act 1987 to provide financial accommodation with an associated statutory guarantee to local councils under that act and replace the mechanisms that specify all the persons and bodies to which certain powers apply under the act with a power for such bodies to be prescribed in regulations. And it amends the Essential Services Commission Act 2001 to clarify funding arrangements.

In relation to the Borrowing and Investment Powers Act, something that I know you, Acting Speaker Crugnale, given that we both represent the Shire of Nillumbik, understand is that they have a very small rate base, a small population and a large geographic area to deliver services to and to provide infrastructure to. Councils having the ability to borrow and to be supported by state government and get their interest rate at the same rate as state government is able to borrow at just means that things can be brought forward and can be built for the benefit of the community, so I am glad that we are doing further work in that.

Some of the things I mentioned earlier relate to connections with the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre, and so it is very important that we are able to ensure that we are working with AUSTRAC to make sure that duties are properly paid but also that we are able to follow where they are going—follow the money, essentially. There is a large suite of changes that are proposed in this amendment bill. I thank the Treasurer and the Assistant Treasurer for their work on this and the public servants who drafted it, and I commend the bill to the house.

Ms SULEYMAN (St Albans) (16:39): I rise today to also speak on the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. As many speakers have said today, this is a significant bill for our community and of course our state. Since the Andrews Labor government came in we have cut or abolished taxes some 57 times, and during the pandemic alone we were able to support Victorians, in particular small businesses, by saving $1.7 billion from payroll tax cuts alone. Just during COVID alone in the City of Brimbank small businesses received financial supports of close to $292 million from our government. This was extremely critical for most businesses in my electorate so they could continue during these challenging periods to remain open in some way but, most importantly, stay afloat during, as I said, these challenging last two years.

Today I am here to discuss some of the new tax incentives that will bring strong benefits not only to my electorate but also to the Victorian community. This includes motor vehicle duty. It is important that Victorians have access to safe and suitable transport, and our government is seeking to make sure that wheelchair users have access to commercial passenger vehicles without having to book ahead, which at times can create stress and anxiety. This is why an exemption for motor vehicle duty will be introduced for new commercial passenger vehicles, such as taxis, if they meet the requirements for wheelchair accessibility. I know in my electorate this will be an important piece of change. It will also apply to vehicles which are unbooked services, meaning that Victorians can hail them from the side of the road, where it is convenient, or request a ride at a taxi rank. The owner of the vehicle will save thousands in the cost of duty by making sure that their car or vehicle is suitable for everyone to travel in.

This is really important for residents and those community members who have some form of disability and need wheelchair accessibility to be able to travel from A to B. This way there will be more suitable vehicles on roads, which will help, as I said, not only those with disability but family members as well. Of course accessibility is absolutely critical in our community. We want to make sure that every barrier when it comes to transport is removed and people are not limited in their options to travel across their communities.

Just recently I had the pleasure of again visiting the Brimbank Bicycle Education Centre and being able to witness firsthand their disability riding program. I was joined by the Minister for Disability, Ageing and Carers, and we were able to see firsthand the great work that the Brimbank Bicycle Education Centre and their volunteers are doing with their local disability agencies to enrich the lives of and provide positive experiences for those who have a disability, whether they are mid aged or whether they are young children. It was great to see some of their programs making sure that Victorians have access to the best opportunities regardless of their ability. The Andrews Labor government is committed to supporting, as we know, all Victorians, including those with a disability, and this scheme will make a real difference in the lives of so many.

Another part of this amendment is the land tax exemption for specialist disability accommodation. Again, this is another incentive being brought in to support Victorians with a disability—the exemption from land tax. We know the cost of land tax can be pretty high and for some not affordable. Land that has a specialist disability accommodation enrolled dwelling built on it means that the dwelling is in a building that has been specifically designed to support people with sensory, intellectual and physical impairments. That particular building that has that specialised accommodation will be exempt, and also on top of that the exemption will be retrospective, meaning that anyone who paid land tax on eligible properties within the last two years will be able to claim a refund. As I said, we are extremely proud, and this is part of our foundation of supporting Victorians with a disability or people with health conditions. It is just absolutely important that we have the right support programs and the incentives that place Victorians with adequate support. I think that is important, having that adequate support.

Another part of this package will include tax on gaming machines in casinos. For the many years it has been in Melbourne Crown Casino has had a tax advantage over small gaming venues in relation to how much they pay on their electronic gaming machines due to previous decisions by previous governments. We know that gaming machines are big business and bring huge amounts of revenue to Crown and also to smaller venues across the state. Many of these machines are located across Victoria, and of course Brimbank has high losses when it comes to gaming machines. It is clearly appropriate for our government to change the rules to make sure that Crown will pay its fair share when it comes to revenue made from electronic machines. These rules should be applied to all gaming operators equally, and I think that is a fair outcome. This legislation will mean that Crown will need to pay the same amount of tax as every other organisation in relation to gaming machines in Victoria. This will be partly about making it fair and in line with other gaming operators and the revenue that is paid back to the state. Importantly this simple change will generate up to $30 million per year, and those are significant funds that can be invested back into communities to benefit all Victorians. This is important. Not only will it make it on par with all other gaming operators, but it will also generate that income back to the state.

Of course these reforms are all part of a package and about investing in Victoria, making it fairer, making it equal and building on the state’s future, whether that is ensuring Crown Casino pays its fair share, supporting people with a disability, boosting incentives on tertiary education or our government backing the Victorian economy so that we can continue to be the powerhouse of the nation and invest in a fairer and more just state for all Victorians.

We have just seen the in last two years a very challenging period, and I must commend the Treasurer for his steady leadership of our economy and for leading us through a global pandemic. There have been global ramifications that have affected everybody, including Victoria, but we have been able, despite the challenges and despite the negativity, to continue. You know, as I said in my earlier introduction, just in Brimbank alone we have been supporting businesses with over $200 million in financial support for local businesses during the last two years. We continue to be the government that is steady and continue to be the government that is responsible economically. We are investing back into the community and making those important reforms where they are needed. I thank the Treasurer for this bill.

Mr FOWLES (Burwood) (16:49): Those of us of a certain age will recall with some fondness the show the Muppets, and it is great to be joined by Waldorf and Statler this evening as I bring the week home with this State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022.

A member interjected.

Mr FOWLES: Well, who is going to be Gonzo, mate? Come on. I am absolutely delighted to be seeing out the week with the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. Can I begin by thanking the Assistant Treasurer, Minister for Regulatory Reform, Minister for Government Services and Minister for Creative Industries, the member for Essendon, for his work and the work of his team in bringing this bill into the chamber. It is a bill that deals with some big things and it is a bill that deals with some very, very small things, but one of the more substantial things is the important work this bill does in relation to the provision of wheelchair-accessible transport. I notice that the Minister for Public Transport is at the table, and he knows, and those in my community know—even in the case of my staff, we know—that wheelchair accessibility is a critical enabler of those who have the misfortune of being in a wheelchair being able to access employment, access health services, access education and training, so much of it. Whilst there are many more options than there have been in the past, there is always more to do in relation to wheelchair accessibility.

The amendments made in this bill remove one of the cost burdens on those commercial passenger vehicle services that are able to provide unbooked services, the lay term for which is taxis. We are not talking about booked services like DiDi, Uber, the rideshares—those services. It is those services that can be found at a taxi rank or simply hailed on the street. Those services will benefit from an exemption from motor vehicle duty. An exemption is currently available for those private motor vehicles that will be specially converted to provide wheelchair access, and there is already a $24 000 reduction in the dutiable value of a vehicle where it is used commercially. But what this does is it gets rid of that threshold, simplifies it and just says simply that there is no duty payable. It is not about the dutiable value. There is simply no duty at all. That is a $2.7 million commitment over the forward estimates period. That is not a vast amount of money in the context of government expenditure, but it makes it really clear to those commercial passenger vehicle providers who are contemplating providing a wheelchair service that they will not be paying stamp duty on the vehicle they use to provide that service. It is an additional incentive, an important incentive to ensure that we continue to have the provision of those services, because it does not matter how good the bus network is, it does not matter how good the tram network is, it does not matter how many flat-floor superstops or whatever we have in place, there will always be a need for specific point-to-point transport for wheelchair-based people. There is no doubt that you are always going to need to have some add-on service because in many cases there are going to be significant limitations on getting, for example, from a regional railway station to home. There is always going to be a need for this sort of commercial passenger vehicle service, and I think this is a very, very good measure to improve the availability of those services by decreasing the tax burden on the provision of them.

There are some land tax amendments in this bill, and they go particularly to the land tax and the stamp duty in relation to land tax when a construction or renovation is happening—a new build on a site. Under the current model it is given back by way of refund at the end of the process. That obviously is a significant cash flow imposition on the taxpayer. We are proposing to make it an exemption that is then available up-front, so the cash never has to be paid and then refunded. Obviously that is administratively simpler, but it is also intrinsically fairer and I think that is a very good reform. In fact it brings us almost identically in line with the way in which that exemption is structured in New South Wales. Of course, there is always the temptation for cynical purveyors of our trade to criticise a policy in the hands of one party and then praise the same policy in the hands of another, but New South Wales got it right. We are happy to be following their model, and we will not seek to take the opportunistic path that others might in seeking to simply criticise a policy based upon the proponents of it rather than the merits of it.

I have 4 minutes left, and I will exhaust my time in order that the whip does not have to wax too lyrical in the 30 seconds he has available to him to close out the week. There is a nigh on overwhelming temptation to sit down, I have got to say, and make him johnny-on-the-spot, but his capacity for retribution is far more significant than mine, and I dare not poke the beast.

A member: The bear.

Mr FOWLES: Thank you. This bill also introduces an exemption from land tax on specialist disability accommodation. Now, we hear the acronym SDA, and that causes the hackles of some people in our movement to get up, but in fact SDA in this context is specialist disability accommodation, and specialist disability accommodation is entirely worthy of an exemption from land tax. A discrete exemption, a small exemption, has been available since the 2020 land tax year for land that is occupied or available for occupation, but it was not extended to land that was in that construction phase. So what we are doing now is making sure that land in that construction phase, land that is in the process of becoming specialist disability accommodation, is in fact exempted from land tax. That is an entirely sensible measure—a measure that will continue to encourage supply of this very, very important category of accommodation into the market.

There are some further amendments that might be best described as administrative in nature. The Taxation Administration Act 1997 is a ripping read I am told, and I am sure that we could delve right into the detail there, but these amendments are largely administrative in nature. They are not particularly controversial. Perhaps evidence of that is that the opposition is not opposing this bill—evidence of that is in their stance on it.

So there is the windfall gains tax amendment, and the windfall gains tax, as you know, was introduced about this time last year I think. It is a very, very sensible revenue measure, because it ensures that the value uplift that comes from the stroke of the ministerial pen or the stroke of the mayor’s pen—that is, the financial uplift that is delivered solely by government action, not just by the passage of time—is shared with the public. That is a very, very sound principle. It is a principle that makes certain that where those landowners have benefited from government action—in many cases government action that they have neither instigated nor sought—they share the revenue and share that uplift or part of that uplift back with the state government.

That windfall gains tax does not kick in until 1 July next year, and it is only for land that increases in value by at least $100 000. There are plenty of exemptions, like residential land up to 2 hectares, which is 5 acres in the old money, and there are of course some important carve-outs here for things like charities and universities.

So all in all it is a balanced bill, it is sensible bill, it is a bill that supports the very important revenue measures that the state has. We will do our level best to see it carried through this place and the next.

Mr CHEESEMAN (South Barwon) (16:59): It is with some pleasure that I make a very, very short contribution on this bill. I think it is fair to say that the State Taxation and Treasury Legislation Amendment Bill 2022 ought really be read in conjunction with the Appropriation (2022–2023) Bill 2022, because of course the tax bill very much goes to the revenue measures that need to underpin the arrangements as spelt out very clearly indeed by the budget. And I must say we need to read both of those bills in the extraordinary circumstances that our government has faced.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The time set down for consideration of items on the government business program has arrived, and I am required to interrupt business.

Motion agreed to.

Read second time.

Third reading

Motion agreed to.

Read third time.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The bill will now be sent to the Legislative Council and their agreement requested.