Nuna Wading Province by -Election
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Questions without Notice 6 May 1986 ASSEMBLY 1661 Tuesday, 6 May 1986 The SPEAKER (the Hon. C. T. Edmunds) took the chair at 2.7 p.m. and read the prayer. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE NUNAWADING PROVINCE BY -ELECTION Mr AUSTIN (Ripon)-I refer to the police report into the role of the mountain district cattlemen in the Nunawading Province by-election. Will the Premier confirm that the report states that full co-operation was received from all people the police approached, except members of the Australian Labor Party; that it further found that no direction and no finance had been given by the Liberal Party to the mountain district cattlemen; and, finally, that paragraph 95 on page 211 of the report indicated that the police had been used for political purposes? Mr CAIN (Premier)-I cannot comment on the assertions of the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. The matters to which he refers are properly within the domain of the police and the Chief Electoral Officer. The Government has made it clear that it will not intrude into those matters. However, if the Opposition wants to do so, it is a matter for it to decide. The Government has strong views about the independence and detachment of those officers in respect of any complaints and investigations into those matters. That is where the matter will remain, so far as the Government is concerned. The honourable member can canvass the gossip and leaks as much as he likes, but I shall not be commenting on them. Mr ROSS-EDW ARDS (Leader of the National Party)-I direct a further question to the Premier. Having regard to the fact that the report of the Nunawading Province by election inquiry has been seen by many people, apart from those mentioned by the Premier previously, will the Premier give an undertaking that those matters will now be debated in this House prior to the adjournment of the sitting? Mr CAIN (Premier)-I will not be giving any such undertaking for the simple reason that I do not regard those matters as being in the domain of Parliament. The Leader of the Opposition may not know what the process is, but I believe the Leader of the National Party ought to know what it is. The Chief Electoral Officer has a role to play in this matter. He has already indicated publicly that he is dealing with the matter, and that is where it should remain. The Chief Electoral Officer deals with all complaints and all inquiries, whether they concern the mountain cattlemen or what happened in Gippsland South or any other electoral matter. They are matters for him, whatever they are. The Government has said-and I believe this is the correct approach-that this is not a matter in the domain of politicians. The Act lays down a course of conduct and several responsibilities. The Government has taken no part in that process, nor will it. Let me make it very clear that the role and the discretion of the Chief Electoral Officer are matters for him; they are not Government business and they will not be Government business under this Government. The Chief Electoral Officer, like other statutory office-holders in the State, has an independent and detached role. Rumour has it that the Leader of the Opposition rings up the Chief Electoral Officer about this matter. I believe the honourable gentleman has no right to ring him up on this matter, nor does any other honourable member have any such right. 1662 ASSEMBLY 6 May 1986 Questions without Notice The Chief Electoral Officer has a perfect entitlement to make a decision free of any pressure of that kind, and I believe he will do so. THIRD-PARTY INSURANCE Mr ROWE (Essendon)-In view of the public concern about the present situation with compulsory third-party insurance in the State, can the Premier indicate to the House what steps the Government has taken to remedy the situation? Mr CAIN (Premier)-Unless reforms are undertaken, the costs of transport accident insurance in the State may prevent many Victorians from being able to own and run motor cars because the cost of claims over the past six years has risen by some 370 per cent. Recently the Premiums Advisory Committee recommended to the Treasurer an increase in third-party premiums to around $500, which is an increase of 176 per cent on the present premiums. Our reforms and proposals will be announced on Thursday. We believe they provide a package which will stabilize the costs of the system and ensure that transport accident insurance is fixed at a level that will enable all Victorians to pay it. Yesterday I was somewhat surprised that the Opposition should suddenly believe it has found some wisdom on this issue, after being in office for some 27 years. It put out a package that, predictably, was shallow and really did not do anything. When the Opposition was in government, it sat year after year and watched the costs of third-party insurance spiral and did nothing about those costs. If yesterday's effort is the best the Opposition can do on this issue, it is clear that it has not learned anything over the past four years in the relative sterility of being in opposition because it cannot put together a reasonable and cogent package. I want to make one thing clear: the Government is not prepared to increase the tax burden on Victorians to pay for third-party insurance. The Leader of the National Party laughs. I do not know what his party's package is, but, that is the effect of the Liberal Party package. It will put a new tax on all families because it proposes to place a surcharge on the licences to fund a shortfall that has already occurred within the consolidated revenue. If the Liberal Party is to fund the $600 million or $700 million shortfall, which taxes does it propose to increase to pay for it? Will the Liberal Party increase taxes or introduce new taxes? It should make up its mind because two new taxes are contemplated. Mr KENNETT (Leader of the Opposition)-On a point of order, I can understand the Premier and the Government being embarrassed, but the Premier is now debating the issue. I suggest that he has answered the question and that the House should proceed with question time. Mr FORDHAM (Minister for Industry, Technology and Resources)-On the point of order, as I recall, the question asked the Premier what steps the Government is taking. The Premier is outlining the steps the Government is taking. Obviously the Opposition does not like the steps the Government is taking, but it is nonsense to suggest that the Premier is debating the issue. The SPEAKER-Order! I do not uphold the point of order. The Standing Orders make it clear that a Minister may not debate a reply to a question, but I do not uphold the point of order. Mr CAIN (Premier)-It is not the Government's intention to seek to solve the problems by imposing a new levy on licence-holders. A levy of $30 per licence would mean that some families would have to pay an additional $120 a year. It is not the Government's intention to fund any shortfall from consolidated revenue and increase taxes as a consequence. Mr Kennett inteIjected. Questions without Notice 6 May 1986 ASSEMBLY 1663 Mr CAIN-Honourable members should consider what the proposal of the Liberal Party will do to a one-car family where four or five drivers share a car. The Government's proposals will recognize that that is not the way to treat Victorian motorists. It is a set of proposals that recognizes the need to ensure that people are cared for as a result of motor accidents. Mr DELZOPPO (Narracan)-On a point of order, the Premier is comparing two policies, so it is obvious he is debating the question. My point of order is that he should not be able to do so. The SPEAKER-Order! I do not uphold the point of order, but I direct the attention of honourable members to Standing Order No. 127 regarding the debating of matters in replies to questions without notice. I ask the Premier to round offhis remarks. Mr CAIN (Premier)-The Government will be undertaking a fundamental reform that does not try to patch up things by levying more taxes on people. It will be a fundamental reform that recognizes the shortcomings of the current system and addresses them as the people would wish them to be addressed. FRINGE BENEFIT TAX ON MOTOR VEHICLES Mr STOCKDALE (Brighton)-I refer the Treasurer to the statement of the Federal Treasurer last week that the fringe benefit tax is pitched at all employers and will apply to Commonwealth, State and local government authorities. Has the State Government brought or leased vehicles since that tax was foreshadowed in September; does the State know how many thousands of taxable vehicles are owned by State departments, agencies or authorities; and has the State Treasurer calculated how much tax the Victorian community will have to pay, through the State Government, for those vehicles? Mr JOLLY (Treasurer)-In respect of the details, it is not possible to give any indication of the total number of vehicles within the public sector. We are currently in the process of assessing the total impact of the new tax package on the State Government position and, when that assessment is made, it will be allowed for in the Budget.