House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Bills Valuation of Land (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill VALUATION OF LAND (MISCELLANEOUS) AMENDMENT BILL Second Reading Second Reading Second Reading. Mr VENNING House of Assembly Schubert Mr VENNING (Schubert) (11:20): I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The opposition certainly supports this bill, which was introduced in the other chamber. We congratulate the Hon. Mr Darley on bringing this bill to the parliament. As a previous valuer-general, I think the Hon. Mr Darley is a great asset to this parliament. This bill clarifies many points in the act, and this will have the effect of making the whole process more transparent and will lead to a more open state government. The valuation of land has implications for rates and taxes, and therefore landowners will be very interested in being able to assess the valuation of their property. This bill will also reduce significantly the red tape. It is often a deliberate ploy by some government departments, particularly the lands department, to put before our constituents a barage of bureaucracy and red tape, and this bill will, where possible, reduce the red tape. The Hon. John Darley would certainly know where that red tape is because of his previous position as the valuer-general here in South Australia, and his knowledge in that area is further proof that he is a great asset to this parliament. Landowners will have free and open access to the information that the valuers themselves use to arrive at their valuations, and landowners will have much more information at their disposal to assess whether or not they agree with the valuation of their property. I believe this is a very good motion, and the Hon. John Darley has certainly put a lot of effort into this bill. I also note that the Valuer-General of Western Australia has commented on how important it has been to the success of their system to make it possible for owners to discuss the valuation of their property with valuers before deciding to lodge an objection, and, of course, these objections can often have a cost to them. Many people just need a greater understanding of the evidence that the valuer used to reach a conclusion. The Hon. Mr Darley also mentioned that it may cause some extra work for the office of the Valuer-General. However, if fewer claims are lodged, hopefully that will balance itself out. Under clause 6 of the proposed bill owners or occupiers will be informed of their rights to this information. Clauses 4 and 5 make a few clarifications to the valuation of heritage listed properties. That is certainly of interest to me, because many of my constituents in the Barossa and even in the mid-north own heritage listed properties. It is difficult enough, as the member for Light has mentioned in this house, owning and developing heritage properties. I think it is great to have that clarified here, too, under this bill. These are important in order to retain their character rather than encourage the subdivision or the selling off of land because of excessive rates and taxes. I believe the amendment in clause 3 is sensible. There is no compelling argument for two neighbours on identical properties to be paying very different rates and taxes based on substantially different valuations. As can be seen, it makes no sense at all. The Hon. Mr Darley has identified part of the Western Australian variation in land tax, which has been successful, and we should draw on that to create greater fairness and equity in our system. I hope the government will support this. I cannot understand if it does not. I cannot understand what the government's position would be. The Hon. Mr Darley, as an Independent, has brought his wisdom and expertise into the council, and we thank him for bringing in this measure. The opposition certainly supports it, and I hope the government will too. Debate adjourned on motion of Mrs Geraghty.