<!--The Official Report of Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) of the Legislative Council and the House of Assembly of the Parliament of South Australia are covered by parliamentary privilege. Republication by others is not afforded the same protection and may result in exposure to legal liability if the material is defamatory. You may copy and make use of excerpts of proceedings where (1) you attribute the Parliament as the source, (2) you assume the risk of liability if the manner of your use is defamatory, (3) you do not use the material for the purpose of advertising, satire or ridicule, or to misrepresent members of Parliament, and (4) your use of the extracts is fair, accurate and not misleading. Copyright in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates is held by the Attorney-General of South Australia.-->
<hansard id="" tocId="" xml:lang="EN-AU" schemaVersion="1.0" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xml="http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2007/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="hansard_1_0.xsd">
  <name>House of Assembly</name>
  <date date="2012-09-19" />
  <sessionName>Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2)</sessionName>
  <parliamentNum>52</parliamentNum>
  <sessionNum>2</sessionNum>
  <parliamentName>Parliament of South Australia</parliamentName>
  <house>House of Assembly</house>
  <venue></venue>
  <reviewStage>published</reviewStage>
  <startPage num="2991" />
  <endPage num="3044" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Goods and Services Tax</name>
      <page num="3016" />
      <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000398">
        <heading>GOODS AND SERVICES TAX</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4622" kind="question">
        <name>Dr CLOSE</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Port Adelaide</electorate>
        <questions>
          <question date="2012-09-19">
            <name>GOODS AND SERVICES TAX</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2012-09-19T14:21:00" />
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000399">
          <timeStamp time="2012-09-19T14:21:00" />
          <by role="member" id="4622">Dr CLOSE (Port Adelaide) (14:21):</by>  My question is to the Treasurer. Can the Treasurer tell the house about the latest Liberal submission to the GST Distribution Review?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="627" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. J.J. SNELLING</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Playford</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Workers Rehabilitation</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Defence Industries</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for Veterans' Affairs</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2012-09-19">
            <name>GOODS AND SERVICES TAX</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2012-09-19T14:21:00" />
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000400">
          <timeStamp time="2012-09-19T14:21:00" />
          <by role="member" id="627">The Hon. J.J. SNELLING (Playford—Treasurer, Minister for Workers Rehabilitation, Minister for Defence Industries, Minister for Veterans' Affairs) (14:21):</by>  The four Liberal states of New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland and Western Australia have lodged a joint submission with the GST Distribution Review Panel that proposes a new method to distribute GST grants and a change to the definition of horizontal fiscal equalisation. The Liberal submission recommends a—</text>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000401">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="7">Ms Chapman interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="627" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. J.J. SNELLING</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000402">
          <by role="member" id="627">The Hon. J.J. SNELLING:</by>  Very well. I think we'll find that the panel is receptive to the arguments which I have put to them. The Liberals' submission recommends a population—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3121">
        <name>Mr PENGILLY</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000403">
          <by role="member" id="3121">Mr PENGILLY:</by>  Point of order: the Treasurer is debating a hypothetical issue.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="619">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000404">
          <by role="member" id="619">The SPEAKER: </by> I must admit I had some concerns about that question. I do not think he is debating it. However, I will listen to the Treasurer for a few more minutes, and then I will decide if it is not appropriate.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="627">
        <name>The Hon. J.J. SNELLING</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000405">
          <by role="member" id="627">The Hon. J.J. SNELLING:</by>  The Liberal submission recommends a population-based distribution system for GST grants with a long-term goal of equal per capita distribution. No wonder those opposite do not want—</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3121">
        <name>Mr PENGILLY</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000406">
          <by role="member" id="3121">Mr PENGILLY:</by>  Point of order: I raise it again.</text>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000407">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="5">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="619">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000408">
          <by role="member" id="619">The SPEAKER: </by> I can't hear you; just a moment.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3121">
        <name>Mr PENGILLY</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000409">
          <by role="member" id="3121">Mr PENGILLY:</by>  The Treasurer is clearly debating something that is in the federal realm and has got absolutely nothing to do with this state parliament.</text>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000410">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="5">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="619">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000411">
          <by role="member" id="619">The SPEAKER:  </by>Order!</text>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000412">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="5">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="619">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000413">
          <by role="member" id="619">The SPEAKER:  </by>Order! Of course, it is GST revenue that we depend on in this in state, so I think it is relevant.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="627">
        <name>The Hon. J.J. SNELLING</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000414">
          <by role="member" id="627">The Hon. J.J. SNELLING:</by>  I think it might have a little bit to do with the state, Madam Speaker, despite those opposite being in denial. The position of the big four Liberal governments is that the commonwealth would take responsibility for funding the additional financial assistance required for states like South Australia that have lower fiscal capacity. The equalising amount above equal per capita in 2012-13 GST distribution is around $4 billion. In the long run, this would see the four larger Liberal states better off by $4 billion, while at the same time, under the Liberals' proposal, the commonwealth would be required to provide significant additional funding to smaller states like South Australia. This is unlikely to occur, and even if it did there would be a significant risk that the funding would not be maintained over time. The Liberal proposal undermines horizontal fiscal equalisation.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="3121">
        <name>Mr PENGILLY</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000415">
          <by role="member" id="3121">Mr PENGILLY:</by>  Point of order: for the third time, the Treasurer is debating the issue. This is the party that did not want the GST.</text>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000416">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="5">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="619">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000417">
          <by role="member" id="619">The SPEAKER:  </by>Order! I am not sure how you can say he is debating it. I was concerned about the wording of the question; however, Treasurer, I ask you to wind up.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="627">
        <name>The Hon. J.J. SNELLING</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000418">
          <by role="member" id="627">The Hon. J.J. SNELLING:</by>  The Liberal proposal undermines horizontal fiscal equalisation, and South Australia will not support it. To undermine HFE is to begin to unravel the federation of Australian states as we know it today. Any proposal to increase commonwealth funding to the states should be consistent with the current equalisation framework, and Liberal governments should not be seeking to undermine it.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="619">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <page num="3017" />
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000419">
          <by role="member" id="619">The SPEAKER: </by> Thank you Treasurer, I think you have made your point.</text>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000420">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="5">Members interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="619">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="20120919a0666179c8a049dcb0000421">
          <by role="member" id="619">The SPEAKER:  </by>Order! I will discuss that question with you afterwards.</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>