House of Assembly Fifty-Second Parliament, Second Session (52-2) 52 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Question Time Car Parking Levy CAR PARKING LEVY Mr MARSHALL House of Assembly Norwood Leader of the Opposition CAR PARKING LEVY Mr MARSHALL (Norwood—Leader of the Opposition) (14:37): My question is again to the Premier. What does the government's car park tax modelling indicate will be the average daily burden on users of CBD car parks given that not all CBD car parks are used 24 hours a day? The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly Cheltenham Premier Minister for State Development Minister for the Public Sector Minister for the Arts CAR PARKING LEVY The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier, Treasurer, Minister for State Development, Minister for the Public Sector, Minister for the Arts) (14:37): I thank the honourable member for his question. I might be able to assist him with the previous question. If I understand, the burden of what he is suggesting is: why haven't we accounted for the fringe benefits tax associated with car parks? We already provide car parks to our employees, so any fringe benefit tax liability presumably will be consequently provided for. What we are talking about is the incremental increase associated with the additional car parking levy, which is a relatively small additional impost. Mr Marshall House of Assembly Mr Marshall: How much? The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Well, we've already told you: $750 per annum for each of the car park spaces. That is the impost in 2014-15, which will be indexed annually to movements in the Adelaide CPI. That equates to around $2 to $3 per working day in 2014-15. As I have observed before, this has not created any difficulty at all in any of the jurisdictions in which it has been introduced. In Melbourne and in Sydney and in Perth and in Brisbane this is a common feature of arrangements for modern capital cities that want to run public transport systems and want to discourage congestion. These are pretty orderly sets of arrangements. Why do we have this renewed line of questioning? It's simply that they want to tow in behind the big end of town in an advertising campaign. Mr van Holst Pellekaan House of Assembly Mr van Holst Pellekaan: Point of order— The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Is the Premier finished? The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL House of Assembly The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL: Yes. The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: Then the member for Stuart's point of order, which would have been upheld, won't be necessary. The member for Ramsay. Mr MARSHALL House of Assembly Mr MARSHALL: Can I ask a supplementary, Mr Speaker? The Speaker House of Assembly The SPEAKER: No. The member for Ramsay.