<!--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="2013-06-05" />
  <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="5863" />
  <endPage num="5964" />
  <dateModified time="2022-08-06T14:30:00+00:00" />
  <proceeding continued="true">
    <name>Question Time</name>
    <subject>
      <name>Small Business</name>
      <text id="201306053737d51c02a54d7eb0000896">
        <heading>SMALL BUSINESS</heading>
      </text>
      <talker role="member" id="4338" kind="question">
        <name>Mr MARSHALL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Norwood</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Leader of the Opposition</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2013-06-05">
            <name>SMALL BUSINESS</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2013-06-05T14:16:00" />
        <text id="201306053737d51c02a54d7eb0000897">
          <timeStamp time="2013-06-05T14:16:00" />
          <by role="member" id="4338">Mr MARSHALL (Norwood—Leader of the Opposition) (14:16):</by>  My question is to the Premier. Can the Premier confirm that the $21.6 million payroll tax cut, which was announced today, really comes on the back of a $120 million payroll tax increase announced just 12 months ago?</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1812" kind="answer">
        <name>The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <electorate id="">Cheltenham</electorate>
        <portfolios>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Premier</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for State Development</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for the Public Sector</name>
          </portfolio>
          <portfolio id="">
            <name>Minister for the Arts</name>
          </portfolio>
        </portfolios>
        <questions>
          <question date="2013-06-05">
            <name>SMALL BUSINESS</name>
          </question>
        </questions>
        <startTime time="2013-06-05T14:16:00" />
        <page num="5907" />
        <text id="201306053737d51c02a54d7eb0000898">
          <timeStamp time="2013-06-05T14:16:00" />
          <by role="member" id="1812">The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL (Cheltenham—Premier, Treasurer, Minister for State Development, Minister for the Public Sector, Minister for the Arts) (14:16):</by>  No, I cannot confirm that. Indeed, $200 million of payroll tax relief has been provided during the course of this government, and we are proud to have done that. I know those opposite trot around South Australia with their mantra about us being the highest taxed state in the nation. It is simply false. Our payroll tax rates are third lowest, our threshold against our competitor in Victoria is actually higher, and in relation to land tax they continue to perpetrate the myth that we are the highest land taxed state in the nation. That is simply wrong. If you compare comparable properties in each state you would find that we are at the low or middle end of land tax.</text>
        <text id="201306053737d51c02a54d7eb0000899">
          <event kind="interjection" role="member" id="74">Mr Marshall interjecting:</event>
        </text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="1812" kind="answer" continued="true">
        <name>The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="201306053737d51c02a54d7eb0000900">
          <by role="member" id="1812">The Hon. J.W. WEATHERILL:</by>  Well, it's simply true. Now, you can rely upon your right wing think tank to undertake their dodgy analysis and then put it out as policy, but it simply does not stack up. And you should be standing with South Australia to promote South Australia's story about being the most competitive place to do business in the nation, because that is the report that KPMG has produced. It is a report that has been sitting there for you to analyse, and you simply will not grapple with the facts.</text>
      </talker>
      <talker role="member" id="531">
        <name>The Speaker</name>
        <house>House of Assembly</house>
        <text id="201306053737d51c02a54d7eb0000901">
          <by role="member" id="531">The SPEAKER: </by> That was, of course, debate, but no-one took the point of order. Leader, supplementary?</text>
      </talker>
    </subject>
  </proceeding>
</hansard>