❓ Opposition asks if the Minister for Planning will introduce or rule out expanding the Metropolitan Region Improvement Tax to regional WA, impacting small businesses and rental properties. The Minister responds that the expansion is under consideration to fund land acquisition for infrastructure and conservation, but no final decision has been made.
AnsweredQoN 576Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
METROPOLITAN REGION IMPROVEMENT TAX
576. Mr M. McGOWAN to the Minister for
Planning:
I refer to the proposed expansion of
the metropolitan region improvement tax, which will hit small businesses and
rental properties in regional Western Australia for the first time.
(1) Will the minister introduce this
new tax?
(2) If not, will
the minister categorically rule out the expansion of this tax into regional
Western Australia?
576. Mr M. McGOWAN to the Minister for
Planning:
I refer to the proposed expansion of
the metropolitan region improvement tax, which will hit small businesses and
rental properties in regional Western Australia for the first time.
(1) Will the minister introduce this
new tax?
(2) If not, will
the minister categorically rule out the expansion of this tax into regional
Western Australia?
AnswerView source ↗
(1)–(2) This
issue has been under some consideration since it was put out in the planning
discussion paper ''Planning makes it happen: phase two—Blueprint
for planning reform August 2014'' about a year ago. It was then flagged
as a possibility that we needed to establish a better funding mechanism for the
acquisition of land required for the construction of major infrastructure
projects, such as roads and railways, and also to acquire land of high
conservation value. It is a system that has been in operation in the Perth
metropolitan area since 1959 or 1960, and has operated very successfully. It
has enabled the acquisition of land, for example, to protect the foreshores of
the Swan and Canning Rivers; to purchase land for the construction of the Perth–Mandurah
railway; and to purchase land through the Bush Forever program.
� We do not have the ability to use the funds
that are collected within the Perth metropolitan area outside the Perth
metropolitan area, and it would be desirable, from many points of view, to be
able to expand this system so that funds that are collected in the metropolitan
area can in part be used outside the metropolitan area, in regional areas, for
land acquisition for those purposes. If that is to occur, I think most people
would accept that it would be fair for the same revenue-raising mechanism to
apply outside the metropolitan area as inside.
At lunchtime I did a little research
to refresh my memory on a couple of publications relating to the existing
metropolitan region improvement tax. There was actually a state tax review
under the previous government and a Western Australian Planning Commission
paper was produced in April 2007. That is a public document that is well worth
reading; it is entitled, ''The case for retaining the metropolitan region
improvement tax''. Of course, it was not contemplated through this
project to expand it outside the metropolitan area, but all of the arguments in
this document, which is a good summary that was produced during the time of the
previous government, actually pertain to the value of having a fund that is
more broadly based than is the case at the moment. I draw attention to a paper
recently presented at the State of Australian Cities conference 2013 entitled, ''Governance
of public land acquisition for regional open space in Perth and Sydney''
by Neil Foley and Peter Williams. Neil Foley is at the University of Western
Australia and strongly supports this sort of mechanism for land acquisition.
The government has not made a final decision to introduce legislation to that
effect. We are currently considering the best way of doing that, but the system
that has operated in the Perth metropolitan area since 1960 has been very
successful—it has had bipartisan support—and we simply need to
find a better and more sustainable way to ensure that land can be acquired in
the Peel and Bunbury regions and elsewhere, so that people who own private
property that is reserved can be compensated for the value of that land.
issue has been under some consideration since it was put out in the planning
discussion paper ''Planning makes it happen: phase two—Blueprint
for planning reform August 2014'' about a year ago. It was then flagged
as a possibility that we needed to establish a better funding mechanism for the
acquisition of land required for the construction of major infrastructure
projects, such as roads and railways, and also to acquire land of high
conservation value. It is a system that has been in operation in the Perth
metropolitan area since 1959 or 1960, and has operated very successfully. It
has enabled the acquisition of land, for example, to protect the foreshores of
the Swan and Canning Rivers; to purchase land for the construction of the Perth–Mandurah
railway; and to purchase land through the Bush Forever program.
� We do not have the ability to use the funds
that are collected within the Perth metropolitan area outside the Perth
metropolitan area, and it would be desirable, from many points of view, to be
able to expand this system so that funds that are collected in the metropolitan
area can in part be used outside the metropolitan area, in regional areas, for
land acquisition for those purposes. If that is to occur, I think most people
would accept that it would be fair for the same revenue-raising mechanism to
apply outside the metropolitan area as inside.
At lunchtime I did a little research
to refresh my memory on a couple of publications relating to the existing
metropolitan region improvement tax. There was actually a state tax review
under the previous government and a Western Australian Planning Commission
paper was produced in April 2007. That is a public document that is well worth
reading; it is entitled, ''The case for retaining the metropolitan region
improvement tax''. Of course, it was not contemplated through this
project to expand it outside the metropolitan area, but all of the arguments in
this document, which is a good summary that was produced during the time of the
previous government, actually pertain to the value of having a fund that is
more broadly based than is the case at the moment. I draw attention to a paper
recently presented at the State of Australian Cities conference 2013 entitled, ''Governance
of public land acquisition for regional open space in Perth and Sydney''
by Neil Foley and Peter Williams. Neil Foley is at the University of Western
Australia and strongly supports this sort of mechanism for land acquisition.
The government has not made a final decision to introduce legislation to that
effect. We are currently considering the best way of doing that, but the system
that has operated in the Perth metropolitan area since 1960 has been very
successful—it has had bipartisan support—and we simply need to
find a better and more sustainable way to ensure that land can be acquired in
the Peel and Bunbury regions and elsewhere, so that people who own private
property that is reserved can be compensated for the value of that land.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.