Bill Debate: Fire Services Property Amendment (Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund) Bill 2025

BILL DEBATE

‘FIRE SERVICES PROPERTY AMENDMENT (EMERGENCY SERVICES AND VOLUNTEERS FUND) BILL 2025’.

Thursday 20 March 2025.

James NEWBURY (Brighton) (10:09):

I rise to speak on the Fire Services Property Amendment (Emergency Services and Volunteers Fund) Bill 2025.

It is important to start on this Bill with what the Government intends to do by introducing this great big new tax, because that is what this is. This Bill is about introducing a great big new tax that is going to further hit everyone – homeowners, landowners, property owners – to the tune of $2 billion over the next three years. But that is what this Bill is about – imposing a great big new tax on Victorians and in doing so introducing a tax that funds, by part, Government service that has always been funded through consolidated revenue. We know that when it comes to new taxes that go to consolidated revenue, this Government has repeatedly introduced new taxes under the guise of doing something to support well-meaning causes. However, in practice we know what this Government does is impose great big new taxes, and that is what this Bill will do.

It is not just my contention that this is a great big new tax; the Treasurer herself confirmed it yesterday. It is important to start with that point. The Treasurer has now confirmed what we thought and knew about this great big new tax. The Treasurer yesterday was confronted with serious concerns from home and property owners and investors that this great big new tax will impose unreasonable additional burdens on them – in fact not just burdens, burdens to the point, as I said yesterday, that hit the final nail in the coffin for investors in this State. What was the Treasurer’s response? ‘Well, they can afford to pay.’ That is what this Government and the Treasurer said yesterday. Her view and this Government’s view is that taxes are too low and certain people who invest to provide homes to Victorians can afford to pay more – and a lot more, we know, in this Bill. Both I and the Leader of the Nationals have repeatedly called out not only the burden but what we have now been proven to be right about, and that is that this Government has an attack planned to increase taxes through this great big new tax.

I think it is important to put on the record that when we talk about investors, 403,000 of the 560,000 property investors own one property. Though the Treasurer would like to paint these people as some kind of land barons who are not paying enough tax, the House should remember that 64,000 of those property owners are teachers who are saving every dollar to buy that second property, that investment property, for their future. Perhaps it is for the future of their kids – to provide their kids somewhere to live – or an investment to get ahead. This Treasurer is saying to 64,000 teachers, ‘You don’t pay enough on your salary, and we think you should pay more tax.’ What a disgrace. 55,000 are nurses, who this Government is saying are land barons and who this Treasurer wants to pay more tax. 41,000 are office administrative assistants – 41,000 land barons as per this Treasurer – who this Treasurer thinks need to pay more tax. Forty thousand are administrative assistants, who the Government describes as not paying enough tax – they are land barons as far as the Treasurer is concerned. 21,000 are electricians and 15,000, almost 16,000, are truck drivers – land barons as far as this Labor Government is concerned – who deserve a great big new tax.

Hundreds of thousands of these 400,000 people who own one property are teachers, nurses, office administrative assistants, admin assistants, electricians and truck drivers who are putting aside every dollar – not only for themselves, but I am sure for their kids – to buy that one investment property for their future to get ahead and for their kids’ future to get ahead. This Treasurer’s first response yesterday, when asked about this great big new tax, was, ‘They can afford to pay.’

As I said at the time –

Michael O’Brien interjected.

James NEWBURY: That is right, it is absolutely outrageous that this Government would think those hundreds of thousands of hard workers are not doing enough with the taxes they already pay. Frankly this Government’s plan is to screw them harder. That is what this Government is planning to do, and it needs to be called out.

As I said yesterday –

Paul Edbrooke: On a Point of Order, Deputy Speaker, I think we heard some unparliamentary language there.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you, Member for Frankston. I did raise an eyebrow at the Member. I think he understands where he overstepped.

James NEWBURY: The Government wants to push the tax burden on them harder. The Government wants them to pay more tax because they are not paying enough, as this Government believes. Any of these descriptions I am sure the Member can interject on at any point – hundreds of thousands of workers.

As I said yesterday, the Premier needs to take a big deep breath and consider whether this Treasurer is fit for her job, because when we have a great big new tax of $2 billion over the next three years imposed on some of the hardest working people of the community, the Treasurer’s first response, which frankly has shocked people, was these hardworking people – teachers and nurses – are not working hard enough, so they can afford to pay more. That is what this Treasurer has said: these people do not work hard enough and are not paying enough tax, so they should be paying more. What a disgrace. Not a single Member from the other side of the Chamber – no-one from the executive or the Premier – has come out to say they support these hardworking people, and the Treasurer was out of line. Every Member who speaks on this Bill has an opportunity to correct the record and say whether or not nurses and teachers are working hard enough, as far as the Treasurer is concerned, and should be paying more tax.

That is what this Bill is about. It is about imposing a great big new tax. What the Government will say is this great big new tax is going to fund emergency services management and support. What they will not tell you is that this great big new tax is also going to fund core Government services, the operation of Government, not, as they would lead you to believe, just emergency services organisations. It is going to fund Department work and agency work of Government. That is why this tax needs to be called out.

I move:

That all the words after ‘That’ be omitted and replaced with the words ‘this House refuses to read this Bill a second time until the Government commits to consulting with stakeholders on the rebate scheme and which organisations should receive funding.’

What we know is the Government supposedly is introducing a great big new tax to fund emergency services.

When you look at the list of what is allowed to be funded under this great big new tax, it is a broad range: meritorious of course, the Country Fire Authority; meritorious of course, Fire Rescue Victoria and also the Victorian State Emergency Service. But as I raised as a concern before, we have core Government work, core Government services: Triple Zero Victoria, Emergency Management Victoria, the Secretary of the Department of Justice and Community Safety for funding of emergency management, whatever that may include – the Secretary of the Department, for emergency services work. The Coalition has moved an Amendment, because we are concerned – and I can put on the record that not only are we moving this Amendment in this place, but we will also be moving textual Amendments in the other place that go into these issues in more detail in terms of the organisations. But the point is that this great big new tax is not only funding people who need it but also funding core Government work, and we say this great big new tax is actually about collecting more money through more tax to do work of Government in addition to supporting organisations that do incredibly hard work.

Not only has the Government created a list of organisations that we have questioned in terms of the current list, and that goes straight to the Amendment, but a number of Members have gone to the Government about organisations that have not been included in funding. A number of Members have advocated strongly to ensure that other organisations are considered who have not been. For example, the Member for South-West Coast has advocated strongly in relation to marine rescue Victoria, the coastguard, Life Saving Victoria and St John Ambulance, which the Government has confirmed are not going to be funded through any funds raised in this Bill. So we would say the Government are prioritising core Government work but by their own admission have neglected to address any of the funding issues raised by these very meritorious organisations who do incredible work, organisations that the Member for South-West Coast has argued and advocated for very, very strongly in the lead-up to this Bill, as have, I know, a number of other Members who I am sure will refer to the work of emergency services organisations in their communities which the Government have said will not be considered as part of this Bill.

I want to also touch on, while I am speaking about the Amendment, the other matter that has been raised in the Amendment, the rebate scheme. The Government committed last year, when they announced their great big new tax, to providing volunteers with an exemption, effectively, from the tax for the hard work that they do. When the announcement first came out, that made sense because they do incredible work, and they do it as volunteers. Seeing the hard work of the volunteers recognised was fair, reasonable and important. But what we have learned since that announcement, as is always the case with this Government, is the Government have found a way to claw back that money they have not even given out yet – claw it back from emergency services volunteers – and the Treasurer has more recently announced that the exemption will now come in the form of a rebate.

What the Treasurer admitted yesterday – on what I think we can all fairly say was a very bad day for the Treasurer, after admitting that people do not pay enough tax – was that hardworking volunteers are now going to have to pay the tax. They are going to have to pay the tax up-front. They are going to have to pay. I hear Members on the other side are surprised. Well, do not be surprised. You are about to vote for this Bill, Members.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Through the Chair, Member for Brighton.

James NEWBURY: This Bill will require in its operation hardworking volunteers to pay the tax up-front – shameful. Then these poor volunteers are going to have to figure out, one, if they are eligible for a rebate – and I think we can all safely assume this Government is not starting an advertising campaign on how these volunteers can seek a rebate. I think we are going to find out on page 124 of a Government Gazette on Christmas Day and that is going to be the end of that. This Government is going to force volunteers to pay the tax up-front and then somehow seek a rebate. How will they do that? It appears the Government does not even know the full details yet.

They will go to an appointed Government agency, which I think we can all safely assume will be the State Revenue Office. I think it is probably fair to say it is not the friendliest of front-facing organisations of the Government, the State Revenue Office. I am sure that a lot of people who have had experience trying to seek a rebate from the State Revenue Office have got an answering machine message that says ‘No’ before you find a person. Whatever you are ringing about, the answer is no. And then you finally get through to a person who then tells you ‘No’ in person. You will go to the State Revenue Office presumably or somewhere on a website – I imagine 44 clicks in on a website – to find a form, and then you will fill out a form. You might be asking, ‘Who fills out the form? Who will fill out the form? Who’s eligible for it?’ Well, the Government does not know. I asked the Government, ‘Who’s included? Which volunteers are the Government exempting?’ And they did not know who they were exempting. I gave the example of John, who has been a volunteer for 38 years. He is now 82, so he is not volunteering in the same way that he has been previously, but he has given 38 years. Will he still seek an exemption? The Government would not guarantee that poor John, who has given 38 years of volunteer work to our community, would still be eligible for this exemption. I do not know why we are calling it an exemption. It is a rebate – if you can find it.

The Coalition has moved an Amendment which goes to those two matters. It goes to the funding issue and how this great big new tax will operate, and it also goes to the rebate. On the funding issue, not only do we have concerns about how the operation or how the split of the money works, if I can put it as crassly as that. What is going to core Government business? What is going to Department work? How many more public servants are being funded with this? Will more public servants be funded? The Government has not answered that question; the Government has not said whether or not this will fund more general public service work. But we also have concerns around transparency, how these funds are allocated annually and what that will look like.

So, the Coalition in the other place, when we have an opportunity to provide more detail, will be raising further concerns about ensuring that the funding is transparently reported. We talk about that a lot in this Chamber as bills come through; very commonly in fact we have moved Amendments which simply say, ‘Please annually report.’ That seems like a fair and reasonable thing. So, when it comes to this Bill in the other place, where we have that more detailed opportunity, we will talk about not only how the funding is split but also how it is reported. We believe that there should be annual reporting. We believe that there should be transparency when you are adding a $2 billion increased cost through a great big new tax on Victorians. It is not unreasonable to be transparent about it, and I would say if you are doing the right thing with the money, why would you hide reporting what you are using it for? That is a fair point, I would have thought. If you are doing the right thing with the tax you are collecting, why would you hide what you are doing with it?

When it comes to the Bill, I have raised a number of concerns on behalf of the Coalition, which is why we will not support it – this great big new tax. Of course we will not. What this Government is doing is saying, ‘We are collecting a great big new tax. We’re going to push part of the money that it raises into core Government work – Government work that was previously funded through consolidated revenue – and we are doing it through a great big new tax that we won’t even transparently report on.’ It is doing it in a really sneaky way. Earlier I referred to the Treasurer’s comments about how hundreds of thousands of property investors – as I mentioned, teachers, nurses, office administrative assistants, electricians, truck drivers – are not paying enough tax as far as the Treasurer is concerned and the particular measure that changes how an investor pays tax through this bill and substantially increases their tax burden. What we know for certain that will do is push property investors out of Victoria, and we are already seeing it. We are seeing a fleeing of property investors –

Danny O’Brien: We know that. They don’t.

James NEWBURY: Well, we know that last year the property price in Victoria went down, and there have been a number of Members on the other side of the Chamber who have privately said that they think that it is a good thing that people’s property values go down. That is what they have said. I see the Premier coming into the Chamber, and it will be interesting to see whether the Premier chastises her Treasurer. While the Premier is here, let me say to the Premier: Premier –

Daniela De Martino interjected.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Through the Chair – without assistance, Member for Monbulk.

James NEWBURY: Through the Deputy Chair, the Treasurer yesterday said that property investors are not paying enough tax, effectively, and can afford to pay more. I see the Premier in the Chamber, but I have not heard the Premier chastise her Treasurer yet, because nurses, teachers, hardworking office administrative assistants, farmers and electricians are not paying enough tax says the Premier’s Treasurer. Instead let the record show the Premier has not taken the opportunity to respond in the Chamber and call out the Treasurer’s just appalling remarks, which in my view should make the Premier question whether the Treasurer is fit for the role – and walked out of the Chamber. If you are one of the hundreds of thousands of nurses or if you are one of the hundreds of thousands of teachers, office administrative assistants, admin assistants, electricians, truck drivers, just to name some of the hundreds of thousands of people that own that investment property, the Premier walked into the Chamber, had an opportunity to call it out and say you all work hard, but did not – she turned her back on you and walked out.

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Through the Chair.

James NEWBURY: Deputy Speaker, I am observing the fact that the Premier walked into the Chamber, and I can understand why Members on the other side of the Chamber are upset that they have been called out on it. All of those hardworking people deserve to have someone who stands up for them, and the Coalition will. And what is the Government doing? They are now laughing about imposing a great big new tax on these hardworking people and saying that they deserve to pay more tax. Well, the thing that Victorians have worked out is this Government is imposing great big new taxes on everyone. That is what Victorians have worked out, just like they have worked out the streets are less safe, and the Government is not going to fix it. Press conferences do not fix crime, press conferences do not fix higher taxes, and that is what Victorians have worked out. With this Bill the Coalition cannot support this Government’s great big new tax, this $2 billion new tax that hits people hard. That is what it does; it hits people hard. When the Government says, ‘We’re going to raise $2 billion,’ and then in a press release says, ‘We’re going to give out $200 million, aren’t we good,’ just remember the quantum difference between what they have committed to and what they are raising. They raise $2 billion and then in a press release say, ‘Aren’t we good that we’re going to give out $200 million?’ All we are saying –

Members interjecting.

James NEWBURY: I am being told by the other side of this Chamber it is a little more than $200 million out of the $2 billion. Well, is it? I am just going to leave it there.

The Coalition has moved an Amendment to the Bill because there are core issues with this bill that need to be addressed. Those issues will also be prosecuted in the Upper House when it comes to the distribution of funding and when it comes to the transparency around how funding is reported. I would hope the Upper House looks at that transparency measure but also the rebate scheme, which is a really, really nasty scheme to make volunteers pay and then try to claw them back. We have moved that Amendment, we will oppose this great big new tax and we will call it out for what it is. The Treasurer’s comments yesterday should stand condemned, and frankly she should apologise.