Differentials Debate

Concerned at the expense of the power granted to local govt under clause 161 (2), which reads A differential rate which is higher or lower for some land in the municipal district than for other land may be declared on the basis of any criterea specified by the Council in the rate. That is carte blanche, open sesame. There can be differential rates on any criteria, and it was in that basis that the National Party objected most strenously to the powers contained in clause 161. We did so on the grounds that no one was in a position to protect ratepayers against potential abuse. It is clear that, in relation to minimum rates- which will, incidentally, de deleted by the Bill-some municipalities have been obtaining more than half of their entire rate revenue under the guise of minimum rates. The National Party wants to ensure that we at least restrain the potential for that power to be abused.....the MAV and the municipalities should be invited to define the classes or basis upon which the rates were levied, and explain the differentiation. It seemed a fair enough compromise, that they should be defined and put into the Bill, enabling everybody to know where we stand in relation to those defined categories.....yet under section 161 it was being advocated that the door be opened to the creation of additional minority groups. It was in that basis that we objected to the provision most strenously I place on the record now the fact that the National Party would profer that the definition of rates under which differentials are to be struck should be declared and identified in the legislation. ...I anticipate that enormous problems will surface if the Bill is passed and that open-ended differential rates will come back to haunt us. Roger Hallam Min. Local Government Western Province., Aug 3 1988