Dunne Peter: Income Tax Bill — Third Reading 
Dunne Peter: Income Tax Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:643;Page:12742] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Minister of Revenue) 
: 
 First of all I acknowledge the Minister of Finance who moved the third reading of this bill a few weeks ago during my absence from the House while I was at a funeral. I am grateful for his taking charge at that point. It was appropriate because he is one of those Ministers of Revenue he referred to as having been involved in the passage and development of this very lengthy legislation over the last 15 years. 
The work began in the early 1990s in the time when the Hon Wyatt Creech was Minister of Revenue. My own involvement began in 1996 when after becoming Minister of Revenue for the first time my first visitor was Sir Ivor Richardson to update me on work with the rewrite project and to advise me that I would be overseeing the introduction of the second stage of the legislation which was the core provisions section. 
When I became Minister of Revenue again in 2005 my first caller was the same Sir Ivor Richardson to advise me that one of my early tasks would be to oversee the introduction of the final stages of this bill. So I am personally delighted to see this five-volume rewrite exercise completed. I am delighted to acknowledge the work of Sir Ivor Robin Oliver and the team at the Inland Revenue Department the rewrite panel and all who have been involved over the years in bringing to fruition a task that many would have thought was beyond us. 
The Minister of Finance referred to the fact that we are the only country to have begun such an exercise and to have completed it. My understanding is that the United Kingdom began such an exercise but after a length of time not dissimilar to ours abandoned it because it was too difficult. The Australians began but stopped halfway through and as a consequence now effectively have two income tax Acts and more problems ahead of them. 
That this exercise is significant should not be underestimated. For the first time we now have in plain English and in one set of documents our income tax law. It will make it easier for those who work with the law—the practitioners and the law officials themselves—to navigate their way around our complicated law. That in itself will assist in making compliance with our system that little bit better. 
I will indicate the next stage for the rewrite panel. Now that the panel has steered this project through its various stages one might be forgiven for thinking that we are quite happy to let the panel members enjoy a little bit of leisure. But I advise the House today that we see an ongoing role for this panel in overseeing the processes of redrafting and in ensuring that public consultation has been brought to a successful conclusion. The panel will continue in operation to deal with any unintended changes that have arisen as a result of the rewrite of this law. 
One of the things that we all know about tax law is that it is dynamic. It is never set in place for any particular period of time and it needs to be constantly revisited. We are very fortunate to have a rewrite panel under the calibre of leadership of Sir Ivor Richardson to keep an eye on these things as we move through. 
When I was in Canada a few weeks ago I was intrigued to be presented with a copy of that country’s first income tax Act which was passed during the exigencies of war in 1917. It is a very slim document not much thicker than one of our Order Papers. It has a couple of operative clauses to which I was attracted and I was very tempted to move a late series of amendments to this bill to incorporate those clauses. The first clause states that the Minister of Revenue shall levy: “what taxes he sees fit upon what individuals he sees fit and that in pursuing those individuals for those assessments he can employ whatever method he likes and can deputise whatever set of officials he likes to carry out that duty for him.” 
I was very attracted to those provisions. They may well be the next stage of the rewrite process of this bill! It would be much simpler in many senses. But I think that in itself that demonstrates just how complex tax law has become right around the world since those days when income taxes were still a very novel concept. 
This is not the sort of issue that will excite huge public interest but it is one that people should be very satisfied at the outcome of. It has been one of the most mammoth projects that has been undertaken in the history of this Parliament. It is no coincidence that the consequence is probably the largest single piece of legislation ever to be passed by this Parliament. 
I simply conclude by acknowledging again the contribution of the rewrite panel—in particular the strong leadership of Sir Ivor. I acknowledge successive Ministers of Finance for their work and successive Finance and Expenditure Committees for their work as well. I also acknowledge all of those who have worked with the officials to bring this very important and lengthy project to what I regard as being a particularly successful conclusion.