Okay, so the actual receipts then. I ask that in the context where some communities, some lease holders, either refuse to pay or ignore or whatever. So there is certainly a difference between actual revenues and assessed revenues, and I am hearing that it will be the actual received revenues. This is great. Now, one other aspect of this is that we're seeing here a provision of, if you will, returning an amount of money back to a client base. In this case, it is the communities reflecting the amount of money that was received from them. I find this a bit unusual, Mr. Chairman, in that if I compare it to the taxes that are levied on fuel and there's the perennial argument which is that if we tax the motorist so much for fuel, why don't we take all that tax money and put it into our highways. It seems like a good idea. The argument that consistently comes across is, no, no, no, you can't do that because taxes go into general revenue and then you do the negotiation or decision-making about where to put the money afterward. So this is an interesting situation where we are taking the actual dollar amount assessed as a tax and returning it right back to the client base. If I have a question here, Mr. Chairman, it's am I correct in saying that this doesn't really follow our general taxation practice? We really seem to be going against the grain when we take this course of action. Can the Minister confirm if I have that right? Thank you.
Bill Braden on Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
In the Legislative Assembly on March 1st, 2005. See this statement in context.
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
February 28th, 2005
Page 1657
See context to find out what was said next.