House erupts over VAT bill gazette date

Wednesday, 5 October 2016 00:07 - - {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}

Joint Opposition MPs renewed calls for the Finance Minister to iron out confusion over two dates appearing on the cover of the Value Added Tax (VAT) Amendment Bill that was moved in Parliament yesterday, insisting lawmakers should be given 14 days’ notice.

Joint Opposition lawmakers vehemently criticised the procedure followed by the Government on the latest VAT amendment and alleged that the gazette was published without Cabinet approval. They also raised questions on the mandatory 14 days’ notice. The issue was raised when the Bill was presented to

Parliament by Leader of the House Lakshman Kiriella.

With the Bill carrying two dates on its cover - 9 September, the date of the supplement, and 13 September, the issued date - Joint Opposition lawmakers demanded an explanation from the Finance Minister, who was not present in the Chamber at the time.

“It is a must to give a minimum of 14 days’ notice. But the bill carries two different dates. But Cabinet approval was received on 13 September. During the previous occasion, the gazette dated 24 June was printed on 4 June 2016. Generally, the gazetted date and the issued date are the same. We would like to know if this Bill was printed before or after Cabinet approval was received,” Joint Opposition MP Bandula Gunawardana said, bringing the attention of the House to Standing Order 45, which should be read with Article 78 of the Constitution.

Defending the VAT Bill, which was shot down by the Supreme Court in July, State Minister of Finance Lakshman Yapa Abeywardena assured that Cabinet approval was given prior to it being printed.

“Cabinet met on the Tuesday, 12 September and on Friday the Government printed this. Certifying the dates and the process followed we have obtained two letters from the Attorney General’s Department and the Government Press. These letters will be tabled tomorrow before the debate. Anyway, the options are available if somebody is interested in taking this to court,” he said.

Urging the Speaker to reject the motion, Joint Opposition MP Wimal Weerawansa criticised the Government for amending taxes shortly before Budget 2017. “We went to courts when the VAT was imposed without a Bill. The Supreme Court cancelled VAT but the Prime Minister recommended solving issues within the Parliament and not resorting to the interpretations of the Supreme Court. We demand a clear reply from the Government as to why it couldn’t wait till Budget 2017 was brought to Parliament. VAT could have been included in it especially after moving four Budgets in Parliament this year.”

Deputy Foreign Minister Dr. Harsha de Silva defended the date discrepancy, quoting from the Constitution by stressing that Article 152 allowed for the House to debate tax amendments once they had been approved by Cabinet and it did not specifically demand adhering to gazette publication dates. (AH)