Page 823 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 2 May 2007

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


There are around 800 single parents in the ACT who will also be affected. If they are not successful in getting jobs or if for some reason they are not able to get jobs, they will receive $29 less per week once their youngest child turns eight; that is, when their youngest child starts costing more. Those who study full time will receive $63 less. There is a real incentive to improve your skills base. Even if they acquire the required work of 15 hours a week at the current minimum wages, their weekly disposable income will be $96 less than on the pension. Welfare recipients also face a loss of federal government concession cards when they are taken off these benefits. That means they will lose their health care and disability pension cards.

Most ACT concessions are directly linked to Centrelink evaluations and benefits. These include, but are not exclusive to, the water and sewerage rebate, the property rebate, public transport and vehicle rebates and taxi subsidies. We find ourselves in a situation where vulnerable ACT residents will be living on less income and no longer eligible for concessions. It is a double whammy caused by the federal and ACT governments. There is a big bridge between being on a pension and earning a wage. Once those concessions are lost, a very big jump in income is required to achieve the same level of wellbeing and access to services that were available to concession holders on low incomes. Believe me, I know that from experience.

Even without the ACT and federal government changes in social policy, the ACT faces a situation where, according to the most recent ACTCOSS budget submission, current rebates and concessions are inadequate for low income households, while some concessions are no longer appropriate. A surprising aspect of the ACT government’s current concessions scheme is that renters are not eligible for concessions on utility charges, despite the fact that they are more likely to live on a low income than home owners. Yet a number of private schools and churches not in a position of hardship continue to receive utility concessions. It seems the current concessions scheme lacks both horizontal and vertical equity.

For some reason the water and sewerage rebate and the property rebate are not available to health care card holders, but the energy concession is. A 65 per cent concession is available on water and sewerage supply charges but not on consumption costs. And although telecommunications is seen by governments to be an essential utility, no concession for its use is available, only debt recovery schemes, and then it is too late for many. We have a mishmash of concessions about which no-one, it appears, has a holistic view.

According to ACTCOSS, the cost of utilities is increasing and consumers are paying more than ever before. That will continue with water scarcity and the impact of greenhouse gases on electricity production. Obviously, low income households are most affected by this. A robust concessions policy is needed to ensure that the costs are ameliorated. I note that there is no reciprocal acknowledgement of pensioner status across New South Wales and the ACT. This seems a pity, given the proximity between ACT and southern New South Wales pensioners and their movement across borders.

I expect that the government will tell me in reply how much money has been spent on concessions over recent years. But this is not what the motion is about. The Greens


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .