Page 846 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 2 May 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Some of the other comments that Dr Foskey made were about considering whether there be a rolling system of reviews. That is something that we could look at as a part of that work. Perhaps it is sensible to build in a timetable of constant review of concessions. In a way, I am sure it is done through indexation—many would say probably not to the extent that it needs to be done—but there would be a process, probably from a financial point of view, of an annual review through the budget process. Perhaps something more wide ranging than every three years is something that we could do. I am sure it is buried in budget reporting somewhere. I am trying to think exactly what part it would be.
It is interesting because the government in 2006-07 will provide in excess of $28 million in concessions in the ACT. I think Dr Foskey has gone through those. They are to pensioners, low income earners, seniors cardholders, health care cardholders and veterans’ affairs gold cardholders. That does not include the concessions for essential services—for example, energy, water and sewerage. The concessions are provided for a whole range of services. In addition, Housing ACT tenants receive some concessions on their rent, up to the value of about $69 million in 2005-06.
We have had a lot of discussion about the previous budget, but it is important in the overall context to understand that the charges that were bought in included, for example, a 50 per cent concession on the fire and emergency services levy for concession holders. We built in a concession rate. I know the broader argument that the Assembly may have about the imposition of those charges in any way, but we were mindful at that time to ensure that the appropriate concessions were built in.
In a sense, I do not accept some of the criticism that Dr Foskey put forward about not looking at that issue through that very difficult budget we had. We also, through that budget, increased the rates concession cap for pensioners. It went up an additional $31 as well.
We are also looking at the cost of providing peak public transport concessions to ACT senior cardholders. That is a piece of work that Minster Hargreaves and I, when I was minister for ageing, and now the Chief Minister are progressing. That is looking at this issue: what is the cost of extending concession rates for senior cardholders to off-peak times?
There is a fair bit of work that is going on at the moment. We can pull it together; we should pull it together; we should have a look at this broadly. Maybe we should have a look at this every three years. Perhaps we should look at this in terms of how we report in the budget—probably not for this budget—but, if that issue can be looked at in the review that is put forward, then that is probably sensible as well in terms of the government being able to respond to that.
We have a way forward here, Dr Foskey. I thank you for the motion. I hope members will be able to support the amendment I have moved because it is a sensible way forward and will provide the Assembly with up-to-date information on the range of concessions available to people in the ACT and how we might progress this along the lines of whether they are targeted. Are they getting to the people that need them most?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .