Labor Blog

    National Press Club Address: I see what needs to be done and I will do it

    Julia Gillard posted Thursday, 27 January 2011

    Yesterday was Australia Day, and in some ways, it was an Australia Day like any other.

    Picnics and barbecues, tennis and cricket, a new Australian of the Year and new Australian citizens - in so many ways it felt just like last year did and just like next year will.

    But yesterday in Toowoomba, Australia Day felt different to any I have known.

    I went to Toowoomba yesterday to be with some of the people I have met in these last weeks. I went to Toowoomba, where shock has been followed by horror and horror has been followed by grief and where grief’s long season has only now begun, because I wanted the people I have met to know that their Prime Minister won’t let them go.

    I also went to Toowoomba to express my admiration for the way Australians have started rebuilding already.  Whether with a mop or a shovel or a bulldozer, Australians see what needs to be done and are doing it.

    It is no different for the Government. I see what needs to be done and I will do it.

    We will rebuild.

    The great floods of this summer have been a national tragedy, not just a natural disaster, because of the awful loss of human life.

    The great floods of this summer have destroyed billions of dollars of wealth and robbed us of billions of dollars of income.  In time they may prove to be the most expensive disaster in Australian history.

    We are grieving.

    We are burying the dead.

    We are thanking many thousands for their courage and selflessness.

    We are moving from crisis to recovery.

    Now is the time to count the cost and to start to rebuild.

    THE TASK BEFORE US

    So today, I want to explain what we already know about the task before us and what we plan to do.

    Queensland is of course the worst affected, but there are flood affected areas in almost every state, and the effects are being felt in the whole country today.

    In order to think clearly about the best way to rebuild we need to understand not only the costs to the economy and the Federal Budget, but the growing capacity constraints on the economy, as well as the importance of the Government’s long-term reform agenda.

    The economic costs begin with the immediate cost of damage and destruction of property.

    Private homes and cars have been wrecked, business equipment ruined, public ferry terminals and highways have been damaged, even the ocean floor of Moreton Bay itself needs cleaning up.

    That is a huge, one-off cost – simply replacing the things the floods have destroyed.  These costs will be shared by people and families, by firms and insurers, by all levels of Government. 

    The Australian Government’s greatest part is through direct payments to affected individuals and businesses and through the cost of rebuilding.  And in rebuilding, the Australian Government pays the greatest share.  Under our longstanding natural disaster arrangements with the States, we meet 75 per cent of this cost for major disasters.

    Today’s estimates of the Federal Budget costs of these floods over the next four years are of course preliminary, but they are the best figures we have before us.

    The Australian Government Disaster Recovery Payments – which have given short-term financial assistance to half a million Australians affected by the floods – are estimated to cost over $600 million.  The Disaster Income Recovery Subsidy – helping workers, small businesspeople and farmers who have lost income – will cost another $120 million.

    At this stage – and I stress the estimates are preliminary and costs may well rise – the cost to the Australian Government of rebuilding flood affected areas outside Queensland is estimated at $1 billion.

    Rebuilding flood affected areas in Queensland itself is estimated to cost us $3.9 billion.

    Bringing all of those elements together the best preliminary estimate of the direct cost to the Federal Budget of this summer’s flood disaster is just over $5.6 billion.

    So that is the immediate Budget challenge, to find over $5 billion.

    Although our economy remains strong, there is also the one-off effect on economic activity because of the immediate disruption from the floods. 

    When a city of millions is closed for business for days, the cost to the economy is huge.  When roads are closed all over a State that represents a fifth of GDP, the cost to the economy is enormous.

    And the cost of this disruption continues into the future.  Some coal mines won’t return to full production for months and farming will be affected for seasons. 

    Treasury’s preliminary estimates are that GDP growth in this financial year will be around half a percentage point lower due to the floods.  The Treasurer will be saying more about the future impact on the economy in coming days.

    But we still have the advantage that our overall economy is strong and that means we have the capacity to pay as we go”.

    With our growing economy and rising national income, we can pay for rebuilding now.  And if we can, we should.  We should not leave the task of finding the money until future years.

    My experience in Government since 2007 tells me that while we must plan to sustain growth we must never take future growth for granted, so we should not put off to tomorrow what we are able to do today. 

    Solely borrowing to rebuild Queensland is a soft option I am not prepared to consider. 

    My Cabinet’s job is still to make the decisions which will bring the Budget back to surplus in 2012-13.

    In a growing economy, we pay as we go.

    In addition to the Budget challenge there is a wider economic challenge as well: building and managing economic capacity.

    This is because we don’t only need to be able to pay for the new things we now need – we quite literally need to be able to make the new things we now need as well. 

    The floods have not washed away piles of hundred dollar notes.  They’ve put holes in roads, buckled rail, broken up sections of ports, wrecked factory equipment, washed away fencing on farms.

    So we’re not just going to need money, we’re going to need concrete and rubber and steel – and more importantly, we’re going to need carpenters and bricklayers and road gangs.

    And while the advantage of a strong economy is felt when we come to fund the rebuilding, the challenge of a strong economy is felt when we look for the capacity: delivering the actual rebuilding itself.

    There is unprecedented demand in many parts of Australia for skilled labour.

    Unemployment is already low and participation is already rising. 

    And that’s before we add one extra tradie or truck driver to rebuild after the floods.

    There is unprecedented pressure on Australia’s infrastructure as well. 

    More infrastructure is already needed to nurture the mining boom and support economic growth, so the Government is investing in long lived economic assets and infrastructure like high speed broadband, ports, roads and rail.

    Now we have thousands of kilometres of roads and rail to rebuild as well.

    Simply spending to rebuild without addressing the balance between supply and demand in the economy as a whole is not an option. 

    That would only drive up the cost of skilled labour and the cost of building materials and other economic inputs, reduce value for money in the rebuilding itself, rob our mining industry and other economic sectors of the skills and material they need, and ultimately spill over into higher inflation and interest rates.

    To make up for the demand we are putting into the economy with our rebuilding efforts the Government must take some demand out of the economy at the same time.

    So sound Budget principles say we should pay as we go – and sound economic principles say we should not add to capacity pressures.

    And we must drive reforms for the future as well.

    I know Australians expect that while we rebuild after the floods, the Government will not lose sight of our long-term reform agenda.

    Australians expect their governments to do more than one thing a time. 

    So 2011 remains a year when I will be delivering the national broadband network, creating more opportunity through education reforms and improving health care as well as a year when I will make long-term decisions on workforce participation and a carbon price. 

    That is my job and that is what I will do.

    DELIVERING REBUILDING

    Here’s how I’ll begin.

    I will make an immediate upfront payment to Queensland of $2 billion.

    With this money rebuilding can start in more than 60 flood-affected communities across Queensland. 

    The payment will be made in the current financial year, as soon as financial controls and arrangements are finalised.

    I’m acutely conscious of the desire of the Queensland Government to use their powers to cut through red tape and deliver rebuilding as fast as they can. I want to ensure that nothing in the funding arrangements holds them back.

    I want this money to be available immediately. In my meetings with Premier Bligh and with Major General Mick Slater they’ve stressed that no town should be closed for a day longer than is necessary because of a lack of funds ready to be spent. And from my discussions with local community leaders and small and medium business owners, they want funds to flow as soon as possible so economic life can return to the main streets of regional towns.

    A National Partnership Agreement with Queensland will establish the conditions of the funding. I expect this to be a simple, transparent and generous set of guidelines which ensure public money is spent in the right ways and at the right time.

    Queensland will get what it needs.

    The money will be managed by the Queensland Reconstruction Authority, which will scope and coordinate the total statewide rebuilding program and develop a statewide reconstruction plan. This will take into account unique local problems and opportunities in each flood affected community.

    Payments to other states will be made through the Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements in the usual way. We are working closely with the responsible State Governments to ensure all this assistance is delivered when and where it is needed.

    The Australian Government’s total commitment – which our best estimates suggest will reach $5.6 billion – is absolutely vital to the rebuilding of our country and our recovery from the floods.

    FUNDING AND SKILLING REBUILDING

    We will meet the cost.

    Rebuilding after the floods in an economy with growing capacity constraints for the present while delivering reforms and making decisions is a big job and there’ll inevitably be setbacks. 

    But as a nation we are up to the challenge and we are up to managing the economic strains. 

    So we can do just that, I have made a set of decisions on funding and managing economic demand.

    I announce today a $5.6 billion funding and skilling package for flood rebuilding.

    A balanced package which cuts some spending programs, defers some new infrastructure and applies a one-off levy to most Australian income earners from 1 July this year.

    Two dollars are saved in spending cuts for every dollar raised by the levy.

    With other changes to ensure we have enough skilled workers to get the new work done.

    First, we will deliver a one-off levy. It will not include lower-income earners.

    A levy of 0.5 per cent will be applied on taxable income between $50,001 and $100,000 and a levy of 1 per cent will be applied on taxable income above $100,000. Anyone earning under $50,000 will not pay the levy.

    In other words it is not like the Medicare Levy, which for most taxpayers applies to all their income – it is like income tax rates which apply only above certain income levels.

    Under this levy, someone who has an income of $60,000 will pay just under $1 extra per week.  A person earning $100,000 per year will pay just under an extra $5 per week.

    The levy will apply only in the 2011-12 financial year and it will raise $1.8 billion.

    People who were affected by the floods will not pay this levy.

    Anyone who receives the Australian Government Disaster Recovery Payment for a flood this financial year will be exempt. 

    And importantly, this levy is completely separate from donations. 

    People who have generously donated are helping out individuals in their time of need.  People who pay this levy will be helping to rebuild the infrastructure – roads, bridges, ports – which has been torn apart by these floods.

    The great majority of Australians are ready to contribute, I have no doubt about that.

    The legislation will be introduced into the Parliament in the first sitting week.

    Second, we will defer some infrastructure projects to help manage capacity constraints and to redirect funding to immediate rebuilding.

    Six Queensland roads projects will be delayed by periods of one to three years. This will save $325 million in the Budget period.  And these changes have been agreed to by the Queensland Government.

    I have also identified a number of projects in other states where delays and reductions in Australian Government funding will save approximately $675 million.  Over coming days I will be discussing these projects directly with the affected State Governments before the Minister for Infrastructure publicly announces the details of our changes.

    The savings from these infrastructure decisions make a major contribution to funding the rebuilding.  Perhaps even more important, these decisions will free up skilled labour for rebuilding. This is part of ensuring we not only pay as we go, but manage capacity as well.

    These decisions will also ensure value for money when these projects are delivered.

    That’s an important part of my thinking in deferring these infrastructure works: for these long-term projects, I am determined to ensure value for money.  Pressing ahead now would inflate the cost to taxpayers considerably.

    Third, we will cut some spending programs and cap some others.

    I am abolishing, deferring and capping access to a number of carbon abatement programs.

    These include the Green Car Innovation Fund, Cleaner Car Rebate Scheme, the Carbon Capture and Storage Flagships and Solar Flagships, the Solar Hot Water Rebate, Green Start Program, Solar Homes and Communities Plan and the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute.

    The key to these carbon abatement program savings is my determination to deliver a carbon price. 

    There is complete consensus that the most efficient way to reduce carbon is to price carbon. Some of these policies are less efficient than a carbon price and will no longer be necessary – others will be better delayed until a carbon price’s full effects are felt.

    And these decisions also mean cuts to industry programs. Business will be doing its part.

    With the major call on the Budget for rebuilding, it is now appropriate to reduce this spending, in the knowledge that the objectives will be delivered better through the Government’s more economically efficient policy of a carbon price.

    I am also capping some programs to limit their cost: the National Rental Affordability Scheme and the LPG Vehicle Scheme.  And some lower priority education spending, where the desired outcome can be achieved through other programs, will be discontinued.  This includes the Capital Development Pool and the Australian Learning and Teaching Council.

    And Building Better Regional Cities funding and Priority Regional Infrastructure Program funding will be redirected to the highest priority infrastructure demand on Government – flood rebuilding.

    There are no easy savings, but this package is balanced and appropriate. 

    I am confident Australians will understand the need for these decisions.

    Skilled labour will be as important as funding for rebuilding.

    The 457 visa program for temporary skilled migrants has proven to be very responsive to prevailing economic conditions. The program is entirely demand driven by employers.

    So I am announcing quicker approval for temporary skilled migrants who work on flood rebuilding.  There will be extra resources, assistance to employers and simpler processes to ensure a five day turnaround for ‘decision-ready’ applications for workers in a host of nominated occupations to work on rebuilding Queensland.

    I am also doubling the pilot of relocation assistance for people on income support and directing it to Queensland.  Up to 4 000 eligible jobseekers who want to get a job helping out will now receive support to move to Queensland and make a difference on the ground.

    The offer to these jobseekers is simple: we can get you help to get there if you can stick at the job.

    The funding and skilling package is the right one.

    Two dollars saved in spending cuts for every dollar raised through the temporary levy.

    Cutting less efficient carbon abatement programs because the carbon price will deliver a market based solution. Business doing its part through cuts to industry programs.

    Capping demand-driven programs to limit costs. Redirecting infrastructure spending to the highest priority, flood rebuilding.  Delivering the skilled workers we need as quickly as we can.

    Paying as we go and managing demand.

    THE INVALUABLE WORK OF THE COMMUNITY AND BUSINESS

    As important as the role of government is in responding to this disaster, others will also play a vital role.

    Australians have given generously to the Premier’s Relief Fund in Queensland and similar funds in other states. I am very proud of that helping hand of mateship.

    This will help meet the hardship and distress of individual flood victims.

    The Australian Government has pledged contributions to these funds as well as encouraging business to give generously. 

    And I do want to take a moment to pay particular tribute to corporate Australia’s contribution in the crisis.  Hundreds of Australian big, medium and small businesses have already pledged money and donations in kind.

    My meeting with business leaders in Brisbane on Monday confirmed that more money was on its way to rebuild and repair – as well as trucks to remove the rubbish, bottled water for drinking, clothes and toys for people whose houses were lost or damaged. 

    These are just examples of the substantial corporate assistance coming through.

    I’m proud of the way corporate Australia has given something back this month.

    I believe all insurers should show as much compassion and flexibility in dealing with individuals affected by the floods.

    Australia's insurance industry has a very positive record of assisting communities after natural disasters, but I know a number of questions have arisen as a result of the floods about definitions, coverage and consumer protection.

    Already the Treasurer and Assistant Treasurer have engaged in a frank and constructive dialogue with the Insurance Council of Australia and the major flood affected insurers and we have seen RACQ lead the way by announcing a $20 million package to assist flood victims.

    This is an example the industry should follow.

    But the rebuilding cost for government is something quite different from corporate assistance and the relief funds or the costs met by insurance.

    Donations will provide invaluable extra help. 

    Government funding will provide the core assistance all Australians rely on and rightly expect from their Government.  This will largely fund the restoration and replacement of essential public assets and long-term economic infrastructure.

    Roads and rail to get farm produce to market and coal to port - Integral parts of the public infrastructure, which urgently need to be brought back into service, and for which the costs run into the billions.


    A CHALLENGE FOR OUR NATION

    I’ve spent a lot of time in flood-affected parts of our country in the past two weeks.

    I wanted to be on the ground to make sure that the Queensland Government could get whatever it needed from the Government straight away. 

    I also wanted to be able to see my Government’s efforts with my own eyes and ensure it was all working at its best, across the country.

    What I have learnt has certainly been instrumental in my own thinking as we’ve put together this package to rebuild after the floods.

    And while what I learnt was important, what I was reminded of was so much more.

    I was reminded about our people.

    Flood affected people in Queensland who feel the sorrow, even the grief, but who know the sun will come up and are determined to endure.

    Flood affected people outside Queensland who keep telling me there’s worse off than them, and they are glad there hasn’t been greater loss of life in their parts.  But flood damage is flood damage and in a quiet way, they also say to me ... don’t forget us.

    Australians not affected by floods who just want to help.  Not just Brisbane’s amazing clean up volunteers, not just friends filling sandbags for friends, but all Australians, especially those far from the waters, are looking for a way to make a difference.

    As I reflect on these floods and what has happened, I can’t escape the sadness.  None of us can.  But I won’t forget the pride in what we have done together.

    But then I look forward and I know what needs to be done: Investing in rebuilding; investing in future growth; managing demand; reforming for the future. That’s what we will do.

    My plan for rebuilding after the floods is the right economic solution, but it is more than that.

    It is what Australians have a right to expect.

    Putting the national interest first.

    Working to build consensus.

    Tackling the big challenges.

    Focussing on delivery.

    Doing it the Australian way.

    Sharing and sticking together.

    Everyone doing their part.

    We put out a hand to help the flood victims on the first day when they needed us. They still need us.

    We won’t let go.
     

    Tags: Economy, Floods, Julia Gillard, Levy, National Press Club, Queensland Floods, Rebuilding, Tax

28 Comments

  • jellio111 from brisbane , queensland Monday, 7 February 2011, 13:07

    Dragonfly / Werz51,
    excellent comments. i think the latest opinion polls will show how the country is being run. Seems people dont like to hear the negative comments on here.I , like many supporters are for Labor but doesnt mean we have to like decisions or the pathway that is being taken.

    I truly believe the kives are being sharpened again for our current PM as people are seeing the lack of leadership and spinlessness that is being shown. Its to easy to backflip on promises made robbing Peter to pay Paul.
    With regards to the cyclone, it simply perplexes me that the people who suffered the greatest and getting nowhere near the support given to them by the government that was given to the people of cyclone Larry. They are getting hung out to dry. I've been to the area at my own cost to help out and for these politicians to go up there and only scratch the surface is disgraceful. They are just media hounds wanting to get their faces on tv and crocodile tears for votes.

    Seems the donkey might even get a start at the next election. Tony Abbot coudnt do any better job than is currently being done and people are screaming to a strong, powerful leader to lead this country into the future. This bumbling government who walk on eggs shells so as to no upset the slim majority is wearing thin and something will give soon.

  • werz51 from Marrickville , NSW Sunday, 6 February 2011, 15:06

    If our prime minister hadn't backed down to the mining industry on the super tax we'd have had the funds to cover these disasters.

  • Dragonfly from Wollongong , NSW Saturday, 5 February 2011, 18:05

    What has Indonesia sent by way of aid to Queensland? Does $2B a year not afford some flexibility. Our foreign aid is a joke, and now another soldier dies, so we keep sending more. Kokoda Bill you are entirely right. We have things to fix in THIS country, not having to worry about the woes of the world. We are becoming the Pacific's answer to America. STICKING OUR BEAK IN. Wasn't Rudd going to bring the troops back? The red headed shrew wants to send more - as does Abbott, so who do we have that's any good? Shewy you are totally right. Why would anybody sane build a city in a flood plane -- be it 1 in 100 or 1 in 50? Bligh has risen to the occasion with the victims though, as her fraught look indicates she is devastated by the entire mess. In Ipswich, people near the river were offered to have their houses bought -- they declined saying they were not getting sufficient money. So greed has gone before a fall in that regard.Gillard is a complete wash out as a PM -- and don't you all know she only got in because the BOUGHT the independents -- some of whom are now arcing up against her. She is having good photo opportunities in Queensland now, the squeeze is dyeing her hair daily. Give it six months, Shorten, the cuckolding son-in-law of the GG will be PM. God help us. And Shewy, I know Labor stalwarts who will NEVER vote Labor again after this farcical female PM -- but some of them are politically ignorant and have threatened to vote Green. Same thing. Might as well vote informal.

  • jellio111 from brisbane , queensland Tuesday, 1 February 2011, 11:01

    Robert, Firstly to your commence.
    I would have to disagree my comments are naive. And for the record, i am a long time Labor voter, but i am supporter of what Labor used to stand for before all the infighting and not standing behind what Labor should an have stood for in the past.
    So i'm afraid to say you have that first argument incorrect, SORRY.

    What i am saying with foreign aid is, why dont we look after our backyard first and foremost THEN help where we can for the rest of the world. It is right the Australian government stand for and look after there own. Correct me if i am wrong!! So again, i would say you are well off the mark with regards to my comments.

    How can you try and play a racism card in an argument about a flood levy and looking after our own. Now that is an totally foolish and naive comment in itself. I dont know the logical how someone can pull a racism card on that and it is quite perplexing.

    Now Public,
    I'm not sure who or what your post was targetted at but if mine then i will put it plain and simple for you. My comments stand for man, women, dog , horse who ever the hell is running the country. If the country is being run like an old shag then the voters have more than a right to comment negative remarks.
    So i would have to rebutt your comments if relating to my posts that they would be different if it was a man. My posts relate to the running of this country by a PM and not a man or women. Very poor call to try a sexist call. Voters have the right to comment on how this country is run and every time poor Julia is bagged someone comes out of their hole and claims it is because she is a women. How you think logically and work it is becuase she is PM and nothing to do with gender. Did you hear Kevin Rudd pull a "i got knifed because i am a man" card when he lost power. No its becuase he was faultering as PM.

  • zedlive from Tamworth , NSW Monday, 31 January 2011, 21:31

    Jellio111,

    I very much doubt Tony Abbott sent Pipes down at Queenscliff surf life saving club a bill for past hours volunteered when the government announced taxation would support the westpac chopper.

    And all the power to him for not having that attitude.

    We passed the hat around. We came up short. The macroeconomic call is we pay now not later, I understand because the world economy is still a little topsy turvy fiscally. The skipper has made the call.

    So we all chip in in a simple way with those better off chipping in more.

    You can't argue with that - can you?

    I mean what you are suggesting is noodle system taxation - bucketloads of noodle system taxation!

  • public Monday, 31 January 2011, 16:31

    I find it interesting that the people posting here find it their right to comment on the personal aspects of Ms Gillard, who represents the government and the people.

    I seem to think if she was a man then the commentary would be different. All the women in power around the country are being threatened by negative remarks.
    Most attacks are to the person and a personal rather than rational dislike of the Prime Minister.

    I don't like sour cream, so does that give me the right to create an ad campain condeming the stuff? No, that would be idiotic, much in the same way I find many comments supposedly by intelligent people.

    Even some of the smarter posts are looking at things in principle - well you know what in principle means to someone who has nothing - nothing.

  • Robert N_Stephenson Monday, 31 January 2011, 16:31

    Jellio 111


    interesting comments and also incredibly naive. The manner of approach and vitriolic nature suggests a Liberal or National voter who didn't get their way.

    It might be wise to understand just what ourt overseas AID does. Did you know if we just said, okay, you know that 100 millions we were going to give you this year, well we won't give it until next year. Thousands of people would just die, because the money buys food and clean water, medicines and support for living. You are now saying, let thousands die because they aren't Australians and don't matter anyway. Interesting concept, I wonder how the United Nations would see such a callous move?


    I will say again - people, and the Liberal isolationists - are arguing over what amounts to peanuts on an individual level, they are saying lets us cripple our country, lets us destroy the infrastructure of other states, lets us let people in poor countries die because we don't want to support Australia ourselves.


    I have heard many arguments of why not to pay the levy, and a great deal of them amount to disguised racism and on the political from Abbot and others are trying to score political browny points from the suffering of others.


    That is Australians shame and your comments added to it - feel proud... and keep your spare 96cents a week because you can't brag about that amount --

  • jellio111 from brisbane , queensland Monday, 31 January 2011, 16:31

    Robert,
    Julia represents Julia. This has been proven many times since her days as deputy.
    She is suppose to govern the country and provide for the Australian public and not the public provide for her to cover the continually sprend-thrift attitude

    The Australian public are more than happy to give to all the people who have lost everything around Australia in all states. I will rebut your comment about Australians and giving. What i have seen is nothing but a country coming together for the hard times for their fellow Australians.
    What people are not happy about is being told they have to pay more money to a government to fix roads, bridges etc in which they should have money set aside for such things. We pay some of the highest taxes in the world and yet it seems lately since this government has become a government by default that new taxes are popping up left right and centre. And we are all getting hit. Why should the Australian public have to sit back and take it from a government with some many short comings. We should we make up there shortfall everytime. Dont we have a right to say no!!!

  • jellio111 from brisbane , queensland Monday, 31 January 2011, 15:31

    kphtrade/Shewy, firstly, Brisbane infrastructure isnt arcahic as you say. if you could comprehend the amount of water that came through the western corridor and brisbane. No infrastructures would have held up at any length to it taking into consideration the land structure as well. Comparing NSW/VIC snow scheme is comparing oranges and apples. there is different land structures, plains and inland routes. The wivenhoe dam held its own quite well compared to the amount of water going through it i think the best that could be done, was. If you investigate, these floods cant compared to another. the 1974 flood was caused by a cyclone. the 2011 flood was caused by massive amounts of rain over a prolonged period that couldnt be held in approx 70% of qld. Tell how many dams should we build to stop that, It wouldnt be logical.
    But saying that, is this pathetically run government going to hit us everytime we have a natural disaster because they dont have money put aside for such emergencies. I have to agree with Shewy, why give substantial amounts of money for foreign aid along with ample other wastages of funds when an emergency fund should be set up in own country. For those who are saying i am whinging. I have so far donated $2000 to the flood appeal and every weekend since have assist those who have lost everything. So now i get told by our all mighty PM that i am forced to fork out more just becuase she says so and to cover the spending she and her numbers man have continued to do. Unfortunately, the labor party will continue to be a joke while this women is at the helm sapping the people she is suppose to represent by force to cover her bottom line. And her offsider , Bligh in QLD, is even worse. She's just sold off a lot of QLD and now doing more to cover herself. DISGRACEFUL POLITICAL GAMES!!

  • Robert N_Stephenson Monday, 31 January 2011, 15:31

    In the examination of the media networks, the Liberal, Nationals and even Independents it has become clear we were lucky to actually get Labor into power, because it has become obvious either Australia would have been hung out to dry because of the floods, or QLD, NSW and VIc would have fallen viction to the extreme nastiness of these interests.


    I have seen some of the most selfish, self centred posts in all my years and I did not think Australians could get so low, so bitter and so vicious - all all driven by a media enterprise that got upset i'it' didn't get a Liberal government into power.


    Australia has become a country where the media influence the people to drive down support of bold and just initiatives. The ALP knows this, but cannot comment in that regard, as the media already have started their run for the next election and they don't want to make the situation worse.


    I would pay $10 a week levy for one year, a modest donations for the rebuilding effort in our country. I am appauled that peope, are getting up in arms in protest over less than a cup of coffee a week in support. How filthy does that sound when you read it?


    What has been revealed by the media is that Australians may be a supportive people, but we are dictated to by a media that only supports greed and desires of the very rich. I had hoped Australians were better than this, but it appears we are really a de*****able bunch, as shown by the media.


    Julia Gillard is working for the country, do her best to secure the nation and help the people in flood ravaged states, while the snipers hide their wallets and through their media buddies tell us to go to hell.


    Next election if you don't vote Labor in you need to remember what you have now been given a glimpse of... it makes me sich to my stomach.

  • Robert N_Stephenson Monday, 31 January 2011, 15:31

    In the examination of the media networks, the Liberal, Nationals and even Independents it has become clear we were lucky to actually get Labor into power, because it has become obvious either Australia would have been hung out to dry because of the floods, or QLD, NSW and VIc would have fallen viction to the extreme nastiness of these interests.


    I have seen some of the most selfish, self centred posts in all my years and I did not think Australians could get so low, so bitter and so vicious - all all driven by a media enterprise that got upset i'it' didn't get a Liberal government into power.


    Australia has become a country where the media influence the people to drive down support of bold and just initiatives. The ALP knows this, but cannot comment in that regard, as the media already have started their run for the next election and they don't want to make the situation worse.


    I would pay $10 a week levy for one year, a modest donations for the rebuilding effort in our country. I am appauled that peope, are getting up in arms in protest over less than a cup of coffee a week in support. How filthy does that sound when you read it?


    What has been revealed by the media is that Australians may be a supportive people, but we are dictated to by a media that only supports greed and desires of the very rich. I had hoped Australians were better than this, but it appears we are really a de*****able bunch, as shown by the media.


    Julia Gillard is working for the country, do her best to secure the nation and help the people in flood ravaged states, while the snipers hide their wallets and through their media buddies tell us to go to hell.


    Next election if you don't vote Labor in you need to remember what you have now been given a glimpse of... it makes me sich to my stomach.

  • winniev1954 from Caboolture , Queensland Monday, 31 January 2011, 10:31

    Well after reading all the comments I have come to one conclusion that is people should not winge the levy is a fine thing it has been done many times before in our history and we still survived the problem is now days there are a lot more greedy people around who take but give very little, well the government could just sit by and not do a thing both federal and state and just repair things when they could afford to do so and if that happened where would the economy and the country be, the roards would fall apart there by no food getting through, rail would take forever to be fixed there by no food, exports to bring money in to the economy, I have noticed that it is always those that earn big money that complaine the loudest, I am on a disability pension and will be glad to pay $1 a week out of my pension to raise the money that is needed.

  • Shewy32 from Matcham , NSW Sunday, 30 January 2011, 16:30

    Julia, you are a big FAIL as PM.

    Please explain to me why the rest of the country has to pay for the re-building of Brisbane. Is it our fault we that we put up roots next to a river prone to flooding? Is it our fault that we didn't build the appropiate infrastructure when we had the opportunity?

    When I spent years living off noodles anad porridge etc to educate myself to ensure that I had a chance at a better life, i didn't realise at the time that i was going to be penalisied for being motivated. I do not wish to digress into another subject, however your stupid assumption that becasue I earn more I can automatically afford more is a perfect example as to why you shouldn't be our leader.

    Why do we give away Billions of dollars a year.....approx 5 billion if I am correct.....to foreign aid when we have things in our own backyard to look after.

    Just a quick opionion poll for your interest, I haven't spoken to anyone as of late who will be voting for you at the next election. CAN'T WAIT!!!

  • proudpom from Perth , WA Saturday, 29 January 2011, 00:29

    Why have a levy for one year surely as climate change continues because we and other governments fail to do anything major to reduce greenhouse gases etc then surely we can expect to have many more natural disasters in the future, so why not retain the levy in preparation for the future events.

  • zedlive from Tamworth , NSW Friday, 28 January 2011, 20:28

    Sanga, when I volunteer, and when I donate, I don't keep a tally of same to be bought to account as some kind of get out of general obligations free card at some stage down the track. I do it for nothing in return.

  • kphtrade from narre waren , victoria Friday, 28 January 2011, 19:28

    The only lesson i see here to be learned is that Queensland's infrastructure is archaic and backwards and a succession of bureaucrats have neglected it.
    Sydney and Melbourne spent 20 years building the snowy scheme.
    Queensland needed to build dams & water facilities capable of holding enough water in 1974 yet 36 years later we are saying the same thing.Will we say the same thing in 36 years time ????
    My condolences to the families who have lost love ones in the floods and i am more than happy to dig into my pocket to help rebuild the flood affected families lives.

  • sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Friday, 28 January 2011, 16:28

    The issue is not about the levy. The issue is about taxing people who may already have donated and those in high income brackets who are exempt because their properties went under. The issue is about how equitable is the levy to high income earners who are also living in a high expense area. The issue is about the political impact of the levy and not about the ethics of good will so far displayed by the Australian people. It is about expenditure and re-development control as well as good project management instead of squandering the levy on brooming things under the carpet for the next 200 yeat event. I would prefer to see two things: 1.) A permanent natural disaster fund that places a rate payer levy on property and business owners in accordance to sliding scale of property values and business profit reports. 2.) A national sustainable infrastructure bank that acts as a permanent institutional investment banking vehicle to deliver vital power, transport, health, water, civic, education and community infrastructure investments with a view towards building sustainable communities, local jobs and community owned faciltiies and services. That way, we don't need a levy because the investment needs of each community are leveraged against their asset values. This type of system will foster co-operation between business and the local community by promoting investment and asset ownership interoperability. It will also ensure that local communities have independent income sources that provide local jobs for locals. The UN does it in Africa, Asia and South Amercia. The US does it, Euroepan countries do it and even the UK does it. So why do we have to be so backward in Australia with regard to our policy thinking?

  • sangerer from Albert Park , Victoria Friday, 28 January 2011, 16:28

    The issue is not about the levy. The issue is about taxing people who may already have donated and those in high income brackets who are exempt because their properties went under. The issue is about how equitable is the levy to high income earners who are also living in a high expense area. The issue is about the political impact of the levy and not about the ethics of good will so far displayed by the Australian people. It is about expenditure and re-development control as well as good project management instead of squandering the levy on brooming things under the carpet for the next 200 yeat event. I would prefer to see two things: 1.) A permanent natural disaster fund that places a rate payer levy on property and business owners in accordance to sliding scale of property values and business profit reports. 2.) A national sustainable infrastructure bank that acts as a permanent institutional investment banking vehicle to deliver vital power, transport, health, water, civic, education and community infrastructure investments with a view towards building sustainable communities, local jobs and community owned faciltiies and services. That way, we don't need a levy because the investment needs of each community are leveraged against their asset values. This type of system will foster co-operation between business and the local community by promoting investment and asset ownership interoperability. It will also ensure that local communities have independent income sources that provide local jobs for locals. The UN does it in Africa, Asia and South Amercia. The US does it, Euroepan countries do it and even the UK does it. So why do we have to be so backward in Australia with regard to our policy thinking?

  • KokodaBill from West Lakes Shore , SA Friday, 28 January 2011, 15:28

    Now that the Government has established the principle of taxing those people who have already donated to the Flood Relief, someone needs to look at Religious organisations that undertake commercial ventures in addition to their charitable works, yet are able to claim tax exemption for both activities.

    These organisations should pay tax on their commercial operations, while the charitable works could remain tax exempt.

    Recently the makers of Weetbix (Sanitarium Health Foods) were fined for grossly understating the amount of fruit in their Weetbix Apricot Bites product, yet this firm is able to claim tax exemption because of its religious orgin. This seems wrong.

  • Ailsap from Stoneville , WA Friday, 28 January 2011, 14:28

    I have no problem with the flood levy – it is a minimal cost - $50 a year for someone on $50K. However I think that exempting flood victims is a silly idea – which appears more a political or maybe a feel good policy rather than common sense. The cost of identifying those who are exempt will exceed the amount of money they would pay. EG it will cost a lot more than $50 to identify and adjust the tax or Centrelink/Medibank system to ensure the levy is not taken from those individuals. Basically it complicates the admin processes behind the concept. Also, if the victims are earning that amount of $ in the financial year and have received financial assistance anyway, I shouldn’t think $50 - $200 a year is going to break them. I think if you asked the flood victims they would rather pay the levy if they earn enough rather than have money wasted exempting them.

    This unfortunately is not an isolated issue in the delivery of government services. I retired last year from an agency which delivered employment services under the Job Network and then the new JSA. The costs of compliance in that system far outweigh any potential risk of poor service delivery or fraud and substantially reduce the quality and effectiveness of the services to the clients - and I am sad to say the new system is even worse than the old one under Howard. Very much a case of the IT system and administration being the tail which is wagging the dog.

    I had really high hopes when we got back into government, but whilst I keep telling myself that the intentions are good (a lot better than Howard’s mob) the reality doesn’t seem to have changed much. Can we please find some common sense?

  • LaborHQ from Canberra , ACT Friday, 28 January 2011, 11:28

    @andrewnelson Thank you for your comment. You are correct when you say we need to get on with job. We are committed to doing all we can to implement this plan and get help to the people of Queensland so that they can start rebuilding their lives. It is very important that we all stay ontop of the facts of the situation and not get caught up in Liberal spin which will just delay much needed help. If your friends or family need to know the facts please let them know about our Flood Recovery page: http://www.alp.org.au/agenda/flood-recovery/

  • LaborHQ from Canberra , ACT Friday, 28 January 2011, 10:28

    @public we thought you might be interested to read the Treasurer's latest Economic Note: http://www.alp.org.au/blogs/ALP-Blog/january-2011/treasurer-s-economic-note/. We think this may clear up a few of the issues you have outlined.

    As davidlen has kindly outlined these payments are scaled to how much you earn. Those who earn below $50 000 or have been affected by the floods are not required to pay the levy. You may want to have a look at our Flood Levy Fact Page: http://www.alp.org.au/agenda/flood-recovery/flood-levy-facts/ which has details about who will be required to pay what.

  • thetrureal from melbourne , victoria Friday, 28 January 2011, 01:28

    What is $1 or even $10 a week for a high earner, once the levy for the floods are achieved, it should become permanent as to fund a full universal health care system. Well done for not taking from the minimum to lower income earners and if you still complain and think it’s unfair, they could have always put up fuel prices by 15 to 30 cents a liter but did not, they could have used the future funds but are not! What do you people want, you don’t want a mining tax that can easily pay for everything but as always, most people want it to happen like magic as Abbott thinks he has.

  • andrewnelson from Brunswick West , Victoria Thursday, 27 January 2011, 23:27

    This levy will cost me a darn site more than $5 a week but I am for it.

    If the Govt doesn't have a mandate to impose a once off levy during times of unusual stress (eg. natural disaster, war etc.), when DOES it have the mandate?

    And these are two key reasons I pay taxes for, right?! Infrastructure and Social Security.

    Don't get me wrong, I am not so well off that I wont miss it (single income family, renting, 2 young kids, elderly immigrant parents etc.), but surely I can afford it for my contribution to the rebuilding process.

    In recent times many of us seem to have forgotten that we live in a social democracy and that the next natural disaster might hit us personally and we sure as heck would be putting up our hand seeking government support.

    Mining Tax, GST debate, now the Flood Levy. Everyone someone seems to be creating a new ginger group aimed at swaying public opinion in any way that avoids their social or commercial responsibility and denies social benefit or necessary innovation, just to save a few bucks personally. At least in this current case I think its is an indictment on our society when we start to deny our social responsibilities (tax) in cases of clear community stress and need like this one (natural and economic disaster).

    I know Tony Abbott is saying that the difference between levies under Labor vs Liberal is that Labor is wasteful and the Libs were not. I don't really buy that, but even if I did, something tells me that if Abbott had won the hung parliament he would be imposing a levy now too, and Labor is cutting $4bn so I think its doing a fair balance between savings and levy - even if you want to argue about where it should make the cuts.

    My immediate suggest though is, if so many people are genuinely so worried about the impact that $5 per week will have on some people, then lets collect at half the rate but spread it over 2 years instead of all in one year. But lets stop penny pinching and griping and get on with the job of rebuilding our country and helping our communities.

  • davidlen from castletown , wa Thursday, 27 January 2011, 22:27

    Gary you of course imply something that is untrue, namely..."$5. a week does not sound like much, but if you look at the figures it can break some people."...your words not mine...it has been made very very clear, those earning 50 to 60k will pay under a dollar a week, then the levy is curved upwards to less than $5 a week for those earning 100.000k. Your comments are mischievous at best and downright porkies at worse.
    If you earn 100.000 and object to 5 bucks a week you are in the wrong party mate. Perhaps the Mad Monk and his rabble of do nothing but dish out negative doomsday responses is more to your liking.
    If you cant afford the levy, let me know and I will pay it for you. Hate to see you out of pocket and destitute, even broken as you imply, regardless of our friends personal tragedies in the flood areas.

  • public Thursday, 27 January 2011, 21:27

    Hello Julia
    Many people have already donated to the flood fund and your asking for more. $5. a week does not sound like much, but if you look at the figures it can break some people.
    How much have you personally donated? How much have the other members in every party donated? I know the people need help, but hitting every one does not help them.
    Trying to get the budget in form is not what most Australians are really concerned about. Focus on the situation, not on your status.
    Regard
    Gary

  • longinthetooth from beaconsfield , WA Thursday, 27 January 2011, 21:27

    Taxpayers give their money as a levy to Fed Gov’t, who give it to flood sufferers, domestic and State Infrastructure, who give it to the construction industry, who get certain things manufactured; also to retailers of furniture, furnishing, whitegoods and appliances, car yards, etc. The flood sufferers get a little help, lots of ticks there, but it won’t bring them back to normality. The Levy payers probably won’t mind too much, until Abbott gets them stirred up. But the construction industry, manufacturers and retailers are in for a boom, ie, Super Profits. The latter won’t have to pay a Levy, won’t have to pay Super Taxes on their 5.7 billion windfall. The insurance companies, who have been only too keen to take their premiums over many years but won’t pay up based on the small print, get away with murder and won’t pay the Levy, or Super Tax on the rise in premiums which we have already been alerted to expect.

    Instead incentives to expedite environmental pollution reduction, sustainable energy supply alternatives, etc, are being made to pay the lions share. This doesn’t make sense. The increased severity of the Bush Fires of 2009, now the floods in WA, Qld, NSW and Victoria are the beginnings predicted by the weather experts of climate change caused by the environmental pollution.

    Good intent, but an awful solution.

    Just as we have graduated personal taxation, we need graduted business taxation. Abandon SuperTax on Mining alone, lets have graduated taxation across the board, with a special flood relief business levy on windfall profits gained from the suffering of others.

  • zedlive from Tamworth , NSW Thursday, 27 January 2011, 13:27

    Nice job.