Senate debates

Monday, 28 February 2011

Tax Laws Amendment (Temporary Flood and Cyclone Reconstruction Levy) Bill 2011; Income Tax Rates Amendment (Temporary Flood and Cyclone Reconstruction Levy) Bill 2011

Second Reading

8:55 pm

Photo of Christopher BackChristopher Back (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

It is a secret, apparently, Senator Boyce tells me. They are so ashamed of the cut-off of funds in those donations that they will not even come out—well, it certainly did not cause much difficulty for that Premier to be in front of the cameras when there was a story to be told. I want her to tell us: what was the cessation of donations once it became known that people who had donated generously will now, in fact, be levied? As has been said by the government’s own advisers, this has not been an economic decision; this has been a political decision—a poor political decision, a disincentive to donate.

It is interesting, isn’t it? Just today we see that, because Queensland, of all the mainland states, has been alone in not insuring against disasters, we find ourselves now in the circumstance of having to grant further support. Whilst there will be an outpouring of support, assistance, time and effort, it behoves the Queensland government to do as the other mainland states do—that is, to take out that disaster insurance—as indeed it behoves people in fire prone areas and flood prone areas to insure. It is simply not good enough. We now see, with the current break-up of the GST as recommended by the Grants Commission, that Queensland will save $15 a head, Victorians will save 50c a head, and it will be the other states that bear that burden.

Speaking of Victoria for a moment, it is only two years ago that we regrettably had the Black Saturday fires, with in excess of $4½ billion worth of damage. If you think back to that time, the world was in the global financial crisis. At that time there was no need, despite the economic circumstances we found ourselves in, to go to the Australian people with a levy. Here we are now, where the government is calling for this levy. I ask why. I ask why the inconsistency, and I ask why the incompetence of this government.

Finally, in this contribution I wish to speak about the poor management of disasters at the financial level by the Attorney-General’s Department and Emergency Management Australia under the Australian government response and recovery arrangements. The Gascoyne River floods in December, the worst in WA’s history, afflicted that entire area and destroyed the town of Gascoyne Junction and the pastoral properties down the Gascoyne. All of the plantations in Carnarvon were destroyed. Caravan parks and houses were washed away. In accordance with the disaster response agreement, the Premier wrote to the Prime Minister on 31 December, declaring it a category C natural disaster. In her defence, the Prime Minister wrote back to the Premier on 5 or 6 January with a copy to the Attorney-General, agreeing with the Premier, and she went to visit the Gascoyne.

No-one got the $1,000 per head or $400 per child under the response and recovery arrangements. Not a single person received those payments from Centrelink until I asked the question, here in the chamber, of Senator Ludwig, representing the Attorney-General. I got absolutely no answer because he did not know the answer. Only then did we find out that a government bureaucracy here in Canberra had made its decision that people of the Gascoyne were not entitled because not very much had happened. It was then, 24 hours later, that the Prime Minister, to her credit, put out a requirement that they were to be paid those funds.

I will refer very briefly to the squandering that went on in Queensland as a result of those floods. People north of Brisbane, some 1,170 kilometres, at the Yarrabah community, ended up getting flood relief funding—1,700 kilometres away! People in Laura, halfway up Cape York, ended up getting funding as a result of Cyclone Yasi, when they suffered no damage at all. To answer Senator Brown’s comment about the Prime Minister waiving any costs for people who have drawn down these funds: in Queensland, I understand, there were plenty who availed themselves of the $1,000, donated it back to flood relief but of course, as a result of being recipients, are now themselves exempted from paying that particular levy.

We have seen throughout this exercise a complete and utter disregard for the generosity of Australians; we have seen a disregard for what I would regard as an acceptance and an understanding of the fact that we live in a country of droughts and flooding rains. It is time this government acted responsibly—and, if they cannot, for them to stand to one side for a government that has and will again.

Comments

No comments