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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 08 Hansard (Tuesday, 3 August 2004) . . Page.. 3347 ..

The release of the Liberal Party’s concession policy resulted in a great deal of criticism from the government. Yesterday Mr Stanhope issued a media release. Before I refer to his media release I will refer to the fact that the Commonwealth recognises the needs of low-income self-funded retirees who are bewildered and resentful that they are not obtaining the benefits of a lifetime of thrift and hard work.

The Commonwealth made a deal with the states to contribute 60 per cent of the cost of extending pensioner concessions to low-income self-funded retirees, including reductions to energy, water and sewerage rates, car registration, transport and spectacle bills. The Stanhope government did not accept the Commonwealth’s proposal. Mr Stanhope, in a media release issued on 2 August, proudly boasts:

My government rejected the Commonwealth’s proposal, as did other States ...

That is not entirely correct. South Australia and Western Australia entered into negotiations with the Commonwealth in relation to this matter. One of the arguments that Mr Stanhope put forward for rejecting this proposal was that there was no guarantee by the Commonwealth government that it would continue to fund the program. What an absurd comment! How can anyone promise that a program will be funded forever? That is no excuse and this government simply has no defence. Mr Stanhope also argued:

An analysis undertaken by … shows that the ageing of the ACT population over the next ten years is estimated to add an extra $14 million to the current concessions bill.

Again, that is no reason why we should not accept the concessions that have been offered by the Commonwealth government. This government put forward no excuse for its failure to accept the Commonwealth government’s offer to contribute $2.1 million, or 60 per cent, towards the cost of extending pensioner concessions to low-income self-funded retirees. One has to ask why the Stanhope Labor government rejected the Commonwealth government’s offer.

The Stanhope government put forward a figure to justify rejecting the Commonwealth government’s proposal. It stated, for example, that the amount of $10 million was concessions offered by the opposition. However, that figure includes concessions that are already being paid. We accurately calculated the additional cost of concessions to be approximately $2 million.

Why did the Labor Party reject the Commonwealth government’s offer? It comes down to an ideology. On 29 March, Mr Quinlan stated in the Canberra Times that the ACT government was more interested in extending concessions to “those who really need it”. As a result of its ideology this government is seeking to penalise low-income self-funded retirees who have looked after themselves and have been provident all their lives. The opposition has approached this issue in a slightly different manner. Self-funded retirees are entitled to the Commonwealth seniors health card but, as members would be aware, that card is not available to everybody.

We believe that our proposal is fair. The Labor government’s petty approach to the ageing in our community does not stop at not allowing concessions to low-income

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