This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Flood Levy - Do you agree?

What do yo think of the Gillard flood levy?

  • I agree with the flood levy and the current level seems right

    Votes: 24 21.2%
  • I agree with the flood levy but the current level is too low

    Votes: 2 1.8%
  • I agree with the flood levy but the current level is too high

    Votes: 3 2.7%
  • I disagree with the flood levy

    Votes: 84 74.3%

  • Total voters
    113
Could this be an ingrained belief that the government of any day (via tax payer funds) does support the lazy, the irresponsible, and those that believe it is their god-given-right to government support.
Given the growth of middle class welfare in this country over the past two decades, it would be very hard to argue against your point.

I don't think either major party has the political capital or courage to reform this real problem in government waste though.
 
Hi
Could some intellectual please explain how we would know that Gillard has only taken
$1.8 Bullion from the tax payer, for the flood levy?
Cheers
 

Qld will suffer under levy deal: Lucas

Xenophon to vote for levy as long as Queensland takes out disaster insurance.

http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/floods/8219311/qld-will-suffer-under-levy-deal-lucas

The federal government's decision to bow to pressure from independent Senator Nick Xenophon to ensure he supports their flood levy will cost Queensland taxpayers dearly, the state government says.

The agreement will force the states and territories to take out insurance, create their own disaster funds or take equivalent measures.

With the support of all the other crossbench senators, the levy will become a reality from July, affecting most Australians earning more than $50,000.

Acting Premier Paul Lucas said he was glad the levy would pass but criticised the federal government and Senator Xenophon, saying they had delivered a "massive kick in the guts" to Queensland taxpayers.

He said the deal would require not only states, but also local governments, to fork out billions of dollars to insure themselves against disasters.

"What do you say to ratepayers in towns like Gympie, or Dalby or Emerald that flood all the time," he told reporters in Brisbane.

"But under this proposal, they're going to have to have insurance.

"It will send them broke."

The state government is currently seeking a quote to insure its assets, including roads, against future natural disasters.

But Mr Lucas said Queensland would struggle to find an appropriate deal because of its size, population and regular floods and cyclones.

"It is simply not on to make it mandatory," he said.

"... We can demonstrate it is not possible to do."

He said the federal government did not have insurance of this kind, and questioned why the case should be different for Queensland.

"Make no mistake, insurance of this type, if you can get it... is delivered by international insurance conglomerates that do it to make a profit," he said.

"Let's be perfectly clear - this doesn't just mean the state will now have to pay massive premiums to overseas insurance companies, but local councils will too."

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Oh well, I suppose that it is only fair that Queensland take out disaster insurance just like any other State in the Federation.

It's time that Queensland gets it's insurance in line with the other states and abandons some of it's old quirks like the fault principle for motor accidents.

Insurers must make a lot of money up there when they only have to fight 'men of straw' in certain situations where no third party indemnity exists.

http://www.maic.qld.gov.au/about-maic/ctp-scheme.shtml

CTP Scheme Description

Queensland operates a common law 'fault' based Compulsory Third Party (CTP) scheme, first introduced in 1936. The scheme provides motor vehicle owners with an insurance policy that covers their unlimited liability for personal injury caused by, through or in connection with the use of the insured motor vehicle in incidents to which the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 applies.

For the injured third party, it provides access to common law, where the injured person has a right to approach a law court to seek monetary compensation from the person 'at fault' for the personal injury and other related losses. As a fault based scheme it requires proof of liability, meaning the injured party must be able to establish negligence against an owner or driver of a motor vehicle. Consequently, circumstances can arise where an injured person can not obtain compensation, such as when they were the driver wholly at fault in the accident because there is no negligent party against whom a claim can be made.

The Queensland scheme is governed by the Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 and underwritten by private licensed insurers who accept applications for insurance and manage claims on behalf of their policyholders. Compensation is paid to accident victims from the respective insurer's premium pool. Since 1994, the scheme has had an increased focus on the rehabilitation of injured persons and places certain obligations on insurers and claimants.
 
Following the response to the 2020 Summit’s recommendations, the Rudd government has agreed to establish a Deployable Civilian Capacity (DCC) for the rapid deployment of civilian experts to assist in international disaster relief, stabilisation and post-conflict reconstruction efforts.

This Policy Analysis examines the need to specify responsibilities, accountabilities, authority, legal obligations and resources to achieve a ‘Team Australia’ approach. Equitable conditions of service for civilian participants on overseas operations that are comparable to military and police entitlements will be important.

An emergency response register of specialist personnel, such as medical teams, engineers, logisticians, sanitation experts and communications technicians, would enhance DCC responsiveness. Another register that monitors the quantity and location of commercial stocks for emergency humanitarian assistance would help.

It is also worth considering, particularly in the aftermath of the Victorian bushfires, how best to draw on the DCC to respond to life-threatening disasters and delivery of humanitarian assistance to Australians at home when catastrophic natural disasters occur.

http://www.apo.org.au/research/rudds-army-deployable-civilian-capacity-australia

Anyone see any of these remarkable people from "Team Australia" leap into action?

HUH ??? Anybody?
 

Is David Koch on the team?
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...