Showing posts with label costs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label costs. Show all posts
Wednesday 9 January 2019
The bad news for NSW North Coast regional communities just never ends
According to
the Berejiklian Coalition Government’s Transport
for NSW website: The
Community Transport Program (CTP) assists individuals who are transport
disadvantaged owing to physical, social, cultural and / or geographic
factors. Individuals who do not qualify for other support programs may be
eligible for community transport. CTP is funded by the NSW
Government and aims to address transport disadvantage at the local level via
community transport organisations.
In the
Clarence Valley medical specialist services are rather thin on the ground and
residents are frequently referred to medical practices and hospital clinics
hundreds of miles away.
For
communities in the Lower Clarence where a high percentage of the population are
elderly people on low incomes this can frequently present a transport problem,
as often there is no family member living close by to assist or the person’s peer
friendship group doesn’t include anyone capable of driving long distances.
Community
transport has been the only option for a good many people.
Until now…..
The Daily Examiner, 8 January 2019, p.3:
The thought of paying
$200 for a trip to see her specialist about her medical condition made Yamba
pensioner Gloria George glad she was sitting down when she made the call.
The 80-year-old said
when she contacted Clarence Community Transport and was told the price to be
taken by car to the Gold Coast for a Wednesday appointment, it could have
brought on a heart attack.
Mrs George said CCT told
her there was a bus service to the Gold Coast that ran on Monday, Wednesday and
Friday for $70.
“My appointment was on
Tuesday and the clinic I was booked into was not available on the other days,”
she said.
“They said they had made
cutbacks and the price to be driven to the appointment was $200.
“I’ve got a bad heart
problem and I nearly fell over when they told me.
“Who can afford $200 to
go to an appointment?”
Mrs George said she
still has a licence, but would not feel safe driving to her appointment.
“I think I’ll be able to
get a friend to drive me there and take me home again. I hope so,” she said.
The manager of CCT,
Warwick Foster, said the price rise for services had come in when the government
cut $250,000 from CCT’s funding when the NDIS came in last year.
“We could no longer
afford to operate the bus five days a week,” he said. “And we can’t afford to
drive people to appointments for the same fee we charge for the bus service.”
Mr Foster said the
government subsidy for transport of $31 a trip created a juggling act for CCT
to afford its services.
“Each trip, no matter
the distance, is subsidised at $31,” he said.
“It doesn’t matter if
the trip is across town or to Brisbane, the subsidy is the same....
Tuesday 9 October 2018
Assistant Treasurer Stuart Robert follows unofficial Liberal Party guideline: Don't get caught but if you do pay it back
Image: The Sydney Morning Herald 2017 |
This time
over the excessive costs associated with his taxpayer-funded 4G home Internet
connection.
He has been
charging taxpayers more than a $1,000 a month for Internet access since 2016 and
by 2018 the cost had risen to over $2,000 a month.
The reasons being
given by Robert for why he didn’t avail himself of cheaper alternatives don’t really
stand close scrutiny.
Given this
Liberal MP’s history (see below) one immediately wonders if a third party individual/
corporation signed his contact with the Internet Service Provider (ISP) and
this increased the cost to taxpayers or whether Robert has a pecuniary interest
in that particular ISP.
Prime
Minister Scott Morrison has
requested that these expense claims be investigated by Special Minister for
State Alex Hawke who himself is under
a cloud when it comes to parliamentary expense claims.
Once his
parliamentary expenses drew media attention Robert was quick to commit to
paying back Internet charges reimbursed by the Dept. of Finance. At a quick estimate that would be somewhere in the vicinity of $25,000, although reportedly he puts the estimate as a little over $20,000.
Parliamentary expense claims are not the only issue for the Member for Fadden.
On 6 October 2018 The West Australian reported that:
Parliamentary expense claims are not the only issue for the Member for Fadden.
On 6 October 2018 The West Australian reported that:
A company run by a Federal minister who charged taxpayers $2000 a month for internet access lodged documents removing him as its director only after the matter was queried by The Weekend West.
Until late yesterday ASIC records showed Assistant Treasurer Stuart Robert was a director of an alternative health franchise business, despite Mr Robert telling Parliament a month ago he quit the board of Cryo Australia when he returned to the ministry.
In February
2016 Stuart Robert was sent to the backbench in disgrace after just three years
as a federal government minister.
It is barely six weeks since he returned to the ministry on the back of Scott Morrison’s politically bloody ascendancy and it appears that there has been no lesson learned.
It is barely six weeks since he returned to the ministry on the back of Scott Morrison’s politically bloody ascendancy and it appears that there has been no lesson learned.
A Brief History
10 FEBRUARY
2016 In
which then Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott gives the nod for then
Assistant Defence Minister Stuart Robert to help smooth the way for a big
Liberal Party donor and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull inherits a problem
12 FEBRUARY
2016 Minister
for Human Services & Minister for Veterans' Affairs showing his contempt
for the Australian electorate
14 FEBRUARY
2016 Liberal
MP Stuart Robert's resignation as Australian Minister for Human Services raises
more questions than it answers
21 FEBRUARY
2016 The
Liberal Member for Fadden - drowning not waving
20 MAY 2016 Federal
MP Stuart Robert channelled $70,000 from his Liberal Nationals Party campaign
fund to three local government candidates
27 SEPTEMBER
2017 Australian
Politics in 2017: Financial Fog Unlimited #2
Thursday 9 August 2018
Is Minister for Home Affairs Peter Dutton value for money?
Australia's millionaire Minister for Home Affairs and Liberal MP for Dickson Peter Dutton has gathered to himself a lucrative salary worth in the vicinity of $478,068 per annum, before any parliamentary entitlements are realised.
The Prime Minister's annual salary is only a little under $50,000 more than this, while the U.S, President's annual salary is apparently around AU$70,000 less than Dutton's annual payment for services rendered.
So is Peter Dutton giving taxpayers value for the revenue dollars they supply.
It honestly doesn't appear to be the case if this audit is any indication.
Australian National Audit Office (ANAO), Report
No.45 2017–18 The
Integration of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection and the
Australian Customs and Border Protection Service, excerpts:
On
18 July 2017, the Prime Minister announced that the government had
decided to establish a Home Affairs portfolio which would have responsibility
for:
federal
law enforcement;
national
security;
transport
security;
criminal
justice;
emergency
management;
immigration
and multicultural affairs; and
border-related
functions.
The Department of Home
Affairs has assumed all of the department’s functions (including the ABF) in
addition to functions from each of the Departments of Prime Minister and
Cabinet; Social Services; Infrastructure and Regional Development and the
Attorney-General’s department.
In addition to the ABF,
the Home Affairs portfolio also includes the following entities:
the
Australian Federal Police;
the
Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission;
the
Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre; and
the
Australian Security Intelligence Organisation. …..
Conclusion
10. The Department of
Immigration and Border Protection achieved the integration of DIBP and ACBPS
and the creation of the Australian Border Force in a structural sense and is
also progressing with the implementation of a suite of reform projects.
However, it is not
achieving commitments made to government in relation to additional revenue, and
is not in a position to provide the government with assurance that the claimed
benefits of integration have been achieved.
11. The department
established largely effective governance arrangements which were revised over
time in response to emerging issues.
12. The department’s record keeping
continues to be poor.
13. The department is
effectively managing a suite of 38 capability reform projects and has developed
sound monitoring arrangements, although the Executive Committee does not have
visibility of the overall status of individual projects.
14. The efficiency
savings committed to by the department were removed from its forward estimates
and have thus been incorporated in the budget. However, the department has not verified whether
efficiencies have been delivered in the specific areas which were nominated in
the Integration Business Case.
15. Based on progress to
the end of December 2017, if
collections continue at the current rate the department will only collect 31.6
per cent of the additional customs duty revenue to which it committed in the
Integration Business Case.
16. In the Integration
Business Case, the department committed to a detailed Benefits Realisation
Plan. The plan was not implemented despite several reviews identifying this
omission. As a result, the
department cannot demonstrate to the government that the claimed benefits of
integration have been achieved….
18. Reporting to the
Executive focused primarily on integration and organisational reform, with
minimal coverage of progress in delivery of the suite of 38 capability reform
projects. Following the identification of this as a gap in the 2017 Gateway
Review, an Enterprise Transformation Blueprint was established to provide the
Executive Committee with greater visibility over the progress of activity
across the department.
19. There was no evidence
identified to indicate that written briefings were provided to the Minister on
progress throughout the implementation process.
20. Detailed
communication plans were established and implemented to support the integration
process. ‘Pulse Check’ surveys were regularly taken to evaluate staff
satisfaction and engagement with the process.
21. The audit found that the
department did not maintain adequate records of the integration process. This
finding repeats the outcomes of a substantial number of audits and reviews
going back to 2005. The department’s own assessment is that its records and
information management is in a critically poor state. The problems and
their solutions are known to the department, and it has an action plan to
address them, although numerous previous attempts to do so have not been
successful.
22. The department also
experienced a loss of corporate memory due to the level of turn-over of SES
staff, with almost half of SES officers present in July 2015 no longer in the
department at July 2017.
23. The department
initially identified possible risks to effective integration. However, regular
reporting against those risks ceased when the Reform and Integration Task Force
was disbanded.
24. The department made
extensive use of consultants to assist it with the integration process. Despite a requirement to
evaluate contracts upon completion, this did not occur in 31 out of 33 (94 per
cent) of contracts with a value of more than $1 million examined by the ANAO,
and therefore it is unclear whether these services represented value for money…..
The Assurance Partner [Third Horizon] was engaged by DIBP as a
consultant for the period 19 June 2014 to 18 June 2016 with a contract value of $2 million
The total paid to the consultant was $1.6 million. Due to the department’s
concerns with the Assurance Partner’s performance, the engagement ended early
in August 2015……
The initial allocation
of funds for the Portfolio Reform Program in the 2014–15 budget was $710.4
million.5 Additional funds were approved in successive budgets which brought
the total funding for the Program to $977.8 million. [my yellow highlighting]
BRIEF BACKGROUND
Thursday 26 July 2018
Australia 2018: the Coal War continues
It should come as no surprise that in the Coal War being conducted by right-wing ideologues and climate change deniers consumers are predicted to be the losers under the Turnbull Government's National Energy Agreement (NEG) and, that Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is offering the same illusory $550 per annum saving on electricity costs per household promised but not delived by his predecessor Tony Abbott.
A COAG Energy Council Ministers meeting on August 2018 will reveal the final NEG design - a design which won't be published until after this meeting.
What is already broadly known about the NEG design appears to support allegations that the aim of this agreement is to cement the dominant position of fossil fuels in the national energy mix at the expense of renewable energy technologies.
REneweconomy, 20 July 2018:
As pressure mounts for
Australia’s states and territories to finalise their position on the National Energy
Guarantee, a new report has warned the federal government’s policy would fail
to achieve its most basic and important function: to lower energy costs for
consumers.
The report, commissioned
by Greenpeace Australia Pacific, says the Coalition’s NEG would in fact do the
opposite – raise electricity prices; as well as bringing investment in
large-scale renewables to a halt, and do nothing to combat climate change.
Based on analysis
conducted by energy and environment analysts RepuTex, the report models the
impact of the NEG under the government’s 26 per cent emissions reduction
target, compared to a more ambitious 45 percent target.
In both scenarios, as
shown in Figure 17 above, electricity prices are forecast to fall through to
2020 as more than 6GW of renewable energy enters the NEM under large-scale
renewable energy target (LRET).
“The increase in low
cost solar and wind generation will see the electricity supply steadily become
more competitive, with average prices less influenced by high priced gas, and
subsequently falling toward $60 MWh in 2020,” the report says.
But under the NEG, new
investment in renewables falls off a cliff after 2020, while the impact of the
reliability guarantee drives an increase in gas generation, prolongs the
phase-out of coal, and makes it harder for key new technologies, like battery
storage and demand management to compete.
“The result is the
continuation of a coal-dominated market with a fairly static picture for
large-scale renewables investment, with gas providing flexibility to meet
evening ramp ups,” the report says.
“As a result wholesale
prices rise above $70 per MWh after the closure of Liddell, and $80 per MWh
after the expected retirement of Yallourn in 2028.”
A more ambitious
emissions reduction target, however, of 45 per cent, would provide a signal for
investment in more solar and wind, driving prices down by around $20/MWh.
“The competitive
pressure from higher solar and wind energy is modelled to push wholesale prices
lower, eventually resulting in the closure of excess coal capacity” – around
9GW, in total, by 2030 RepuTex says.
Published
on Jul 23, 2018
The
crucial make or break meeting of State Energy Ministers is on 10 August. So if
we want block Turnbull's dirty energy plan, we need to move right now.
Thursday 12 July 2018
Don't expect your residential electricity costs to come down anytime soon
In three years time the amount of revenue electricity network companies can charge customers will be reduced, which according to the Australian Energy Regulator in its Draft Rate of Return Guideline "could [not would] result in household customers’ bills decreasing by around $30 to $40 per year".
Remembering all the other failed assurances that the cost of residentail electricity would come down, it is a brave individual who takes this latest prediction at face value.
Australian
Financial Review,
10 July 2018:
The Australian Energy
Regulator has moved to significantly cut the amount of revenue electricity
network companies can charge customers in a bid to take the pressure off
households and businesses enduring high power prices.
AER chair
Paula Conboy said it would reduce average household
electricity bills by about $30 to $40 a year….
But energy
network companies claim the new guidelines will strip about $2 billion
in revenue over the next five years and threaten future investment in the
energy sector.
Morgan Stanley said the
rule, if confirmed, would cut valuations of listed grid owners such as Spark
Infrastructure and Ausnet Services, while adding it "could have been
worse".
Energy users welcomed
the move as a sign the regulator is prioritising the interests of
consumers although Energy Consumers of Australia acting head Lynne
Gallagher said the proposed reduction in the rate of return able to be earned
on capital could have been bigger.
"There is no doubt
that there could be some disappointment from some consumer groups with this
decision, but it is a much better outcome than we've seen in previous years on
this issue," Ms Gallagher said....
AusNet said that if the rule is confirmed, the reductions would apply to its power distribution network from the beginning of 2021, in transmission from April 1 2022 and in gas from January 1 2023. Spark said the rule would apply to its various assets in 2020, 2021 and 2023….
Australian Competition and Consumer
Commission, Restoring
electricity affordability & Australia's competitive advantage,
11 July 2018, excerpts:
Australia is facing its
most challenging time in electricity markets. High prices and bills have placed
enormous strain on household budgets and business viability. The current
situation is unacceptable and unsustainable. The approach to policy, regulatory
design and promotion of competition in this sector has not worked well for
consumers. Indeed, the National Energy Market (NEM) needs to be reset, and this
report sets out a plan for doing this…….
There
are many causes of the current problems in the electricity market. At all
stages of the supply chain decisions have been made over many years by many
governments that set the NEM on the wrong course.
In networks, the framework that governs
regulation of monopoly infrastructure was loosened, leaving the regulator with
limited ability to constrain excess spending by network owners. The limited
merits review (LMR) regime allowed network owners to appeal regulatory
decisions and recover billions of additional dollars from consumers. It led to
significant increases in prices, has drawn out the length of time taken for
revenue determinations, and has created significant uncertainty around network
pricing. In addition, increased expenditure on networks was driven by
reliability standards for some networks that were set too high, without due
regard for consumers’ willingness to pay for marginal increases in reliability.
In generation, against ACCC advice, the
Queensland and New South Wales (NSW) governments made decisions regarding the
operation and ownership of generation assets giving rise to concentrated
markets. In Queensland, the government consolidated the generation assets of
three businesses into two. In NSW, as one example, both generators owned by
Macquarie Generation were sold to AGL, missing an opportunity to deliver a
competitive market structure by selling them to separate buyers.
Most
state governments put in place excessively generous solar feed-in tariff
schemes with a view to encouraging consumers to install solar photovoltaic (PV)
systems. Under these schemes, the subsidy paid to consumers for the energy
produced by their systems outweighed, by many multiples, the value of that
energy. Take up of the schemes exceeded all expectations, in part due to
dramatic declines in solar PV installation costs. The substantial cost of the
schemes continues to be spread across all electricity users.
The
main enduring policy instrument for encouraging low-emissions electricity
generation is the Renewable Energy Target. While it has been effective at
encouraging wind and solar generation capacity installation, it has also
distorted the investment that has occurred in the transition from higher carbon
technologies to lower ones. The subsidies received for installing wind and
solar made the business case for doing so compelling but did so in a way that
was indifferent to the ability to provide energy to the market when demand
requires it.
At
a time when gas-powered generation has become more important with the exit of
large coal-fired plants, the extent of LNG exports from the East Coast and
government moratoria on on-shore gas exploration and development have stifled
the availability of gas at a low price.
Electricity
retailers have also played a major role in poor outcomes for consumers.
Retailers have made pricing structures confusing and have developed a practice
of discounting which is opaque and not comparable across the market. Standing
offers are priced excessively to facilitate this practice, leaving inactive
customers paying far more than they need to for electricity. Pay on time
discounts, which have emerged as a response to attempts to constrain late
payment fees, are excessive and punitive for those customers who fail to pay
bills on time. [my yellow highlighting]
Labels:
cost of living,
costs,
electricity,
energy
Tuesday 26 June 2018
Australia’s Border Farce lives down to its nickname
Minister for
Home Affairs and Liberal MP for Dickson Peter
Dutton’s poor oversight and lack of managerial skills is on display for all
to see…….
The Sydney Morning Herald, 6 June 2018:
The benefits of
the merger of the Immigration and Customs departments and creation of
Australian Border Force haven't been proven and promised increased
revenue hasn't materialised, a damning audit report has found.
While the Department of
Immigration and Border Protection did achieve the merger effectively, it
"is not in a position to provide the government with assurance that the
claimed benefits of integration have been achieved," the report said.
The merger of the
Department of Immigration and Border Protection with the Australian
Customs and Border Protection Service took place in 2015, with its functions
now covered under the Department of Home Affairs. Controversial at the time, it
heralded a move to focus more on guarding the country's borders over
resettlement and migration.
In the business case for
the merger, the department committed to a "Benefits Realisation
Plan," but because the plan was not implemented, the claimed benefits have
not been measured and can't be demonstrated, the report said.
While the business case
for the integration of the departments promised an increase in revenue from
customs duty, less than half of the promised revenue increase has materialised.
At the end of 2017, just 42.2 per cent of the extra revenue committed to had
been achieved, and the report predicted that at the current rate just 31.6 per
cent of the additional revenue promised would be delivered.
When the merger was
announced, then immigration minister Scott Morrison promised "hundreds of
millions in savings" would be reinvested back into the agency.
Auditor-general Grant
Herir slammed the department's record keeping, which the department admitted
was in a "critically poor state," and said there was no evidence that
the Minister Peter Dutton was given written briefings on the progress of
the integration of the departments.
In its response, the
Department of Home Affairs acknowledged it had issues with record keeping and
committed to making improvements a priority. The report didn't look on this
commitment favourably though, pointing to more than 10 years of audits and
reviews that have made similar findings.
The problems and their
solutions are known to the department, and it has an action plan to address
them, although numerous previous attempts to do so have not been
successful," it said.
The report also found
that the department experienced a loss of corporate memory through the merger.
"Almost half of SES
officers present in July 2015 [were] no longer in the department at July
2017," it said.
The report also found
that out of 33 consultancy contracts with values of more than $1 million, just
2 were evaluated for value for money, meaning that it was unclear if the other
31 contracts had been value for money.
Spending on consultancy
in the department more than doubled in the years after the merger, topping more
than $50 million in each of the 2014-15 and 2015-16 financial years…..
The Age, 19 June 2018:
The multimillion-dollar
college that trains Australia’s border security personnel has “overpromised and
underdelivered” and immigration and customs officials have repeatedly abused
their powers, a scathing report has found.
The
government-commissioned findings also said many department staff lack the
training needed to perform their jobs and “jaws of death” have gripped
officials struggling to complete more work with fewer resources.
In May 2014 the
Coalition Abbott government controversially announced the creation of the
Australian Border Force (ABF), as part of a merger of customs and immigration
border operations. Crucial to the new super-charged agency was the
establishment of the ABF College, with multiple campuses, to ensure recruits
and existing staff “have the right skills to do their jobs”.
Under the former
department of immigration and border protection, consultants RAND Australia
were asked to evaluate the progress of the merger, ahead of the creation
of the Home Affairs portfolio in December last year which combined immigration,
border protection, law enforcement and intelligence.
The findings concluded
that “clear and unequivocal” progress has been made towards building a “modern
border management capability”.
However, success had
been “uneven” and in particular, the ABF College “largely remains a
disappointment to senior leaders across the department”.
The report involved
interviews with senior department officials, who cited concern that the
college’s curriculum was “not adequate for actual training needs”.
The college’s use of
technology was poor and, in many cases, was used to “automate bad learning
environments” rather than improve training.
The college was supposed
to train staff across the department, however many officials were not given time
to attend courses.
Overall, the college and
other training opportunities in the department “overpromised and underdelivered
to the detriment of the workforce and the morale”.
One senior official was
so frustrated at the problems that he suspended a board examining the issues
“until new terms of reference and fresh ideas were developed”.
The report is dated 2018
but it is not clear exactly when it was finalised. The Department of Home
Affairs did not answer questions from Fairfax Media on how much had been spent
on the college and where its campuses were located. Officials have
previously said the 2014-15 budget included $54 million to establish the
college and other training measures, and that several campuses would be
established including in Sydney and Canberra.
Across the department’s
broader workforce, senior officials said staff in many cases lacked “the
capability to do the work required of their assigned positions”.
This included customs
and immigration investigators “not understanding the law, use of force
protocols, and rules of engagement” which in some cases led to “abuse of
power,” the report said.
One official said field
compliance officers “were doing dangerous jobs without proper training” and
another described a junior officer who was “unable to manage shipboard
operations due to a lack of proper training and experience”.
Department staff
described being held in the “jaws of death” as they juggled an increased
workload and declining resources. Senior officials repeatedly raised concern
that the ABF received more resources than other divisions but “has not been
subjected to the same level of scrutiny”….
As a local
member it appears that Dutton is also having ‘workforce’ issues ahead of the
forthcoming federal election…..
Peter is working hard
but could use your help.
If you can spare an hour or two to help Peter in Dickson, please join the team.
If you can spare an hour or two to help Peter in Dickson, please join the team.
The most shameful evidence of Peter Dutton's management style is found when one condiders that as Minister for Immigration and Border Protection
since 23 December 2014, he currently has ultimate responsibility for the welfare of asylum
seekers held in custody.
Bringing the total number
of deaths in onshore or offshore detention and in the community to est. 64 people since January
2000.
That is the equivilant of almost four deaths each year on Peter Dutton's watch and around three deaths per year overall.
According to MSN
on 21 June 2018; There are nearly 700 men currently in
detention on Papua New Guinea, and more than 900 men, women and children on
Nauru.
Saturday 19 May 2018
Tweets of the Week
Today DHS told the senate, that so far:— NotMyDebt (@not_my_debt) May 8, 2018
Robodebt has cost $276 million to administer.
And... Robodebt has 'recovered' $279 million.
While they can separate forecast savings for newspaper headlines, apparently it's not possible to do that with actual savings.#notmydebt pic.twitter.com/Q6M6NaY09p
DHS was asked how many robodebts are awaiting reassessment. They failed to answer. We've heard from people waiting months.— NotMyDebt (@not_my_debt) May 9, 2018
So far 652,898 reassessments have been initiated.
30,953 debts have changed in value or been wiped. That's 30,953 debt notices that were wrong.#notmydebt pic.twitter.com/LJd3WxDJV4
DHS are including 'prevented debts' in their savings from robodebt.— Sarah Masting (@sarah_masting) May 8, 2018
What happens if a company in the private sector banks a possibly avoided future liability as a cash asset?
See: Blue Sky Alternative Investments - majority of board resigned
Time for robodebt resignations? pic.twitter.com/jsdQVM4NAa
Friday 2 February 2018
How we see the cost of living in Australia in 2018
Essential Report, 30 January 2018:
A substantial majority believe that, in the last 12 months, cost of living (73%) and electricity costs (75%) have all got worse. The only economic measure that has got better is company profits (42% better/12% worse).
Compared the last time this question was asked in February 2016, there has been an increase in the percentage that think electricity costs (up 13% to 75%) have got worse. However, there has also been an increase in the percentage that think company profits (+12), unemployment (+19) and the economy overall (+18) have got better.
Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), media release, 31 January 2018:
51% (down 2% since
August) believe that, in the last two years, their income has fallen behind the
cost of living. 28% (up 3%) think it has stayed even with the cost of living
and 14% (down 1%) think it has gone up more.
64% of those earning
under $600 pw and 58% of those earning $600-1,000 pw think their income has
fallen behind while 54% of those earning over $2,000 pw think it has stayed the
same or gone up.
According to the ABS, over the last
twelve months up to end September 2017 the Living Cost Index* rose:
2.0% for Pensioner
and Beneficiary Households
2.1% for
Other Government Transfer Recipient Households
1.7% for Age
Pensioner Households
1.6% for Self-Funded
Retiree Households
1.5% for Employee
Households
One of the principal drivers to the rise in costs for these groups has been the rise in housing costs due to the rise in wholesale electricity costs.
Labels:
Australian society,
costs,
Income,
poll,
statistics,
wages
Thursday 23 November 2017
Will you be able to afford your electricity bill this summer?
The Daily Examiner, 22 November 2017, p.5:
Power price hikes have tripled wage growth in the past decade and experts fear more NSW families could have their electricity disconnected this summer.
New data shows the average electricity bill has jumped a whopping 116 per cent from $1282 in 2007 to $2770 in 2017, while the median wage has grown just 35 per cent from $59,723 to $80,382.
The figures, compiled exclusively for The Daily Telegraph by price comparison firm Finder, reveal the average bill jumped 10.5 per cent in the past year alone, while wages grew just 2.2 per cent.
Analysis shows the portion of their wages workers are spending on their bills has grown more than 60 per cent in those 10 years.
Experts are now worried that residents forced to spend a bigger chunk of their wages on electricity could risk disconnections this summer as airconditioner use pushes bills even higher.
While state and federal politicians remain divided on how to tackle soaring power prices, figures from the Australian Energy Regulator show that from 2014 to 2017 the number of customers on hardship programs has risen from 18,293 to 24,921. The number of customers with bill debt has also jumped almost 20,000 in the past year, with 85,801 customers now in debt compared with 68,487 last year.
In the most recent financial quarter there were 7775 electricity disconnections in NSW and 1908 households with their gas cut off.
To put this in perspective, a careful aged pensioner living alone in New South Wales would have easily faced an annual electricity bill in 2016-17 in the vicinity of $1,300-$1,500.
Labels:
#TurnbullGovernmentFAIL,
costs,
electricity
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)