Clarence Valley taken down a peg by IPART in 2016

Clarence Valley Council website, accessed 24 May 2016:

At the 24 November 2015 Extraordinary Council meeting (Item 12.060/15), Council resolved to apply for a Section 508A SRV of 6.5% p.a. (including the rate peg limit) for 5 years commencing 1 July 2016, which is a cumulative increase in ordinary rates of 37% by year 5 (2020-21) of the SRV (with the cumulative increase permanently built into the general rate after the 5 year SRV period has ceased). Council notified IPART on 25 November 2015 of its intent to make an SRV application of that nature. The additional income from the SRV above the rate peg as per Item 12.060/15 is to be spent on roads and roads related infrastructure renewals and maintenance to address the significant infrastructure backlog and maintenance gap for this group of assets.

In May 2016 Clarence Valley Council submitted an amended application to the Independent Pricing And Regulatory Tribunal (IPART) for this special rate variation (SRV) which was to be permanently retained in the rate base and also applied for a minimum rate increase (MR).

This table formed part of the council application:

Clarence Valley residents made at least 169 submissions to council on this proposed rate increase and sent in a 115 signature petition. Only 3 submissions were in support of the rate increase. While IPART received 56 submissions (including one petition with around 2,000 signatures and 268 online submissions) opposing Clarence Valley Council’s application.

On 17 May 2016 IPART announced approval of  the application for a SRV increase for the 2016-17 financial year only. This represents a 4.7% rise above the rate peg.

Council’s MR application was not approved. On 1 July 2017 the rate increase will be removed as per IPART’s instructions and therefore average rates will decrease.

According to the IPART Determination:

The application was not approved in full because it did not satisfy criteria 1 and 2 of the Guidelines. The council did not adequately justify the extent of the need for the proposed special variation, as the effects of additional revenue and cost savings previously adopted by the council were not included in the IP&R documents (or presented to the community). Secondly, the annual and cumulative cost impacts of the proposed rate increases were not adequately communicated to the community…..

The council’s ‘Base Case’, in its adopted IP&R documents, understates the available revenue and therefore overstates the financial impact of, and the need for, the special variation…..

The increased income from user charges and fees were included in the LTFP adopted by the council on 23 June 2015 and should have been included in the ‘Base Case’ used for community consultation on the special variation (in August and September 2015). Similarly, the efficiency cost savings adopted by council on 24 November 2015 should have been included in the ‘Base Case’ included in the Revised LTFP adopted 9 February 2016, which formed the basis of the special variation application.

The council amended its application to IPART in April 2016 and May 2016 to include these measures in its ‘Base Case’, however this followed the completion of the community consultation process. In excluding the additional user charges and fees and efficiency savings from the ‘Base Case’, the council did not adequately inform and make the community aware of the financial impact of the proposed special variation…..

In 2015 the council reviewed its IP&R documents in consultation with the community. It clearly explained the purpose of the proposed special variation and provided reasonable opportunities for community feedback. However, we are not satisfied that the community was provided with:

* adequate opportunity to consider the need for the special variation, as a result of the positive effects of the additional revenue and cost savings previously adopted by the council, which reduce the need for, and extent of, the rate increase required to achieve financial sustainability, and

* adequate information about the extent of the annual and cumulative financial impact of the proposed rate increases over the five years of the special variation….

IPART’s decision means that Clarence Valley Council may increase its general income in 2016-17 by an estimated $1.8 million including the rate peg.

Out of the ten councils who applied for rate increases this year, Clarence Valley Council was the only one which didn’t get all it asked for.

Perhaps that will tell this particular council something about how inadequate is its approach to community consultation and revenue raising.

Though I am quite sure that ratepayers across the valley are hugely relieved that it was found to be so inadequate by the folk in Sydney.

Of course Clarence Valley Council can apply for a special rate variation again in 2017-18 and perhaps the next time around management will allow Council in the Chamber a chance to consider its final formal written application to IPART before it is submitted.

Summoning up "the old Malcolm"

For some reason certain commentators and voters appear to believe that Malcolm Bligh Turnbull had to fundamentally change in order to be elected Prime Minister of Australia by the Liberal Party.

Nothing Turnbull has done since 1 December 2009 when his party dumped him as opposition leader indicates that any change has occurred.

Basically what one sees is what has always been there – a hugely egotistical man, driven by ambition, who believes the misleading ' poor boy' backstory he created about his own life and who has little to no knowledge of the hopes, dreams, concerns and daily lives of ordinary people and cares even less.

In other words, we see this…….

 Maltony Bligh Turnbull

Courtesy of Robbo

Australian Federal Election 2016: polling at the beginning of Week 4 of the campaign

News.com.au, 28 May 2016:

Three weeks into the two-month campaign, the 7News-ReachTel poll, released on Friday, has Labor ahead 52-48 on a two-party preferred basis.

Earlier in the week Newspoll and Essential had Labor leading the coalition 51-49 per cent, reversing the Fairfax-Ipsos result from the previous weekend.

For those who place more faith in the punters here are Sportsbet markets covering NSW Northern Rivers at 8am 29 May 2016:

Sitting Nationals MP Kevin Hogan since 2013 vs Labor candidate Janelle Saffin

Sitting Labor MP Justine Elliot since 2004 vs Nationals candidate Matthew Fraser & The Greens Dawn Walker

Sitting Nationals MP Luke Hartsuyker since 2001 vs candidate “Any Other” & Labor’s Alfredo Navarro

Australian Federal Election 2016: oh the pain, it burns!

I’m sure there is more than one voter on a low income who is chortling about what went down in Week Three of the federal election campaign.

This has been the state of play for members of the Australian Parliament since 1999.

Excerpts from TR 1999/10 Taxation Ruling Income tax and fringe benefits tax: Members of Parliament – allowances, reimbursements, donations and gifts, benefits, deductions and recoupments:

10. Members commonly receive the following types of allowances, in addition to their Parliamentary ‘salaries’ (see paragraphs 42 to 45). Particular allowances may vary depending on the Parliament in which a Member serves.

• Committee allowance

• Daily expense allowance

• Electorate allowance

• Expense or entertainment allowance

• Opposition spokespersons’ allowance

• Postage allowance

• Printing and stationery allowance

• Private vehicle allowance/motor vehicle allowance

• Telephone allowance

• Travel allowance.

These allowances, like MPs and senators parliamentary salaries, are considered assessable income by the Australian Taxation Office.

Second property not used as a Member’s residence: A deduction is allowable for expenses of a non-capital nature, and for depreciation of plant, where the property is not properly regarded as a second residence. However, the deduction is limited to the extent to which the expenditure is incurred in respect of a property that is used by a Member for work-related travel purposes on overnight stays away from his or her residence, and the expenditure is not private or domestic in nature (paragraphs 328 to 336).

Second residence expenses: A deduction is not allowable for the costs of maintaining a property that is used as a second residence (paragraphs 337 to 343)……

These two sections of the ruling appear to allow parliamentarians to double-dip at the ordinary taxpayers expense – first using the overnight travel allowance to pay down the mortgage on a Canberra residence if it’s not owned outright and then claiming tax deductions including mortgage interest, rates, insurance and utilities on the same residence.

Then this cosy little arrangement became public knowledge…….

News.com.au, 22 May 2016:

TAXPAYERS are helping to pay the mortgage and the rent for federal MPs who are raking in $1000 a week to sleep in Canberra and then, on top of that, claiming a big tax deduction for rent, rates, electricity and mortgage.

In a little-known tax ruling, MPs who rent can also claim a tax deduction for a second residence including “lease payments; rent; interest on borrowings used for the acquisition of the property; rates; taxes; insurance; general maintenance of the building, plant and grounds’’.

Finance Minister Mathias Cormann, charged with cracking down on budget waste, is just one of the MPs double-dipping by claiming a $273-a-night travel allowance (which, bizarrely, is not regarded as taxable income) and scoring a tax deduction as well….

The rules state that an MP “may choose to rent or buy a property rather than stay in a hotel or other commercial establishment when travelling. A deduction is allowable for expenses, that are not of a capital, private or domestic nature, in respect of such a property where it is used by a Member for accommodation when he or she is undertaking work-related travel.

“Such expenses include: lease payments; rent; interest on borrowings used for the acquisition of the property; rates; taxes; insurance; general maintenance of the building, plant and grounds.’’

The Guardian, 22 May 2016:

The finance minister, Mathias Cormann, has defended politicians receiving both a $273 a night travel allowance and tax deductions for mortgages and rents for properties in Canberra.

Speaking on Insiders on Sunday, Cormann said the remuneration tribunal granted the travel allowance and the tax office allowed deductions for politicians’ accommodation expenses.

Federal politicians receive $273 a night to stay in Canberra, a travel allowance they can claim even when they stay in a property that they or their partner own.

Reports have revealed that on top of the allowance, MPs who rent or buy a property to stay in during work-related travel can also claim tax deductions for rent, interest on borrowings used for the acquisition of the property, rates, taxes, insurance and general maintenance.

The first report indicates that some federal politicians may be under the impression that a travel allowance paid for a presumed expense was not taxable income.

Then came this painful revelation……

ABC News, 23 May 2016:

Tax Commissioner Chris Jordan stressed that members of Parliament had to abide by the same standards as everyone else.

"The rules are the same for every taxpayer, regardless of their occupation," Mr Jordan said in a statement.

"Any taxpayer who has had to travel overnight for work is entitled to deduct the costs of meals and accommodation under our tax laws.

"However, given that there are clear misunderstandings of how the ruling is applied, we will undertake to review the 1999 ruling to give greater clarity for all taxpayers on the treatment of allowances they may receive from their employer to cover the costs of work related travel."

The ATO said the returns of all taxpayers, including MPs were scrutinised, and that any taxpayer should not be claiming deductions for travel expenses unless they have declared the allowance as income in their tax returns.

In 1999, the ATO issued a ruling about how it assesses travel allowances and tax deductions for MPs.

That ruling will now be reviewed in light of the issue being thrust into the campaign spotlight.

Gillian Mears July 1964 - May 2016, a Clarence Valley girl

Old Copmanhurst by the late great author Gillian Mears in Meanjin Volume 71 Issue 1 2012

Much exclamation occurs when people realise Foal’s Bread is my first novel in sixteen years. Sixteen years ago I was about to turn thirty-one. From this distance that seems inconceivably young and I was inconceivably bewildered that only horses understood that something horrible had begun to happen in my legs and feet.

I can clearly remember how for that birthday I rode my brown mare Bellini down as usual to my father’s letterbox on Old Copmanhurst Road. Although the advance author copies of The Grass Sister had arrived early, far from any feeling of luck that they’d landed in the letterbox on my birthday, only dismay was sweeping through me. Whereas a few weeks before I could’ve vaulted back onto my horse with my backpack full of mail, on that day it had become a difficult scramble.

The multiple sclerosis that would defy diagnosis for another seven years was slowly but surely taking away my ability to ride even the quietest pony, let alone Bellini, my loveliness Wind of Song ex-barrier rogue, rescued by my eldest sister Yvonne from the brutality of a Brisbane track for me to purchase.

I felt a growing sorrow that as the mystery progressed, less and less chance existed for those moments when my own soul could meet my mare’s through a long pair of favourite old leather reins. My grief at seeing her sold wasn’t unconnected to the fact that whatever was happening in my body was inexorably also severing my links with my own horse-loving family….

On 1 January 2009 the realisation dawned that Yvonne might never send out her book. I could wait no longer. My wholehearted attempts to write first a play and then a wisdom cat fable had, against all expectation and effort, utterly failed. Now I felt in a race with myself. In honour of Stow’s claim that fuelled by pork pie he wrote all his novels fast, I resolved to have a final draft of Foal’s Bread finished by the first day of spring. Memories of that kind of Newton Boyd country west of Grafton but before the Great Dividing Range, informed my writing days.

Even though I was thousands of miles away from the Clarence River, ghosts of horses of the past seemed to walk right into my writing room. When I’d typed the draft of each week’s chapter onto my computer I even developed the habit of throwing a cloth over it and the printer, as if they were horses to be rugged before nightfall. Then I could practically feel the warmth of a horse. I could feel that I really was clipping up the back legs straps of a rug as a cold wind sprang up off the river….

Read the rest of the story here.

* Photograph: The Sydney Morning Herald, 9 November 2012

It's not just the Clarence Valley that harasses its bats

Environment East Gippsland EEG

21 May 2016

Greg Hunt MP has granted a sthn NSW Shire council exemption from Australia's enviro law (EPBC) so it can harass/kill/burn/disperse the migratory colony of threatened wildlife - notably the Grey-headed Flying Fox. What precedent does this set for every other town along the east coast to demand an OK to mass kill this threatened species because a handful of people are frightened of bat poo. This is hardly 'in the national interets'. 
Flying foxes are a 'keystone species'; they play a vital role in our ecosystem, a species upon which many other plants and animals depend.
'Ecosure' is the most experienced flying-fox management consultancy in Australia and has been involved in numerous dispersal programs. Their report to the government on this said it is the highest risk dispersal scenario they have assessed...
Dispersal activities have unpredictable outcomes, are very costly, require ongoing commitment and maintenance, are often not successful and rarely achieve desirable outcomes for all stakeholders. Dispersal also often leads to flying-fox stress, injuries or fatalities, and may lead to increased human and animal health risk...
Removing their protection is an act so remiss in its duty of care to vulnerable species that it will one day be referred to as “catastrophic".
https://www.change.org/p/protection-of-the-vuln…/u/16625192…
and here @GregHuntMP proudly tells the world he is happy to see thousands of threatened Flying Foxes harassed, stressed and killed off to stop 'residents suffering' from the bat's happy chatter and droppings.
http://www.greghunt.com.au/…/Coalition-Plan-To-Tackle-Batem…

NOTE: The Grey-headed Flying Fox is listed as Threatened in Victoria, Vulnerable in New South Wales and Rare in South Australia.

Tweet of the Week