Commission of Audit!!!

I thought it would be interesting to debate what the Abbott Governments “Commission of Audit” would possible deliver to Australia….Here is a short list!!!

Carbon tax – Abbott has vowed to repeal the Carbon Tax and the revenue it would generate yet keep the compensation for taxpayers. He will replace the Carbon Tax with his Direct Action policy which will be funded from consolidated revenue. Abbott will forgo revenue from the “Carbon tax” whilst keeping compensation delivering a net loss to the budget bottom line. He will also fund his Direct Action policy from consolidated revenue eroding the budget bottom line even further. Net result will blow a big hole in the federal budget. Abbott is hoping repealing the Carbon Tax will generate growth and demand adding revenue to the budget to cover the loss of revenue and added spending!!!

Mining tax - Abbott has vowed to repeal the Mining Tax and the revenue it would generate in the hope it will increase investment in the mining sector and generate higher royalties that would go to the States and be recouped through the redistribution of the GST. The Mining Tax was designed to increase revenue based on volume not investment meaning now the investment stage has ended and exports are increasing the mining tax would have generated considerably more revenue over time. Abbott has vowed to remove all funding associated with the mining tax recouping a net gain to federal coffers.

Paid Parental Leave – Abbott’s gold plated PPL will be funded from consolidated revenue and a 1.5% levy (not tax) on Australia’s largest businesses that will be offset by a 1.5% tax cut to all businesses leaving a net loss to the budget bottom line. Abbott claims this will increase productivity and workplace participation which will increase revenue over time but there is no provision for child care which is widely considered a much more influential factor in woman returning to full time work.

Private health care rebate – Abbott has vowed to restore the private health care rebate which will be funded from consolidated revenue. Abbott is hoping this will reduce health costs in the public sector and is considering a co-payment which would supplement the private health care rebate and make private health insurance cheaper for those who can afford it.

Negative gearing – No commitment.

Raising the GST – Ruled out.

Fringe benefit tax – Restored further reducing revenue into the Federal Coffers.

Gonski – Committed to fully fund from consolidated revenue.

NDIS - Committed to fully fund from consolidated revenue.

Superannuation – Cutting the low income support payment. No commitment to tighten co contributions that cost the budget billions of dollars annually

Public Service – Cutting the public service by thousands of jobs which will reduce spending and the delivery of services.


Conclusion – Abbott will remove revenue measures whilst introducing policies that will be funded from consolidated revenue. Abbott will have to find savings from other sources or increase taxes to return the budget to surplus.

dont forget phil most have to pass the senate...and most have already b een told it wont happen..because.... well we dont really know why..

maybe its pay back time..

seeing shorty on the news last night.. he looked like the union ratbag he really is....definitely not PM material..

phil we have to stop borrowing... what is your answer.

if we cannot live within our means.. we either pay more or go without.

philperth2010 wrote on Apr 1^st, 2014 at 11:42pm:

Paid Parental Leave – Abbott’s gold plated PPL will be funded from consolidated revenue and a 1.5% levy (not tax) on Australia’s largest businesses that will be offset by a 1.5% tax cut to all businesses leaving a net loss to the budget bottom line.

This funding method is a fiction that will provide ZERO revenue for the PPL. It will actually be funded from consolidated revenue.


Quote:

Private health care rebate – Abbott has vowed to restore the private health care rebate which will be funded from consolidated revenue. Abbott is hoping this will reduce health costs in the public sector and is considering a co-payment which would supplement the private health care rebate and make private health insurance cheaper for those who can afford it.

Spending five billion dollars to save two billion dollars is a waste of money. The budget would be better off overall if this wealthfare rebate was abolished completely. Some of the money saved should be given to the states to increase their health spending and specifically targeted at reducing waiting lists.


Quote:

Superannuation – Cutting the low income support payment. No commitment to tighten co contributions that cost the budget billions of dollars annually

One of the biggest revenue leaks is the excessively generous concessions to high income earners - the group that needs concessions the least actually receive the largest percentage discount. Someone on a low income pays a higher tax on super than their income, someone on the minimum wage receives a 4% concession, someone on a high income receives around 30%. It's unfair and does not do enough to reduce welfare dependency in old age.


Quote:

Conclusion – Abbott will remove revenue measures whilst introducing policies that will be funded from consolidated revenue. Abbott will have to find savings from other sources or increase taxes to return the budget to surplus.

In other words, there are cuts to come and the Abbott government won't confide in the Australian people and tell them what's coming.

Commission of Audit is a load of bullshyte.

It was only set up so when Hockey cuts out things in the budget he doesn't have to take the blame, he can say it was in the report from the commission  of audit.

What is the bet he will cut the $600 bonus that people on Carers Allowance and Carers Payment get every 12 months, don't people on the Old Age Pension get $500 bonus every 12 months? I bet that is cut out as well.

Why don't Abbott and company grow a set and start to take responsibility for their action and stop blaming everyone else for their stuff ups

cods wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 5:59am:

dont forget phil most have to pass the senate...and most have already b een told it wont happen..because.... well we dont really know why.. maybe its pay back time.. seeing shorty on the news last night.. he looked like the union ratbag he really is....definitely not PM material.. phil we have to stop borrowing... what is your answer. if we cannot live within our means.. we either pay more or go without.

The answer is to pay more and go without.....Cut middle and upper class welfare.....Abolish the fringe benefits tax.....Scrap Abbott's PPL scheme and make child care more affordable instead.....Rework the mining tax and the GST to be more equitable.....Scrap the carbon tax and move to an ETS starting at a low price so our industries are not disadvantaged.....Retain the means test on Private Health Care Insurance.....Scrap tax loopholes in superannuation.....Build rail to improve transport and reduce traffic congestion.....Stop persecuting asylum seekers and process their claims onshore.....Put the GST on food and overseas purchases.....Build a fibre NBN to the premises to high residential and business areas and use wireless in rural and remote areas.....Then I would wait until growth returned to trend and revenue started to increase so Australia could build a sovereign wealth fund to cushion us from our ageing population and another GFC!!!

There are many other things that can be done and abolishing industry assistance to wealthy multinationals is a good start.....Making hard decisions means Governments of all persuasions need to stop buying votes with election hand outs and do what is in the long term interest of all Australians!!!

:) :) :)

Abbott's PPL is to be funded by a levy on companies over a certain size.
That has always been the policy.
It remains the policy no matter what you lot say until the policy is changed. ::)
Presently I get the feeling the Greens amendments will be passed in order to get it through the Senate.

philperth2010 wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 7:29am:

cods wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 5:59am: dont forget phil most have to pass the senate...and most have already b een told it wont happen..because.... well we dont really know why.. maybe its pay back time.. seeing shorty on the news last night.. he looked like the union ratbag he really is....definitely not PM material.. phil we have to stop borrowing... what is your answer. if we cannot live within our means.. we either pay more or go without. The answer is to pay more and go without.....Cut middle and upper class welfare.....Abolish the fringe benefits tax.....Scrap Abbott's PPL scheme and make child care more affordable instead.....Rework the mining tax and the GST to be more equitable.....Scrap the carbon tax and move to an ETS starting at a low price so our industries are not disadvantaged.....Retain the means test on Private Health Care Insurance.....Scrap tax loopholes in superannuation.....Build rail to improve transport and reduce traffic congestion.....Stop persecuting asylum seekers and process their claims onshore.....Put the GST on food and overseas purchases.....Build a fibre NBN to the premises to high residential and business areas and use wireless in rural and remote areas.....Then I would wait until growth returned to trend and revenue started to increase so Australia could build a sovereign wealth fund to cushion us from our ageing population and another GFC!!! There are many other things that can be done and abolishing industry assistance to wealthy multinationals is a good start.....Making hard decisions means Governments of all persuasions need to stop buying votes with election hand outs and do what is in the long term interest of all Australians!!! :) :) :)

I think we all have the answers phil.. if only it was that simple.. to do the hard things govts need backing.. and thats when the opposition turns the screws...and or fringe parties with a smiggin of POWER put the boot in....

its all power you know... they care bugger all about the country and the way its heading...

the greens are all about us doing more for asylum seekers.. god help us do they have any idea how much each asylum seeker is costing us??.. a far bigger amount than our own homeless and job seekers  will ever cost...

philperth2010 wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 7:29am:

Making hard decisions means Governments of all persuasions need to stop buying votes with election hand outs and do what is in the long term interest of all Australians!!!

http://www.bestgraph.com/gifs/animaux/cochons/cochons-48.gif

Why would you not expect a Commission of Audit or similar? Isn't managing budgets and debt levels a primary responsibility of good government? Most of the criticisms here are of a political nature rather than a practical one.

The PPL is a good idea but unaffordable
The Mining Tax is the worse tax ever invented and now that the days of super profits are gone, it will raise nothing while being a regulatory burden

cods wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 5:59am:

maybe its pay back time..

Are you worried that Labor might behave in the same way that the Liberals did under Abbott during the term of the previous government?

I don't mind the idea of an MRRT...  each state has a different royalty arrangement.
We should have a national one, one where the mining companies are made to pay a proper amount for the natural resources that they sell.
One Australian royalty arrangement is what is needed, much like a gst where each state can benefit.

No suggestion of their looking into the Family / Discretionary Trusts rorts of the rich and fabulous?

Grendel wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 7:34am:

Abbott's PPL is to be funded by a levy on companies over a certain size. That has always been the policy. It remains the policy no matter what you lot say until the policy is changed. ::) Presently I get the feeling the Greens amendments will be passed in order to get it through the Senate.

Paid for out of consolidated revenue because while he is taxing them 1.5% to pay for it he is also reducing their tax by 1.5%, in one hand and out the other. He is saying to the companies "I will raise your tax 1.5% but don't worry companies, I will reduce your tax by 1.5%."

Setanta wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 12:07pm:

Grendel wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 7:34am: Abbott's PPL is to be funded by a levy on companies over a certain size. That has always been the policy. It remains the policy no matter what you lot say until the policy is changed. ::) Presently I get the feeling the Greens amendments will be passed in order to get it through the Senate. Paid for out of consolidated revenue because while he is taxing them 1.5% to pay for it he is also reducing their tax by 1.5%, in one hand and out the other. He is saying to the companies "I will raise your tax 1.5% but don't worry companies, I will reduce your tax by 1.5%."

I suppose you are going to back up your assertions then?
By way of taxes...  originally the company tax was going to be lowered so the levy would be basically neutral for the companies.  Yet smaller companies would benefit.
So no matter where the levy funds are stored how is what I said and the original policy different?  hmmm?

John S wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 7:24am:

Commission of Audit is a load of bullshyte. It was only set up so when Hockey cuts out things in the budget he doesn't have to take the blame, he can say it was in the report from the commission  of audit. What is the bet he will cut the $600 bonus that people on Carers Allowance and Carers Payment get every 12 months, don't people on the Old Age Pension get $500 bonus every 12 months? I bet that is cut out as well. Why don't Abbott and company grow a set and start to take responsibility for their action and stop blaming everyone else for their stuff ups

And just another set of easy job handouts for the Party faithful.... that's all these things are in reality - just more scoffing at the trough.... no valuable result ever and just a lovely little earner for a bit of sitting around and 'validating' the already decided 'policies'

Bit o' cash for the next free overseas world trip first class.....

Personally I think a comprehensive look at the books is well overdue.
You can't plan for the future if you don't know where you are or in what situation you find yourself.
It was a very good idea.

Grendel wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 3:56pm:

Personally I think a comprehensive look at the books is well overdue. You can't plan for the future if you don't know where you are or in what situation you find yourself. It was a very good idea.

Yeas....but why is it necessary for that to be done by Abbott's appointees.  Surely Treasury are more than capable.  After all, that's their job isn't it?

Aussie wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 4:32pm:

Grendel wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 3:56pm: Personally I think a comprehensive look at the books is well overdue. You can't plan for the future if you don't know where you are or in what situation you find yourself. It was a very good idea. Yeas....but why is it necessary for that to be done by Abbott's appointees.  Surely Treasury are more than capable.  After all, that's their job isn't it?

You would think so, but no. Treasury's forecasts in the past few years have been more akin to sci-fi than dry analytical reporting. They got it wrong so badly that it sometimes defies belief.  Remember every single Swan deficit/surplus prediction that was muffed by huge margins?  An example of Treasury at 'work'.

Bread and Butter wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 4:55pm:

Aussie wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 4:32pm: Grendel wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 3:56pm: Personally I think a comprehensive look at the books is well overdue. You can't plan for the future if you don't know where you are or in what situation you find yourself. It was a very good idea. Yeas....but why is it necessary for that to be done by Abbott's appointees.  Surely Treasury are more than capable.  After all, that's their job isn't it? You would think so, but no. Treasury's forecasts in the past few years have been more akin to sci-fi than dry analytical reporting. They got it wrong so badly that it sometimes defies belief.  Remember every single Swan deficit/surplus prediction that was muffed by huge margins?  An example of Treasury at 'work'.

So, where do you think this 'audit' mob will get their basic data from?  The fairies, or Treasury?

Treasury collates data and advises Government based upon it.

Why do we have a Treasurer, and all the other Deputies in Parliament?  Isn't it their job to make decisions based on what they are given by Treasury.

Or, has The Arab Hockey outsourced decision making to unelected swill who by some weird coincidence have close ties with the LNP?

::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

Grendel wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 2:33pm:

Setanta wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 12:07pm: Grendel wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 7:34am: Abbott's PPL is to be funded by a levy on companies over a certain size. That has always been the policy. It remains the policy no matter what you lot say until the policy is changed. ::) Presently I get the feeling the Greens amendments will be passed in order to get it through the Senate. Paid for out of consolidated revenue because while he is taxing them 1.5% to pay for it he is also reducing their tax by 1.5%, in one hand and out the other. He is saying to the companies "I will raise your tax 1.5% but don't worry companies, I will reduce your tax by 1.5%." I suppose you are going to back up your assertions then? By way of taxes...  originally the company tax was going to be lowered so the levy would be basically neutral for the companies.  Yet smaller companies would benefit. So no matter where the levy funds are stored how is what I said and the original policy different?  hmmm?

Re bold, yes, you are right, so where does the money come from? The tax them, then give them the same tax cut leaves only one place it's going to come from, consolidated revenue, it's just a con job. He could have just given small companies a tax cut and been done with it as the PPL is coming out of consolidated revenue, the way it works, anyway. What assertions do I have to back up? You agree with me unless you think he's going to magic it.

Grendel wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 3:56pm:

Personally I think a comprehensive look at the books is well overdue. You can't plan for the future if you don't know where you are or in what situation you find yourself. It was a very good idea.

An examination of taxation and government expenditure is fine in principle, but the so-called "Commission of Audit" isn't a broad-based examination of taxation and expenditure. It has a narrow focus that only looks at those areas that the Coalition wants to cut and does not include in its brief numerous other areas of taxation and expenditure.

We need a REAL Commission of Audit that looks at everything, not just those areas of taxation and expenditure that the government of the day wants to target for cuts using the Commission of Audit as a stalking horse.

Bam wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 6:28pm:

Grendel wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 3:56pm: Personally I think a comprehensive look at the books is well overdue. You can't plan for the future if you don't know where you are or in what situation you find yourself. It was a very good idea. An examination of taxation and government expenditure is fine in principle, but the so-called "Commission of Audit" isn't a broad-based examination of taxation and expenditure. It has a narrow focus that only looks at those areas that the Coalition wants to cut and does not include in its brief numerous other areas of taxation and expenditure. We need a REAL Commission of Audit that looks at everything, not just those areas of taxation and expenditure that the government of the day wants to target for cuts using the Commission of Audit as a stalking horse.

yep and its a bloody good idea... you have to start somewhere.

Grendel wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 6:34pm:

Bam wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 6:28pm: Grendel wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 3:56pm: Personally I think a comprehensive look at the books is well overdue. You can't plan for the future if you don't know where you are or in what situation you find yourself. It was a very good idea. An examination of taxation and government expenditure is fine in principle, but the so-called "Commission of Audit" isn't a broad-based examination of taxation and expenditure. It has a narrow focus that only looks at those areas that the Coalition wants to cut and does not include in its brief numerous other areas of taxation and expenditure. We need a REAL Commission of Audit that looks at everything, not just those areas of taxation and expenditure that the government of the day wants to target for cuts using the Commission of Audit as a stalking horse. yep and its a bloody good idea... you have to start somewhere.

Why only do a small audit on a few areas of expenditure when a full audit that looks at all taxes and all spending would be far better?

Negative gearing - not examined.
Private health insurance rebate - not examined.
Subsidies to the mining industry - not examined.
Tax concessions to the mining industry - not examined.
Taxation of superannuation contributions - not examined.

If these were examined, billions of dollars of wasted money and uncollected taxes would go a long way to reigning in the deficit.

Commission of Audit!!!

isn't that just a new way of saying 'here our our excuses'?

John Smith wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 7:16pm:

Commission of Audit!!! isn't that just a new way of saying 'here our our excuses'?

Of course it is, and delivered by the Good 'ol Boys of LNP persuasion.

Grendel wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 11:33am:

I don't mind the idea of an MRRT...  each state has a different royalty arrangement. We should have a national one, one where the mining companies are made to pay a proper amount for the natural resources that they sell. One Australian royalty arrangement is what is needed, much like a gst where each state can benefit.

Now there is an idea....

Aussie wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 5:36pm:

Bread and Butter wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 4:55pm: Aussie wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 4:32pm: Grendel wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 3:56pm: Personally I think a comprehensive look at the books is well overdue. You can't plan for the future if you don't know where you are or in what situation you find yourself. It was a very good idea. Yeas....but why is it necessary for that to be done by Abbott's appointees.  Surely Treasury are more than capable.  After all, that's their job isn't it? You would think so, but no. Treasury's forecasts in the past few years have been more akin to sci-fi than dry analytical reporting. They got it wrong so badly that it sometimes defies belief.  Remember every single Swan deficit/surplus prediction that was muffed by huge margins?  An example of Treasury at 'work'. So, where do you think this 'audit' mob will get their basic data from?  The fairies, or Treasury? Treasury collates data and advises Government based upon it. Why do we have a Treasurer, and all the other Deputies in Parliament?  Isn't it their job to make decisions based on what they are given by Treasury. Or, has The Arab Hockey outsourced decision making to unelected swill who by some weird coincidence have close ties with the LNP?

You are absolutely right, Aussie - we already pay for a plethora of overpaid public servants to advise ministers etc - and we pay handsomely for a 'Treasurer' who we expect to know his stuff - but who, in reality, only parrots what he is advised on by the same public servants.

There is no need for any 'commission of audit' - and as I've pointed out since Day One of the COA - it is nothing more than just another handout pay for Party faithful and old mates.

Nice little earner for doing nothing but suck deeply on the public trough.

And this and every other government in the past 30-40 years expects my respect?

http://www.thelmagazine.com/images/blogimages/2009/06/09/1244574390-flying-pigs.jpg

Aussie wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 5:36pm:

Bread and Butter wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 4:55pm: Aussie wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 4:32pm: Grendel wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 3:56pm: Personally I think a comprehensive look at the books is well overdue. You can't plan for the future if you don't know where you are or in what situation you find yourself. It was a very good idea. Yeas....but why is it necessary for that to be done by Abbott's appointees.  Surely Treasury are more than capable.  After all, that's their job isn't it? You would think so, but no. Treasury's forecasts in the past few years have been more akin to sci-fi than dry analytical reporting. They got it wrong so badly that it sometimes defies belief.  Remember every single Swan deficit/surplus prediction that was muffed by huge margins?  An example of Treasury at 'work'. So, where do you think this 'audit' mob will get their basic data from?  The fairies, or Treasury? Treasury collates data and advises Government based upon it. Why do we have a Treasurer, and all the other Deputies in Parliament?  Isn't it their job to make decisions based on what they are given by Treasury. Or, has The Arab Hockey outsourced decision making to unelected swill who by some weird coincidence have close ties with the LNP?

Treasury analyses data.  Some results are better than before. Paul Keating refused to listen to them after he was burned by the recession the was told wasn't coming (by Treasury) when everybody else knew otherwise. Costello learned that lesson too and took Treasury with a pinch of salt.  Swan listened to every word they said and the rest is history.

GrandPaPa wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 11:42am:

No suggestion of their looking into the Family / Discretionary Trusts rorts of the rich and fabulous?

Another great idea....

Bam wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 6:41pm:

Grendel wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 6:34pm: Bam wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 6:28pm: Grendel wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 3:56pm: Personally I think a comprehensive look at the books is well overdue. You can't plan for the future if you don't know where you are or in what situation you find yourself. It was a very good idea. An examination of taxation and government expenditure is fine in principle, but the so-called "Commission of Audit" isn't a broad-based examination of taxation and expenditure. It has a narrow focus that only looks at those areas that the Coalition wants to cut and does not include in its brief numerous other areas of taxation and expenditure. We need a REAL Commission of Audit that looks at everything, not just those areas of taxation and expenditure that the government of the day wants to target for cuts using the Commission of Audit as a stalking horse. yep and its a bloody good idea... you have to start somewhere. Why only do a small audit on a few areas of expenditure when a full audit that looks at all taxes and all spending would be far better? Negative gearing - not examined. Private health insurance rebate - not examined. Subsidies to the mining industry - not examined. Tax concessions to the mining industry - not examined. Taxation of superannuation contributions - not examined. If these were examined, billions of dollars of wasted money and uncollected taxes would go a long way to reigning in the deficit.

Just because they aren't important to you doesn't mean they are invalid or a waste.  That fool Rudd commissioned the Henry report and implemented FOUR out of 150 recommendations and even then, not in the way Henry intended.

Bread and Butter wrote on Apr 2^nd, 2014 at 4:55pm:

Aussie wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 4:32pm: Grendel wrote on Apr 2nd, 2014 at 3:56pm: Personally I think a comprehensive look at the books is well overdue. You can't plan for the future if you don't know where you are or in what situation you find yourself. It was a very good idea. Yeas....but why is it necessary for that to be done by Abbott's appointees.  Surely Treasury are more than capable.  After all, that's their job isn't it? You would think so, but no. Treasury's forecasts in the past few years have been more akin to sci-fi than dry analytical reporting. They got it wrong so badly that it sometimes defies belief.  Remember every single Swan deficit/surplus prediction that was muffed by huge margins?  An example of Treasury at 'work'.

And who, may I be so bold as to ask - has got it right in the same timespan?

NONE of them.

Yeas, The Arab Treasurer Hockey is leaking what suits him.  Come on Joe...let's see it all before WA goes to the Senate election this week-end.  Arsehole.

Click here.