Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

Domestic Violence Levy

Discussion in 'The Pub' at netrider.net.au started by Jeffco, Jun 8, 2016.

  1. Let me say at the start, that domestic violence is a gutless dog act and anyone convicted should be given a harsh penalty / sentence and that victims do need all the help they require but I'm not 100 % behind this idea either.

    The Government already taxes us directly and indirectly, If I am required to be fiscally responsible to ensure that I have enough money to meet all my obligations I think the Government should do the same.

    A one off fee to get it started I could accept but ongoing I don't like.

    What do others think

    ACT government announces domestic violence tax


    The ACT government has announced the country’s first domestic violence tax, and will begin charging households $30 per year.



    The levy has been established to fund a $21.4 million reform package, the Safer Families program, The Australian reports.

    The fund will be the territory’s largest ever investment in the issue, ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr said.

    “Family violence does not discriminate; it is a national issue that touches the lives of Australians everywhere,” Mr Barr said.

    “In Canberra we’ve seen our share of tragedy. All of us need to stand up and say enough is enough. There is no place for family violence in our community.”

    Mr Barr said the state government chose to levy the funds from residents, as opposed to using revenue, so that there was always a “locked-in, legislated, sustainable revenue source” for the initiative.

    The Safer Families program comes with new laws to alter the definition of family violence to include emotional, economic and psychological abuse.

    It will also include improved legal protection for domestic abuse victims.

    In April, Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews said he was considering a similar levy to help fund 227 recommendations made to the state by a royal commission probe into domestic violence.


    © ninemsn 2016


    Read more at ACT government announces domestic violence tax
     
     Top
    • Agree Agree x 2
  2. What a load of bollocks; what next, a tax on people who don't smoke to pay for medical treatment of those dopes who do?
     
     Top
    • Agree Agree x 2
  3. Domestic issues should not be regulated by the state. If people really want to get involved I suppose we could issue revolvers to everybody when they turn 14. This should help to even out the physical imbalances that lead to some of the problems.
     
     Top
    • Agree Agree x 4
  4. So, if you pay the tax, does that mean you are entitled to do it?

    Maybe I am just too simple minded, but, as I understand it, domestic violence is against the law.

    So, maybe the cops do need some help to handle it.

    Maybe there does need to be some kind of change in the courts' attitudes about it.

    But a special, extra tax on it........ BS!
     
     Top
  5. More rubbish excuses for raising tax.
     
     Top
    • Agree Agree x 7
  6. I think it is a reasonable idea. The reality of domestic violence is that we all bear the cost of it anyway. If you consider the cost of enforcement, shelters for those hiding from perpetrators, medical bills, psychological costs, etc, then we are already paying through taxation.

    If a levy reduces the incidence of domestic violence through education, and significantly reduces the effects on the victim, then society wins, and longer term the cost will be reduced.

    Ultimately, domestic violence will be solved when it is unacceptable in everyone's minds for one partner to hit another. Until then, it will continue to lead to further violence. How often do we read of a criminal using his "violent family home" as part of the mitigating circumstances for his own crimes?
     
     Top
  7. Yes absolutely and that's the point I'm baulking at, we already pay.

    Why do I need to be hit (no pun intended) with a new "tax" to pay for it again.

    If this is successful what's next as hornethornet says a 'levy" for smokers.

    Hang on the road toll is a drain lets levy that, shit this "levy" crap works goods lets levy edumacation

    The government needs to be better with its finances IMO
     
     Top
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. I'd have severe doubts that the money raised through this tax is used for it's intended purpose.
     
     Top
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 2
  9. NOT by taxing people who don't do it!!!!!
     
     Top
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. That's what I was trying to express in my post. (Thanks Jeffco!)
     
     Top
    • Like Like x 1
  11. The ACT so-called government has a long history of cockamamie legislation. It suits the loony left people who live there.
     
     Top
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. Well, it had BETTER have a measurable, significant and pretty much immediate effect on domestic violence, because if it doesn't the ACT government will look like they are cynically and cruelly profiteering on the suffering of the victims for their own benefit.
     
     Top
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  13. middomiddo this is exactly what they are counting on, emotive issues are easier to tax. The implication being that anyone against the tax must be soft on domestic violence.
    We allready pay enough tax much of which is pissed against the wind, this wont be any different, it will just fund public servants travelling first class to domestic violence symposiums on the other side of the world. Call me cynical if you will but I've seen it all before.
     
     Top
    • Agree Agree x 3
  14. #14 middo, Jun 8, 2016
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 9, 2016
    Have a read of what the proposed levy will fund:

    Safer Families - Budget 2016-2017

    If you agree that funding these things are worthwhile (and obviously you may not), then how should it be funded? If funded from general revenue, then the cost will tend to fall proportionately differently from a household levy. So there are really two questions for everyone here to ponder:

    1. Do you agree with the increased services to try to reduce the incidence, effects and long term cost of domestic violence?


    2. Do you agree with the method of funding it?

    If you answer yes to the first, and no to the second then suggest another method of funding.

    If you answer no to the first, then please justify why those with poor language skills or little financial backing or disempowered by their poor education and family background should suffer more than the rest of us who happen to be more fortunate.

    Like same sex marriage? Most here will be aware of your Christian views. Just because you don't agree with something doesn't make it looney left. David Cameron is in favour of same sex marriage - because he is a conservative.
     
     Top

  15. ?? Have you ever lived in Canberra?? It's the muesli state: full of nuts, fruits and flakes.
     
     Top
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. No. But a quick look at their demographics from the last census does tell the story doesn't it. Better educated and wealthier than the rest of Australia. Must be nuts...

    Oh wait, there is this gem from the census..
    From ACT Demographics and LocalStats
     
     Top
  17. There's a third, and IMO very important question: Is the ACT government the most suitable agency to reap public resources to deliver outcomes on this issue?

    Nobody (I hope) is questioning the importance of the DV issue. But I think we need to think very carefully before assenting to administrations creating their own revenue streams for their own purposes.
     
     Top
  18. Wealthier, yes, living on the fat of Australia's taxes, sending each other emails and memos while the rest of us try and produce something actually useful..
     
     Top
    • Agree Agree x 2
  19. Addressing domestic violence: good thing.

    It's a gutless, pathetic act, and nobody that does it deserves to hide behind the "private business/behind closed doors" bullshit. If you abuse your family like that you are a sorry piece of shyt.

    Taxing everyone for it : not a fan. Yeah, it could focus the ire of the wider community on the miserable scum that made them bring the tax in, but the truth is if the problem vanished the tax would stay in place, because that's what our "fearless leaders" repeatedly do.

    Better to just drag the abusing filth out back, clang 'em with a shovel and use them as fertilizer, it's all the pieces of shyt are worth.
     
     Top
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Like Like x 2
  20. There would be at least a hundred worthwhile causes out there for serious money to be spend on, but this sneaky way of raising money by calling it a levy instead of a tax is what infuriates me. Politicians have been doing it forever: " There will be no tax increases.................just a dozen or so new levies". And the anti social aspect of this is that levies do not vary with the scale of income, but have to be paid by the poorest household just the same.
     
     Top
    • Agree Agree x 1