Would you support:
- 2% extra GST to pay for and encourage clean transport and clean green power produced, or
- a carbon tax on petrol / new cars / electricity to encourage green power and transport.
Please add demographic [eg age, sex, location, income], and contact (if you wish).
1 page summary of proposal (pdf) [Update 11/4]: Final Garnaut Submission (pdf) [Update: 18/4] Included in The Australian Top 50 Ideas for 2020 Summit here #28
1 page Petition flyer (pdf) Full petition to print (pdf)
Thank you.
Richard Ferrers
Innovation Researcher
University of Queensland
Research Fellow, Centre for Global Innovation and Entrepreneurship
University of Melbourne
21 comments:
[28 yrs, male, Elwood, Student (low income)]
Yes I would support any incentive to reduce carbon emissions.
[63 female retired]
GST only on petrol and other polluters.
[42, female, St Kilda, over $30,000]
Yes [would support 2% GST] as long as it was for a discrete period eg 10 yrs and dismantled after ie did not go into consolidated revenue.
Richard
Just looked at your website and thought I would post a brief summary of your idea for a Low C incentive scheme in the hope that it gets considered via the summit process. I presonally would love the opportunity to pay 2% extra GST.
to Victoria Climate Change Summit Discussions. See summit here.
JM [Northcote]
[40s Wine Store Manager, Father, married]
OK [2% GST] but maybe time ok limited, and not into general revenue & tax removed at time out.
[50s working class]
More non petrol transport.
I have read the ETS document from the Garnaut report, and I am going to be putting my own submission in tonight :)
I support the emissions trading scheme, but I would like to see all industrial sectors included from the start. Agriculture produces over 30% of Australia's greenhouse gases. The livestock portion produces some 30.65% (half direct emissions, the other half from land clearing practices) This is about double the amount from fuel/transport use. If we are prepared to do something about cars, surely we are prepared to do something about livestock?
Don't change the GST - the G'ment will never go back to 10%.
Increase the cost of petrol by at least 50 cents and all that money should go to renewables etc.
The beauty of this is that it will immediately get people out of their cars
[28, male, Brisbane, 65k]
The three main culprits are the Energy Industries (est. 50%), Transport (est. 15%) and Agriculture (est. 15%). Pretty much the entire society.
Yes to 2% GST incentive for the green energy industry to give them the kick start.
A 5 years renewal contract if the incentive still needed to phase out the fossil fuel industry.
I think perhaps tax things such as alcohol and tobacco products at a higher rate to get the revenue.
Government hospitals use tax payers money to treat so many alcohol-tobacco related admissions, the tax may deter the use of these substances.
A small rise 1-2% on GST is okay if it is time limited & only taxed on certain products which won't rise too sharply
[40's, male, Perth, Mgr (high income)]
Agreed to add 2% to GST as a way to gather revenue for green energy changes.
PRO's.
Broad tax base and good revenue raising capability
Won't hurt low income earner too much
CON's
No link to the issue (i.e. general tax paying for green power ect.)
Unfairly burdening people with expense when not using the service.
OVERALL
I personally think it is the way to collect engough revenue to deal with the problem. How do you ensure that the problem is dealt with in a cost effective way (i guess that's another topic).
SZ
[39yrs, male, Fairfield, med-high income]
Either option will hurt low-income earners so some kind of rebate scheme to offset negative impact on financially vulnerable people will be neccessary.
With that proviso, I would support a carbon tax provided that 100% of the revenue raised was poured into green R&D projects which can be commercialised in Australia. I believe that a carbon tax will encourage environmentally responsible behaviour by penalising the big emitters and could potentially kick-start a new export industry.
[24 m Seoul via Perth 35-50K]
Sounds like a great idea, though I would be concerned about the impact on lower income earners - perhaps they should receive a rebate]
It would need to be very clear that the increased rate could only continue for 5 ( with a max of 7-10) years. Perhaps it could be extended longer for other 'special programmes' but only after an election/referendum.
[70s Retired Saleman Box Hill]
How do you guarantee the fund doesn't get bastardised? I agree with you [on 2% GST scheme], but the government and bureaucracy can't be trusted.
[30s female music teacher Inner Melbourne]
I am prepared to pay the 2% GST but I want a guarantee that the money to go to green energy and transport.
[40s male Forex analyst / developer St Kilda $50k]
I would be happy to pay it [2% GST] but I need to be sure the money is going to the right [place].
[30s male primary school teacher, parent small kids, mortgage, married, Northcote]
I would be reluctant to agree to increase GST because the floodgates would open potentially. A petrol tax would make me use my car less, [but] $0.50 (33%) is too much. 10% [carbon tax on petrol] is a lot, but maybe ok. I would be more inclined to agree to a petrol tax, but partly because I am well served by public transport, living in the inner suburbs.
[50s male academic artist St Kilda]
Initial response is petrol tax. In principle, cars are good target for funding source... Heart says target cars, but head says GST more likely to win favour with electorate. Particularly support workers transition to new [industries].
[40s male teacher home owner unionist Mitchum]
I would support it [2% GST] but lessen impact on working class families by GST at 1%. The other revenue should be derived from a new Goods and Services Tax on Carbon unfriendly products. eg 5%
[46 years Female Lilydale low income earner]
Yes, would definitely support the incentive scheme!
[23, male, Brisbane via England, PhD student]
Petrol prices have already risen in excess of 50c over the last 5 or so years and yet the impact on car usage has been minimal. Australian geography is not like that of Europe, our low population density means that we have an inherent need for individual vehicle transport. With this in mind, I do not believe that a tax on car-related expenses with have a significant impact on the CO2 production.
A 2% increase in the GST offers a good revenue raising opportunity. However, it would be important that the distribution of this money is completely transparent. For instance, will it be used for large projects like developing mass transport systems in the cities, or research based projects like nuclear fusion (the only technology that can deliver us away from the need for fossil fuels).
I do not believe that this can be time limited. Rather it should be assessed on its goals. What if, after 5 years, there is still a requirement for this revenue but the contract had a 5 yr sunset clause.
Post a Comment