YouDecide2007 - Pensioners need $30 a week now!

Home

Pensioners need $30 a week now!

By Shannon Morris,

Pensioners need a $30 a week increase in their pension now, not the measly $8 a week the Prime Minister is offering, said Greens lead Senate candidate for Queensland Larissa Waters.

"Australia's pensioners deserve a decent income. So far, the Prime Minister has announced $10 billion a year in tax cuts and $1 billion a year to help poorer Australians with power bills, but he still can't find $3 billion a year to increase the aged pension by $30 a week to give Australia's 2 million pensioners a better income," said Ms Waters today.

"The new indexing will not lift pensioners out of their present poverty - it will ensure they stay the same. The fact remains there has not been a substantial increase in the pension in the 11 years John Howard has been in office," Ms Waters said.

"Politicians' wages have lifted 85% above the CPI since Howard came to power - why not pensioners?"

"The Prime Minister's $4 billion utilities payment boost for pensioners and carers over 4 years means less than $8 per pensioner per week."

"The Greens plan for a $30 a week boost for pensions was voted down by the government and opposition in the Senate in August."

"The Greens will increase the aged pension by $30 a week and help all low income earners reduce their power bills by installing energy efficiency devices such as insulation and solar hot-water heaters in their homes," Ms Waters said.

Users' Comments

Display 5 of 8 comments

It is only fair.

By: Gezza5240 (Registered ) on 25-10-2007 00:30

Yes, I agree. The tax cuts are so stupid when there are so many things that need expenditure on them. Pensioner poevery is certainly one of them. If only that 30+ billion dollars was being spent on water, the environment, safer roads, better public transport(trains), more money for teachers and murses,etc etc. Then we might actually get a better country rather than just giving back a paltry sum to individuals which will only lead to interest hikes which will take it all back anyway.

» Report this comment to administrator

Self funded, and part Pensioners.

By: AlanK (Registered ) on 25-10-2007 05:41

I am in some ways a member of both camps. I was looking forward to July 1, this year. Over 70, no tax on Super? As a retired ex-government employee who had contributed to Super ALL of 48.3 years, I was paying $180 per fortnight tax. Foolish me thinks I will get $90 a week 'pay' increase. Alas, it was not to be. Somehow, buried out of sight in the leglislation, out of sight, amongst the soft and warm, was a requirement for me to pay $58. I could never get an explanation for that one.
To compound this, I got a letter from the Super administering body telling me that the cost of living HAD NOT INCREASED in the previous period, and, therefore I would not be getting ANY increase until the next review period, maybe!
Now, I get a part pension only a percentage of the full pension, for which I am thankful as I am in receipt of the pensioner benefits which does help.
MY QUESTION IS WHY ARE AUSTRALIANS MEANS TESTED?
In other countries ALL persons over retirement age are given the FULL PENSION in recognition of their service to the country during their working life. If the obtaining of the full pension puts them into a tax paying situation, some of it is returned to the government as tax.
How many public servants would not be needed to administer the present act? Who knows, some of them may be able to find meaningful work in other departments. Maybe checking politicians allowance claims could be a good substitute.

» Report this comment to administrator

battlers Unite

By: anne_elk (Registered ) on 25-10-2007 23:08

I look forward to Nov 11, when all registered voting Australians, the rich businessmen along with the downtrodden and oppressed of Australia; the indigenous people, the workers, the carers, the disabled, the ex servicemen and women, the single parents and the unemployed, are finally given the opportunity to unite for their rights and proudly elect a party which policies look after them...
Rejecting the way that our taxes have been spent for the last 11 years and rejecting the way our human rights and our way of life has been stolen by this government.

I have faith in “the battlers” of Australian and remain in hope that this will happen, because if it doesn't, there will be nothing left to strip away.

Anne Goddard
http:// globalclimatechangeaction.org

» Report this comment to administrator

Forgotten?

By: AlanK (Registered ) on 27-10-2007 00:09

What has been forgotten in this argument is how it all started in the first place. For my first tax return, Form S, I was actually paying 2 components. One was for Social Services, and the other was Income Tax. The social services were for the age pension, child endowment, widow’s pension, and unemployment relief.
Income tax rates were far less than now. (I am quite sure that an old form S from 1948 could be found by an interested party). The average weekly wage was 7 guineas, $14.70 a week, 364 guineas, $765 per annum, and this was enough for a husband to support a wife and 2 kids, save, and allow for holidays, theoretically. The point is that the top tax rate for the top income on the back of the form was for 5,000 pounds, $10,000. If you did earn 5001 pounds per annum, then you paid x, and 1 shilling and 8 pence tax on each pound over the 5000. 1 shilling and 8 pence is 1/12th, or, as near as dammit to 8.5%. 8.5% tax for someone who obtained remuneration of 7.5 times the average weekly wage. Maybe a far more people were paying their fair share of taxes back then!
We all know that for some time, federal governments have been trying to shift the burden of support for the elderly onto their, [the elderly], shoulders, but it takes many years to plan for this. Legislation changes have been far to rapid to allow the planning to happen, even for those who thought they were well removed. Changes to Super laws for one. Reduction from 75% to 50% pensions on final salary for one. Then the next change to NO pension, just a lump sum, bugger off, you are out of the mix.
I would guess that most 70 year olds of today would have been caught by this one, caught and trapped. If the governments plan is to lose any need of support, why not now raise the pension to, and tie it to, at least 60% of the average weekly wage in the country. Maybe this is why AWA’s were brought in. Too have a lower base, or am I being facetious?
Those who are retiring now, or, have just retired, are those who paid the BIG taxes and levies through the time that Australia was emerging to become the player that it ‘thinks’ it is today. An old saying, but true, “Charity begins at Home”.
If the government can not raise the benefit, then spend the money saved on services
So that the pensioner gains are made in other ways. Pensioners still may be in a position to contribute to children/grandchildre

» Report this comment to administrator

Forgotten? Part2

By: AlanK (Registered ) on 27-10-2007 00:15

So that the pensioner gains are made in other ways. Pensioners still may be in a position to contribute to children/grandchildren. Baby sitting, education, transport, meals, health costs, are but a few of the ways this could occur. To say nothing of the cost of these supplementary services pensioners provide, and SAVE the government!

» Report this comment to administrator

Display 5 of 8 comments

Add your comment

[+] Show form

[-] Hide form

Only registered users can comment an article. Please login or register.

More comments...

< Prev		Next >

[ Back ]

Our Sponsors

Our Friends

Who's commenting on what...

Currently Online