We already have a tax here in NSW .. it's called a fishing licence
We already have a tax here in NSW .. it's called a fishing licence
No need to bget smart about it Derek, obviously I was in the middle of posting when you posted your article, so therefore could not have read it until after the fact
Was not my intention at all.Originally Posted by Scott nthQld
Seems pretty clear from the wording of the grant that this is exactly what they are looking at. What's next, a tax on cricket pads and bats for anyone playing cricket? A tax on tents, caravans and camping gear for those who like to camp? This country is already over taxed as it is. Regardless of what they could spend the money on, nobody in their right mind would support a tax that singles out one recreational past time.The idea that the federal government would tax recreational fishing tackle is nonsense, Fisheries Minister Eric Abetz says.
Must go out and buy some gear now, on the off chance it does go ahead.
I have just sent the following email to Recfish after some answers. Maybe we'll see what they've got to say for themselves.
To whom it may concern,
Due to today's media releases form several media bodies I, and many others have become aware of your organisation's proposal to impose an additional tax on Fishing tackle purchased by recreational fisherpeople.
Myself and many other are very anxious of what the result maybe and where the additional funding may go if the tax is enforced.
The main question on all of our minds is that why an organisation that is supposed to be representing the recreational fisherman would even suggest such a travesty to put so much more pressure on the fishing community?
Also, why is it that RecFish Australia has not yet made a comment on the fact? Is it because you will lose so much support when people find out about your dodgy dealings, trying to stab people in the back?
If, however, RecFish does get its way, and a tax is imposed, where will the funds be used? Will it go into your pockets never to be seen again or will it be used for improved facilities such as upgraded/new boat ramps with adequate lighting and security, new artificial reefs, education for both new and experienced recreational fishers? Or how about funding for Govt department such as QLD DPI and the equivalent in other states. We mustn't forget the Coastguard and resue services that may need upgrading of communications or additional manpower to operate efficiently and effectively?
RecFish seems to have turned into just another money grabbing Government and so far many people, including myself, have lost faith in your organisation to defend our rights.
I am anticipating a full and direct response to my questions and any explanation on why you have decided to turn against your peers.
Sincerely
Scott Thompson
Email: sthompson@lge.com
My apologies, I guess with recent events I am a bit steamed and my responses are somewhat reactionary
Last edited by Scott nthQld; 23-08-2007 at 03:04 PM. Reason: spelling
Here it is direct from the RecFish website http://www.recfish.com.au/hot_topics...0issue%208.pdf
A Scoping Study on the concept of independent revenue sources for the Recreational Fishing Sector in Australia
For many years it has been difficult to find a means whereby the recreational and sport fishing sector of the fishing industry can secure a reliable and equitable source of revenue to provide the capability for the sector to develop and grow.
Historically the sector has always relied on the governments of the day to provide resources to develop and promote the sector. This scoping study will identify funding options that if implemented will see the funds paid by the anglers go back into the industry with direct benefits returned to the fisheries, fishers and the sector.
A reliable revenue source will allow the sector’s representative groups to develop long term plans for capacity building, succession planning, growing the participation, R D & E, restoration projects, etc which in turn will deliver direct benefits to the fishing public.
This project will provide a comprehensive analysis of the benefits/detriments of levies and the processes that need to be addressed in considering their introduction and identify additional or alternative options not as yet explored by the sector. Identifying alternatives will be researched congruently with stakeholder interviews and a preliminary assessment of their practicality provided to determine the value of further investigation.
A number of potential uses of a levy or alternative funding options have already been identified and the scoping paper will further develop these. Alternative funding options identified in the paper will be assessed for equity, effectiveness and ease of implementation.
This project has been funded through the Recreational Fishing Community Grants rogram.
Contact the CEO John Harrison ceo@recfish.com.au for further discussion on this roject.
Last edited by Derek Bullock; 23-08-2007 at 03:18 PM.
What are the chances of there being any consultation with the people who actually count in this. I can't believe that they are expecting the people who already invest stacks of money into their favourite past time, to now contribute more money to allow the 'sector's representative groups to develop blah, blah, blah!!!' With more and more green zones reducing the chances of us catching fish. Instead of finding a way to get us paying more, maybe the government should investigate a way to fund a fishing rod buy back scheme!!!This project will provide a comprehensive analysis of the benefits/detriments of levies and the processes that need to be addressed in considering their introduction and identify additional or alternative options not as yet explored by the sector. Identifying alternatives will be researched congruently with stakeholder interviews and a preliminary assessment of their practicality provided to determine the value of further investigation.
The way I read this and please correct me if I am wrong but it looks like the recfish is doing the study to find a way that they can access more money from the recreational fishing community... for themselves??
Because from the wording there it looks as if the money would go back to funding organisations like recfish to help them promote the sport and educational type purposes. So IF that is the case the money wont be going back to funding fish stocks or more ramps but into advertising and ensuring that recfish is around for a long time (succession planning). So if thats the case how does this help fishing? Has recfish ever done anything? Sorry to sound rude I'm just asking because I cant think of anything that recfish has ever done but am happy to stand corrected.
Thanks for bringing this up as I was totally unaware
I have received a reply to my email sent yesterday. Recfish have sent me a copy of their latest media release on this matter. email is below:
For immediate publication 23 August 2007
Media release
Setting the record straight.
John Harrison CEO of Recfish Australia today wanted to clear some confusion in media reports on a process whereby the recreational fishing sector is seeking to identify an independent revenue stream to support recreational fishing needs around Australia.
“For many years it has been impossible to find a means whereby the recreational and sport fishing sector of the fishing industry can secure a reliable and equitable source of revenue to provide the capability for the sector to develop and grow”.
“Historically the sector has always relied on the governments of the day to provide resources to develop and promote the sector. This puts you at the whim of the Minister of the day”
Whilst some argue that it is the responsibility of the governments to support peak bodies in reality this does not always happen. There are examples of government withdrawing funding or threatening to withdraw funding to peak bodies, e.g. Recfish Australia 1996, Sunfish ~ 2000 & Recfishwest 2007.
“With funding from the Australian Government’s Recreational Fishing Community Grant Program Recfish Australia will commission a scoping study to identify funding options that if implemented will see any funds paid by the anglers go back into the industry with direct benefits returned to the fisheries, fishers and the sector. The study will commence shortly with a target completion of mid 2008.”
“A reliable revenue source will allow the sector’s representative groups to develop long term plans for capacity building, succession planning, growing the participation, Research & Development & Extension (RDE), restoration projects, capacity building, communications, habitat restoration etc., which in turn will deliver direct benefits to the fishing public. A number of potential uses of strategic revenue options or alternative funding options have already been identified and the scoping paper will develop these, and any additional initiatives identified by consultant/s, further”.
“One area within the study will be looking at the fuel excise paid by recreational fishers in their boats and how this may be used to support the recreational fishing sector. Currently fuel rebates are available for the commercial fishing fleet, primary producers and others. This study will look at how the fuel excise that is currently paid by anglers for their boat fuel could be diverted into a trust fund to provide the revenue necessary to deliver the long term objectives”.
“The study will also look at the option of a lottery or lotto system and it will study the spending habits of recreational fishers on the goods and services they use and identify any possible options for either capturing some of the taxes currently paid or the potential arrangements where an equitable and fair amount can be included in the cost of these goods and services.”
“These are not the only options that will be considered in the study as we are seeking innovative and new ideas from the study.”
“The whole concept behind this is to ask the questions and explore the options for independent funding mechanisms and if so what the next steps might be. If the question is not asked we will never know the answer.”
“I must reiterate, this is a scoping paper only, looking at potential options and seeking recommendations.”
“This is not about lining Recfish Australia’s pocket or a money grab. It is about the future of recreational fishing being able to stand on its own feet and shape its future.” Mr Harrison concluded.
Media enquiries
John Harrison
07 33561111
Some people like to go fishing...other people like to look at those people fishing and think...hmmmm how can I squeeze some money out of this?
Simplified view. but am I wrong ?
I think I'd rather pay a fishing licence than more tax..it just sit's easier for me.
It annoy's me when they crap on about funding for studies into the effects of Blah Blah Blah.
Here's the latest media release from AAP, obtained from http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.a...289007&rss=yes
Recreational fishing 'could be taxed'
Thursday Aug 23 19:06 AEST
Recreational fishing could be taxed by the federal government under a plan being investigated by a peak fishing lobby group and funded by taxpayers.
The commonwealth has given almost $200,000 to RecFish Australia to investigate "a levy" which would almost certainly be placed on the tackle recreational fishers buy.
However, Fisheries Minister Eric Abetz says RecFish Australia has already ruled out the possibility of a tackle tax.
"That was one option that they explored but I understand they themselves have ruled that proposal out," a spokesman for the minister told AAP.
"I can also categorically assure you that the federal government will not, has not and never will be supporting a tax on recreational fishing."
But RecFish Australia CEO John Harrison told AAP the study had not even started and nothing had been ruled in or out.
"It (the study) has not even gone to tender yet," Mr Harrison said.
"I have not even called for expressions of interest in doing the study."
Fishing is one of the biggest recreational sports in Australia and if a tax is imposed it could hurt the coalition's chances in the bellwether NSW coastal seat of Eden-Monaro which has gone with the winner at every election since 1972.
Mr Harrison said the possibility of a tackle tax was one of many possibilities RecFish was going to investigate.
"We are going to look at the complexities of the fuel excise," he said.
Fuel rebates offered to primary producers will be something the investigation looks at.
"This is only asking a question," Mr Harrison said of the inquiry.
The $198,680 study aims to find a way of making recreational fishing self-sustaining.
The money raised from a levy could be used to build recreational fishing infrastructure or help the environmental health of fishing spots.
"A levy would enable the sector to promote growth," the grant description said.
Mr Harrison said he hoped whoever won the tender would also develop other possible options for self-sufficiency.
Labor's fisheries spokesman Kerry O'Brien said a tackle tax would be just another way for the Howard government to take more money from working families.
"More than five million Australians go fishing every year, spending in excess of $680 million on fishing tackle alone," Senator O'Brien said.
"Some states, such as New South Wales, already tax recreational fishing through an annual angling licence.
"This Howard government new tax would rip more money from working families during their annual school holidays and unfairly impact on recreational anglers and small tackle stores.
"I call on the government to immediately rule out imposing this new tax on recreational fishing."
©AAP 2007
Fishermen vote (and there are millions of us!) There is a major election looming - anyone that even hints at supporting anything like this tax would not be getting my vote!
Arpie
Thats just it, all parties (except probably the greens) are denying any support for the plan, but if that was the case why did the Federal Govt (Liberal btw, in case someone didn't know) give almost $200,000 to do research on whether it is viable or not.
As you can read in the above AAP press release, Eric Abetz, Federal Minister for Fisheries (Liberal), has already lied in that saying Recfish has ruled out the possiblity of a new tax, yet Recfish CEO states that Recfish has not even sought tenders from agents to gather information. But then again, in this situation who can you trust, the Govt, or the organisation who suggested the tax in the first place?
"maybe the government should investigate a way to fund a fishing rod buy back scheme!!!"
Fafnir, thats gold! That was a huge waste of time and money.
"A reliable revenue source will allow the sector’s representative groups to develop long term plans for capacity building, succession planning"
We all fear thats only what we'll see out of this money. Organisations spending millions of dollars "researching" and "planning" and "thinking" about what is best for Rec Fishers and seeing very little on the back end of it as too much is wasted in research and planning and studies.
I recently started a thread about this very idea. My initial thought processes were quickly changed by some very thoughtfull comments by Ausfish members.
I agree that a certain percentage of funds spent in this industry by rec fishers must be garanteed to return to the sector directly. I think a garanteed percentage of the GST being paid already is the best option (fat chance of that happening). The most important thing I beleive in all of this is that funds MUST be directly allocated to state bodies not a national level. ie if 35% of revenue raised comes from NSW then 35% of revenue goes back to NSW fisheries etc.
Cheers Chris
Last edited by Lovey80; 24-08-2007 at 11:50 AM.
Democracy: Simply a system that allows the 51% to steal from the other 49%.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote