Call for levy to fund boat facilities boost

[Maxg]

Well ask them what happens to the GST buks from your recreational dollars, which get back into your State coffers. For every billion spent on rec angling, including boating etc whatever, the fed gov gets 100 million which ends up in your State Gov's revenue bucket. They make a big profit out of rec angling. Let them use that. Max

[Ron_Collins]

Hi All

Back from the Show.

In my opinion, it would not be a good idea to ask Sunfish to handle or otherwise manage the PPV. Why? Firstly, Sunfish is a beneficiary of the levy in that a large slice their annual funding comes from it. You may recall that Sunfish had a deal of trouble gaining funds for the current financial year.


Secondly, and again it's my opinion only, it needs a wider representative body than Sunfish to manage the money and its allocation to ensure that funding is not always directed to one sector or another, which could happen under the Sunfish banner.

GST is a separate issue, along with fuel excise, and I'm happy to comment on those issues a little later. For now, that's about as far as I can take the rego levy without speaking with some of our members of Parliament and the BIAQ.

Meanwhile, any other feedback or points of view that may assist our cause would be appreciated. Ron Collins.

[Vern_Veitch]

Whilst I agree with Ron's facts, I do not agree with some of his views. To my mind, there is no justification to take even more revenue from boat owners. Some of the taxes we pay that should go at least in part towards boating facilities include:
1. GST (on everything we buy for rec fishing and boating including safety gear.
2. Fuel Excise
3. Our share of income tax
4. Boat and Trailer Registration - note that although some of our boat registration goes towards facilities, none of our trailer rego is allocated back to our benefit.
There are probably others but these are already well above the total spent on managing facilities and fisheries.
The $12 PPV levy is not for facilities but is used for a range of projects including Sunfish funding (projected to be $125 000 next F/Y) QB&FP "Flying Squad" and various fisheries research and management issues as allocated by QFS.
To put this in balance we need to look at other places government spends money. A short list includes:
1. Car racing on the Gold Coast for 1 day a year - about $10 million I believe.
2. A walking bridge overthe Brisbane River - $27 million.
Lang Park rebuild - about $230 million.
3. Trawler buy-back $20 million
4. Cane industry rescue package - State and Commonwealth total is over $200 million in the last 5 years for an industry that is unlikely to be economically viable in the medium to long term.
The next question is how much would it cost to upgrade facilities. I cannot give an estimate but the proposed, in my dreams, boat ramp that is urgently needed in Townsville has been estimated to cost about $4 million on top of other construction costs to have 12 lanes and 500 car and trailer parks with some support buildings for coast guard etc.
I guess all of the above really means that the government sees the boating community as some sort of milking cow that they can ignore. And with our lack of support for those volunteers who are out there trying to improve things, they are probably right.
I cannot afford the time that I previously spent on this page due to study commitments but will try to keep an eye on it when time permits.
Vern

[Kerry]

First I'll comment on the bit of correct information: the BIAQ has issued a press release saying it supported a $25 levy on registered boats to raise funds for infastructure improvement through upgrading existing facilities and the building of new facilities.

So is the correct information a "new additional" $25 levy in "addition" to the "existing" levy?

I have no idea who the BIAQ consulted before it announced what is a fairly heavy levy.

That's a good point especially considering who the BIA are anyway (or think they are).[/quote]

.... some indisputable facts: we, owners of registered "recreational" boats, currently pay a $12 "private pleasure vessel levy" (PPV).

.... those funds are allocated in line with a budget approved by QFS and members of the fishing fraternity.

.... is also an agreed amount allocated to "administration".

But according to the Government, the rules of the levy preclude it being used for the provision or maintenance of general facilities.

.... whole issue is clouded by the fact that we're dealing with two departments and cross departmental dealings are far from easy.

An "administration" amount, now that % would be interesting but obviously not for public inspection, apart from the fact that the public actually pays the levy.

Really this whole "levy" appears to be convieniently "cross threaded", in that it always appears to be another department's problem.

To preclude this levy for the purpose then makes it a straight out tax, which isn't a levy at all. This I suppose answers the first query in that if the "existing" 12 bucks is precluded from being used for "the provision or maintenance of general facilities" then this BIA 25 bucks has to be an addition.

Personally, I would not mind paying another levy of say $10, provided it was utilised in accordance with closely scrutinised rules that made sure funds did not disappear into the old black hole, and budgets were approved by the Government and representatives of recreational fishers.

There's no way another levy of any description should even be considered until the "first" levy (tax) is actually used in the context of a levy and not simply a tax as if it's not used as a levy based on the purpose for which is was raised then it's not a levy at all but a straight tax and simply put another rort >

Cheers, Kerry.

[Vern_Veitch]

Kerry,
I think you missed the point on a few issues that I clarrified.
The PPV levy allocation is accountable and it's use is for fishery management issues. Very little is spent on Administration.
The big issue is where is the rest of our boat and trailer funding being used. Queensland Transport will tell you they are spending some $8 million per year on facilities but most of that is spent on keeping seats shiny and offices cool in a Brisbane CBD building and not a lot on new or upgraded facilities. And they refuse to accept that our trailer rego should be used for boating facilities.
Our other taxes that I outlined in a previous post should cover basic admin costs but they are hidden in internal revenue so the Government can tell us that they are spending more than they take in rego's (boat only) and that everything is wonderful.
Those of us who only get to use ramps on weekends know better. Can you imagine if the SE Freeway was built to handle the minimum traffick load - it would still be 2 lanes. That is presently the condition of our ramps.
Vern

[adrian]

well this has opened my eyes but i have to agree that they should use the money they get from our regos on ramps and other things and as for the sand at bribie theyy should jsut clean it off as it's not owned by anyone but no one wants to take the responablity for it
maybe a stand is needed or maybe a water tax for using the waterways is next it seems to me that levies get money and give nothing in return

anzac

[Gazza]

and as sure as the sun sets......and probably rises again

you will be told that "it's the local councils" responsibility

oneday ,oneday..... a sitting/non-sitting gov't/opposition will utter the words......

"NO new taxes....and.....and.... NO new levies"

Regards
Gazza

p.s. Ron , don't you "trust " Sunfish to be "allowed" to handle money on behalf of RecFishos for RecFishos ??? ???

Couldn't do worse than the monies being presently taken and ........non-spent on RecFishos........ from RecFishos ???

[Ron_Collins]

Hi Gazza

I'm pleased to say that I have quite a close relationship with some Sunfish officials.

But the disbursement of the money that I'm talking about covers much more than rec fishing. That's why I would be keen to see its "administration" handled by a more diversified group.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that "rec fishing" is immensely more diversified than wetting a line off the local jetty, for instance. Rec fishing has to take into account the needs of, for instance, charter operators, divers, boaties who fish, tourism operators in fishing regions and so on. We could end up with a list a mile long if we set our minds to it, I'm sure.

That's why I would like to see a wider group on any money "disbursement" committee. The process would need to be very transparent and very accountable to those paying the dollars. Maybe I'm dreaming, but in my biased opinion I'm sure it could work.

So, Gazza, I hope that is a clearer explanation of my personal position regarding Sunfish and disbursement of any funds collected for rec fishing. Matter of fact, I think if you analysed the contents of BNB Fishing and the 4BC Talking Fishing Show, you'd find Sunfish gets a good run on most issues.

Best wishes for now. Ron Collins.

[Gazza]

Thanks Mate , respect your POV and clearer position

NO new taxes....and..and....NO new levies


Regards
Gazza

[Kapitan]

"No new taxes and no new levies" says the media tart Beatie!!!!!

Just more speed cameras and radar guns..........

Whichever way you look at it, it is all govenment revenue and its a growth industry. Governments/public servants are not known for efficient management of the things they do, (Qld Ambulance service???).

Just have to pay up and shut up.

[jaybee]

awwwwwwwwwww geeeeeeeee, and webby, lucky phil and a few others say i am a cynical bathtub,(i agree to that ) when is everyone going to wake up to the fact you cant trust the government which ever one it is, and what ever they have you involved in as an 'ordinary person' cause they will only tell you what they only want you to hear. The only outcome will be to line their pockets and try to make out it will do you good
cheers.
joe.