This simple and generalised statement shows how out of touch
Mr Hockey really is. In the last 10 months he has been photographed smoking
expensive cigars, sitting on a silk chair when making his austerity speech,
dancing on the night he announced the need to slash pensions, told us that cuts
to the budget didn’t go far enough and complains how hard it is to be the
treasurer.
In case you haven’t caught up with the latest, Mr Hockey
hopes to re-introduce the fuel excise tax that he sees as a way to raise money
to pay for roads.
These comments from a man who is chauffeured to work every
day!
The Australian Institute recent analysis states that the
poorest 20% spend more than three times as much of their income on petrol; the lowest
income earners in Australia spend the greatest amount on fuel as a proportion
of income. This research does fly in the face of Mr Hockey’s comments.
Most in the higher income brackets tend to have multiple
cars and potentially get a deduction on fuel or have their company pay for all
costs associated with their car.
How will a fuel tax impact business and transport of goods,
will the additional costs be passed onto the consumer – I suspect it will.
In Melbourne the urban sprawl goes for kilometres into the
vastness that is Victoria fuelled by the great Australian dream to own a home
on a ¼ acre block.
Inner city high density living is also not a choice for many
families, elderly or low income earners due to affordability, lack of space and
community feel.
So more and more people are moving out and commuting back
into the city or inner city suburbs to work.
The urban sprawl may cater for family, housing and lifestyle
needs however it does not necessarily cater for employment needs.
So many of our ‘urban sprawlers’ in fact are driving
distances to work. Now according to Mr Hockey’s statement and data, only the
rich drive long distances, therefore does this make our ‘urban sprawlers’ rich?
I would suggest Mr Hockey that this segment of our community
may disagree with you.
Across the country public transport budgets have been
slashed, in fact it was Mr Hockey who slashed the funding to any public
transport projects in Australia that wasn’t already under construction. Anyone who catches public transport in Victoria will certainly agree that we have issues with our trains, trams and buses running to time and in many country areas are non-existent. Which means that they need a car, unless they intend to start riding horses again.
Many in the country drive long distances just to get
groceries, get their kids to schools or themselves to work.
The figure Joe is quoting of $16 per week on petrol is an
absolute farce. I would love to know who does actually pay that much per week
for petrol.
Mr Hockey is making the assumption, based on his data of
course, that low income earners don’t have cars or drive long distances is so
far from the reality; in fact most often they have old cars that are not fuel
efficient. Remember too that low cost housing isn’t always located in the inner
city fringe.
Joe Hockey needs to understand that owning a car is not a
luxury item, it is a necessity. Majority of us need a vehicle to get us to and
from work, visit family and friends, take out kids to school and do the
shopping.
The comments made by Mr Hockey smacks of elitist, condescending,
us and them mentality which is not what this country is about.
It seems that selling his budget hasn’t been as easy as he thought
it may be and he needs some basic sales lessons. Perhaps I will invite him to
our next training session.
It sadly does show however how out of touch Mr Hockey and
his government perhaps is.
