Emergency services funding rethink
Vaucluse MP Gabrielle Upton has called for a rethinking of emergency services funding in NSW, requesting the State Government consider alternative models.
The move comes in light of a 2012 Government Discussion Paper proposal for a property-based levy to replace the current funding model, where 73 per cent of emergency services funding comes from household insurance.
“The [State Government’s plans] would unfairly affect taxpayers in the electorate of Vaucluse, whose demand is not commensurate with other areas of the state,” said Ms Upton.
Health Services Union NSW Secretary Gerard Hayes said more needed to be done in the provision of health care in Waverley.
“Health care is a fundamental right for residents, but [soon] people will be forced to fund basic health care out of their pocket,” he said.
The discussion paper criticised the current model saying it “discourages people taking out insurance” and is “unfair as the [Emergency Services Levy] is only paid by people with insurance”.
The government’s proposal includes a larger proportion of funding to the rest of the state, commensurate with higher property prices and better service provision in more heavily urbanised areas.
But Ms Upton said a property-based levy is needed, with a “floor and cap” for each property.
Ms Upton’s proposal would equalise payments for emergency services to ensure owners of valuable properties do not shoulder an imbalanced burden of taxation.
The current model requires local councils to pay 12 per cent of the total cost of operating these services, calculated by Fire and Rescue NSW, NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) and NSW State Emergency Service (SES) according to the needs of each individual council.
The 2012-13 state budget included a $96 million Strategic Disaster Readiness package for the SES to improve emergency responsiveness and volunteer support. The package was in addition to $170 million of assistance grants given towards the recovery from recent floods across NSW.
Ms Upton’s proposal seeks to source the funds on a sustainable basis from all residents and not just insurance holders, ensuring funds go directly from residents’ pockets to state coffers, instead of being diverted via insurance companies.
By Joshua Tassell
