|
Post by Banjo on Dec 3, 2013 7:31:23 GMT 7
Prime Minister Tony Abbott's plan to claw back $3 billion in family and welfare payments THE Abbott Government will today move to claw back almost $3 billion in family and welfare payments under laws to tighten eligibility. Pensioners, students and families have been included in the savings measures that will start from January. The Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment Bill is expected to be passed tomorrow despite facing some headwinds from crossbench Senators. While many of the sweeping reforms have already been flagged by the Government, some of the changes may shock pensioners living overseas, parents of teenage children and working mums and dads who rely on childcare. One of the biggest savings - more than $1.2 billion, will come from not raising indexation on the child care rebate and end-of-year Family Tax Benefit supplements. The annual child care rebate limit of $7500 will remain until July 1, 2017, and Family Tax Benefit supplements will remain at current levels for three years. More than $50 million will be saved over four years by changing how long someone has to live in Australia before receiving the pension. Currently a person who has been out of the country for 26 weeks continues to get their pension if they lived in Australia for 25 years. That will change to 35 years next year. And from July 1, 2014, the length of time that families can be temporarily overseas and continue to receive family and parental payments will reduce from three years to 56 weeks. Parents with teens have also been targeted, which will save $76 million over four years. From January 2014, Family Tax Benefit Part A will be paid to families only up to the end of the calendar year in which their teen completes school. Eligibility will be removed for 16 and 17-year-olds who have finished their Year 12 qualification. The benefit will also be slashed for families whose children have completed school and have a job. Changes to student start-up loans, which help with the cost of study, including the purchase of text books, computers and internet access, will reap $1.2 billion over five years by a more targeted approach to chasing debts. More than $80 million will be saved by cutting late entrants to the pension bonus scheme. The scheme provided a lump-sum payment to those qualified for age pension who reached qualifying age but who choose to defer their pension and remain in the workforce. The scheme was closed from 2009, although people remained able to register for the scheme if they were qualified for it, but had not registered, at the time of its closure. - See more at: www.theaustralian.com.au/news/prime-minister-tony-abbotts-plan-to-claw-back-3-billion-in-family-and-welfare-payments/story-e6frg6n6-1226773756241#sthash.Vy2dXrGT.dpuf
|
|
|
Post by bruceb on Dec 4, 2013 10:55:53 GMT 7
|
|
|
Post by Denis-NFA on Dec 4, 2013 11:58:05 GMT 7
There are also some good replies on that thread in defense of resident and overseas DSP and OAP recipients.
There was one guy Shane that I think many here could identify with that underscores an anomaly in the whole pension set up,
I for 1 am ashamed to call myself an Australian. I live overseas and get a disability support pension. This is what I get for busting my ass 12 hrs a day 7 days a week working and destroying my body. I told centrelink I live with a woman who is sort of girlfriend/carer and that 2 of us live off my pension. She has no money and doesn't own anything. She has never lived in Australia and only visited twice. For that information Centrlink said Thank you for your information .. for your honesty we will cut your pension by $210 a fortnight. So now 2 of us have to live off $600 a fortnight. Yet because she is not an Australian resident she is NOT entitled to a carrs pension or carers allowance just recognition of being my defacto .. Thank you for that.
He is correct because if he was in Australia his de facto would be getting assistance or if he was resident in Australia and his de facto was overseas he would be entitled to single pay under Section 24.
The response he got was ordinary but I left a belated response for him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2013 15:31:39 GMT 7
Prime Minister Tony Abbott's plan to claw back $3 billion in family and welfare payments THE Abbott Government will today move to claw back almost $3 billion in family and welfare payments under laws to tighten eligibility. Pensioners, students and families have been included in the savings measures that will start from January. The Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment Bill is expected to be passed tomorrow despite facing some headwinds from crossbench Senators. While many of the sweeping reforms have already been flagged by the Government, some of the changes may shock pensioners living overseas, parents of teenage children and working mums and dads who rely on childcare. One of the biggest savings - more than $1.2 billion, will come from not raising indexation on the child care rebate and end-of-year Family Tax Benefit supplements. The annual child care rebate limit of $7500 will remain until July 1, 2017, and Family Tax Benefit supplements will remain at current levels for three years. More than $50 million will be saved over four years by changing how long someone has to live in Australia before receiving the pension. Currently a person who has been out of the country for 26 weeks continues to get their pension if they lived in Australia for 25 years. That will change to 35 years next year. And from July 1, 2014, the length of time that families can be temporarily overseas and continue to receive family and parental payments will reduce from three years to 56 weeks. Parents with teens have also been targeted, which will save $76 million over four years. From January 2014, Family Tax Benefit Part A will be paid to families only up to the end of the calendar year in which their teen completes school. Eligibility will be removed for 16 and 17-year-olds who have finished their Year 12 qualification. The benefit will also be slashed for families whose children have completed school and have a job. Changes to student start-up loans, which help with the cost of study, including the purchase of text books, computers and internet access, will reap $1.2 billion over five years by a more targeted approach to chasing debts. More than $80 million will be saved by cutting late entrants to the pension bonus scheme. The scheme provided a lump-sum payment to those qualified for age pension who reached qualifying age but who choose to defer their pension and remain in the workforce. The scheme was closed from 2009, although people remained able to register for the scheme if they were qualified for it, but had not registered, at the time of its closure. - See more at: www.theaustralian.com.au/news/prime-minister-tony-abbotts-plan-to-claw-back-3-billion-in-family-and-welfare-payments/story-e6frg6n6-1226773756241#sthash.Vy2dXrGT.dpuf
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2013 15:41:43 GMT 7
Banjo, I am pretty sure these changes mooted by Labour Government last year and I thought had already been introduced. Whilst it is distressing for all of us to be interviewed, interrogated and scrutinised by mindless charts etc., reality tells us that it has been coming for a long time. All we can do is try and get the best possible result for all of us as I see it. The country has been bankrupted over the past 6 years. We have an aging population and welfare is draining the coffers, sad but true. I would love to see our beloved politicians review their own super and pension rorts, plus all these so called an earned benefit such as free travel, free cars, free staff, full pension benefits after 3 terms in Parliament, allowed to earn as much as they like without penalty etc. Why are there rules for the battlers but carte blanche for pollies? Watch them squawk if they are subjected to the treatment DSP and others have to endure.
|
|
|
Post by mick on Dec 6, 2013 14:51:05 GMT 7
So does this overseas business have anything to do with the DSP and UP?
|
|
|
Post by Denis-NFA on Dec 6, 2013 15:25:16 GMT 7
So does this overseas business have anything to do with the DSP and UP? It is possibly to do with this, More than $50 million will be saved over four years by changing how long someone has to live in Australia before receiving the pension.
Currently a person who has been out of the country for 26 weeks continues to get their pension if they lived in Australia for 25 years.
That will change to 35 years next year.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Dec 6, 2013 15:29:16 GMT 7
Indeed, we need to watch what governments with similar policies and philosophies to ours are doing in other countries. The UK and northern Europe have had a strong welfare system for year, if it is being dismantled there then there is genuine cause for concern here.
|
|
|
Post by Denis-NFA on Dec 6, 2013 15:35:41 GMT 7
Indeed, we need to watch what governments with similar policies and philosophies to ours are doing in other countries. The UK and northern Europe have had a strong welfare system for year, if it is being dismantled there then there is genuine cause for concern here. Agree Banjo. Particularly what they are doing in the reciprocal agreement countries, and Australian legislation related thereto.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2013 7:29:13 GMT 7
I have read the articles in the newspapers but contributors are often off the beam with regards to receiving benefits/pensions overseas. It is repeatedly pointed out that the end cost to the Australian taxpayer is less. Where a person elects to live if really a matter for themselves at the end of their working life (or in dsp case, forced ending). When we were all working, paying paye and gst etc. the money was gleefully accepted by the govt. Now it is our turn to be able to live with dignity where we choose and in many cases, these choices are motivated by the least costly life style. I didnt see the govt asking me over the years where they could spend my taxes and gst, why should I have to ask them where I can now live?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2013 7:30:34 GMT 7
I have no problems with the govt tightening up residency status requirements, but maybe 25 years was enough?
|
|
|
Post by Denis-NFA on Dec 7, 2013 14:55:50 GMT 7
I have read the articles in the newspapers but contributors are often off the beam with regards to receiving benefits/pensions overseas. It is repeatedly pointed out that the end cost to the Australian taxpayer is less. Where a person elects to live if really a matter for themselves at the end of their working life (or in dsp case, forced ending). When we were all working, paying paye and gst etc. the money was gleefully accepted by the govt. Now it is our turn to be able to live with dignity where we choose and in many cases, these choices are motivated by the least costly life style. I didnt see the govt asking me over the years where they could spend my taxes and gst, why should I have to ask them where I can now live? Totally agree that we should be protecting our Australian constitution rights of pensioners. Any change to the constitution is liable to destroy our place in the scheme of things.
|
|
|
Post by mick on Dec 7, 2013 15:27:03 GMT 7
So what I am asking is does this mean I will have to come back to Australia every 26 weeks, even with UP? Remember I am under 25.
|
|
|
Post by Banjo on Dec 7, 2013 16:15:20 GMT 7
No, the U in UP stands for unlimited. You can live where you like for as long as you please. I have heard of no restrictions being added regarding age.
|
|
|
Post by blueheeler on Dec 7, 2013 20:08:05 GMT 7
Something doesn't add up here mick is asking:
So what I am asking is does this mean I will have to come back to Australia every 26 weeks, even with UP? Remember I am under 25.
Benjo's replay:
No, the U in UP stands for unlimited. You can live where you like for as long as you please. I have heard of no restrictions being added regarding age.
If Mick doesn't have UP yet it does effect him I would think or I'm totally missing the point here. Must be my old age sorry
Someone please explain.
|
|