• Welcome to RAIL - Back On Track Forum.
 

fuel subsidy

Started by #Metro, January 24, 2013, 17:44:37 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

#Metro

Negative people... have a problem for every solution. Posts are commentary and are not necessarily endorsed by RAIL Back on Track or its members.

somebody

Even from across the border, it blew my mind that such a thing would ever be introduced.

somebody

It was a subsidy.  Qld was giving money while the feds were taking it.  There was no need for this policy ever.

somebody

Too bad, I say.  The subsidy should never have been introduced.

somebody

Quote from: rtt_rules on January 28, 2013, 15:35:55 PM
Quote from: Simon on January 28, 2013, 15:28:40 PM
Too bad, I say.  The subsidy should never have been introduced.

Thats the point, it was not introduced, Qld just never taxed fuel, then very quickly a change had to be made to maintain the pump price due to a legal issue with the taxing. The alt could have been all the states petrol taxes were dropped with the Feds picking up the difference for those states. I'm sure if there had been more states like Qld this may have happened.
So they enacted legislation, set up a bureaucracy in the OSR etc without actually introducing anything eh?  ::) :frs:

Quote from: rtt_rules on January 28, 2013, 15:35:55 PM
On the other had, there were road tolls abolished because of the same or similar issue. For example when I went to the Daintree in 2003, there was a levy for using the ferry to cross the river. 12mth later they found out this long standing levy (and many others) were illegal. If you had a receipt you could claim it back. So is the ferry now subsidised?
I'm not across the ferry.

SurfRail

All depends on whether section 90 of the Constitution gets invoked.  This is the one which basically says from the time the feds impose a system of customs duty, excise and bounties (ie way back when not long after federation), pre-existing state duties/excises etc became inoperative and no new ones could be struck other than by using some other power (eg an agreement between the feds and a state).

Depends on whether the relevant charge offends section 90 of the Constitution.  I must admit I have never read the relevant decision to see what kind of application it has beyond the specific question at hand in that case, so can't really comment further on particular charges/taxes/levies etc.
Ride the G:

somebody


🡱 🡳