-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
State based EV road user charge (Overturned 18/10/23)
- Thread starter jamesgo
- Start date
Times are tough and money is tight. NSW has a limited pool of rebates as well. Demand for EVs is such that rebates aren’t really needed any more and that money is more effectively spent elsewhere. Also it can be argued EV rebates are little more than middle class welfare to people buying expensive goods.
except
1. The roads are almost completely funded by fuel excise.
2. Anyone that currently owns an electric car probably replaced a modern fuel efficient clean burning vehicle with it - due to them being 60k anyway.
3. Wood heaters in houses are far worse than cars/trucks
I get the sense you feel very strongly about this… the biggest obstacles to EV uptake are vehicle supply and public charging infrastructure, not rebates.
The States have quite narrow revenue bases, and not unreasonably many have seen that a consumption tax on vehicle usage could be an effective way of shoring up a long-term, predictable revenue stream that is not reliant on the whims of the Commonwealth, especially as Federal fuel excise dwindles, giving them more scope to invest in the things that society says it wants, but seems reluctant to pay for.
The VIC EV policy was clumsily introduced, but it’s not that different to NSW’s EV policy, which was widely praised
. Go figure.
I'm a scientist, of course I feel strongly about the arrogance of politicians misleading the population and claiming to know better than the science at hand. Especially if the politicians do it for cheap points with the pleb.
We have an opportunity to upgrade society at maglev speeds right now. The government should be acting in society's best interest which always and without fail is a forward looking direction. Yet they're still building policies that hold back the required changes to benefit dirty business (and I mean that mostly in an environmental sense). All under the pretext of helping the simple, low income worker.
We should look towards Norway. They're in a very similar constellation as Australia, having huge petro resources dependency for income, yet driving green infrastructure and EV adoption at never before seen speeds.
Taxing the solution to dirty transport is the very last thing that should be on any future oriented agenda. Of course it will need to be introduced at some point - but that point is far in the future.
Australians have this deeply ingrained fear that somebody might have an advantage, I think you call that tall poppy syndrome. In Switzerland we call it the "fist in the pocket", slightly different causes, but the exact same outcome: Stifle innovation to make sure we're all equally miserable. That's no way to do politics.
@SL666 it's been documented at length in this thread and others that fuel excise goes into general revenue and has nothing to do with road construction funding. You are correct about point 3 however. Wood fireplaces have no business being in suburban neighbourhoods, neither do the fire control burns which more often than not appear to be the local pyromaniacs playground, at the immense health cost of killing a dozen people a year or so in Sydney alone. The fundamental concept of people thinking they deserve their own quarter acre (or larger) free standing home is at the root of that problem, but that's a discussion for another forum.
We have an opportunity to upgrade society at maglev speeds right now. The government should be acting in society's best interest which always and without fail is a forward looking direction. Yet they're still building policies that hold back the required changes to benefit dirty business (and I mean that mostly in an environmental sense). All under the pretext of helping the simple, low income worker.
We should look towards Norway. They're in a very similar constellation as Australia, having huge petro resources dependency for income, yet driving green infrastructure and EV adoption at never before seen speeds.
Taxing the solution to dirty transport is the very last thing that should be on any future oriented agenda. Of course it will need to be introduced at some point - but that point is far in the future.
Australians have this deeply ingrained fear that somebody might have an advantage, I think you call that tall poppy syndrome. In Switzerland we call it the "fist in the pocket", slightly different causes, but the exact same outcome: Stifle innovation to make sure we're all equally miserable. That's no way to do politics.
@SL666 it's been documented at length in this thread and others that fuel excise goes into general revenue and has nothing to do with road construction funding. You are correct about point 3 however. Wood fireplaces have no business being in suburban neighbourhoods, neither do the fire control burns which more often than not appear to be the local pyromaniacs playground, at the immense health cost of killing a dozen people a year or so in Sydney alone. The fundamental concept of people thinking they deserve their own quarter acre (or larger) free standing home is at the root of that problem, but that's a discussion for another forum.
You could say the same about any tax though - I'll leave it at, the amount of excise collected per state is similar to the amount of federal road funding that state receives - do you believe that heavier (on average) more powerful (on average) electric cars shouldn't contribute to the general coffers for road maintenance?
Old and sick people being killed by temporary fire control emissions < burning suburbs to the ground.
Why do you think you need to enforce the way you choose to live on others? I love my 1/4 acre (it's *nearly* big enough) and large freestanding home - with large freestanding shed - others enjoy flying in planes too, visiting other lands - and they are an environmental catastrophe.
(but yeah, we are getting pretty far off topic at this point
)
Candleflame
Active Member
Also unlike europe ppl blast their woodfires straight out into the air. And those are very common in northern west nsw and southwest qld. If its not too common i actually kinda like it. Smells a bit european when its 5C outside hehe.
Id love for fuel excise to go towards building roads. Within 10 to 20 years therell be an autobahn with proper guard rails, animal tunnels and advisory speedlimit of 140 going around australia.
Id love for fuel excise to go towards building roads. Within 10 to 20 years therell be an autobahn with proper guard rails, animal tunnels and advisory speedlimit of 140 going around australia.
I agree with you but I think the way the Vic government has done it may move many off the fence and back into ICEland for a few years. If they had made an announcement and said that the money would drive EV adoption more effectively if directed at improving our charging infrastructure, I would fully support the change. Burying it in budget papers with no announcement and no mention of other policies supporting EV adoption has left a bad taste...
I have recently purchased a model 3 RWD. It's the most I've spent on a car by a factor of more than 2 and government policy, both the EV rebate and FBT exemption, did play a role in making this possible. However, Tesla have since dropped their price by about the same so I guess it all evens out. Price cuts and more affordable EVs are likely to continue too...
I can't imagine how someone who has stretched to afford something like an MG4 that won't be delivered this financial year is feeling about this though.
Candleflame
Active Member
i think aus is generally pro airpollution... like no real laws re: woodburners (look at armidale) and filters/chimney sweeping. Dieselgate was ignored with the reason "average australian is not gonna care about their emissions" etc. I think its just an australian thing to not care about anything if it doesnt affect you immediately.
Maybe that other country that sounds like australia and is west of the east coast has better laws. This one is extracted from the SA EPA guidelines on burning an indoor wood heater
The Environment Protection Act 1993, section 25, states:
A person must not undertake an activity that pollutes, or might pollute, the environment unless the person takes all reasonable and practicable measures to prevent or minimise any resulting environmental harm.
Smoke and odour from burning wood is a form of pollution and it may cause environmental harm. An authorised officer under the Act may issue an expiation notice or an Environment Protection Order to achieve compliance with the general environmental duty. Penalties ranging from $300 to $60,000 may be applied.
Candleflame
Active Member
are woodburners illegal in south australia? tbh thats not great either. It's like banning central heating in darwin...
The whole "minimizing environmental harm" is very subjective. Clearly the air is not filtered here - just look at armidales pollution issue.
No wood heaters are not banned, however the epa go on to outline that generating smoke from them will result in a visit and penalty. They helpfully outline how to minimise that risk. Outdoor fire pits etc can now only be charcoal and you must be using it to cook food, so always have a bag of marshmallows and a billy of water close by.
But in the meantime the SA public transport buses continue to belch smoke like it doesn’t matter, but thats government owned so no problems.
Candleflame
Active Member
empty laws. its like australians emissions law which (at least for QLD) is that a car which is stationary is only allowed to emit visible smoke for 10 seconds at a time. What ***** law is that... like who designed that. What about an actual emissiontest as part of a 2-3 yearly inspection?
@SL666 I'm not prescribing how you should live. But I do expect you to show a bare minimum of circumspection and respect to your fellow citizens and not kill them with air pollution from your controlled burns because you chose to build your house in a known bush fire area.
Think about that. Take as long as you need.
Think about that. Take as long as you need.
No. I don't believe the High Court schedules judgements like that. The next sitting dates start on July 31st, so that'll be the earliest it could be now.
maybe my prediction the plaintiffs will lose will also be wrong 
I was going to post here a map of the 2003 Canberra fires - but you are referring to Australia - pretty much all of it, except the sandy part in the middle.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
