Senate debates
Wednesday, 25 November 2009
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Australian Climate Change Regulatory Authority Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Charges — Customs) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Charges — Excise) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Charges — General) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS Fuel Credits) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS Fuel Credits) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Excise Tariff Amendment (Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Customs Tariff Amendment (Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Amendment (Household Assistance) Bill 2009 [No. 2]
In Committee
9:44 pm
Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Hansard source
First, it is not a rebate. We deliver assistance through the tax and welfare system. It is very important to note that. We deliver through the tax and welfare system through various means. Whether it is low-income tax offset or family tax benefit or other allowances, that is how the assistance will be delivered. That is how it is delivered in the bills before the chamber. Because of that, we utilise the existing definitions of low and middle income which already exist in the social security system. For example, a low-income single person is defined as somebody earning $30,000 or less, which is linked with the minimum wage, whilst the top end of middle income for a couple with children is defined in the advice to me, and I hope this is correct, as $160,000. That is related to the particular threshold in relation to family tax benefit B. So there are a range of different definitions of what would be low and middle income—as there are currently in the social security system, as I am sure the senator would know.
No comments