ACOSS Report

Key points

• Community service guarantees would specify a set of services that are available to all who need them regardless of income or where they live.
• The Commonwealth Government would be responsible for ensuring that guarantees and related outcomes are achieved, while State and Territory governments would be responsible for planning and delivery of the services.
• Costs would be shared according a formula set in legislation – not by administrative fiat.
• In return for these funding guarantees, State and Territory Governments would be required to provide services in a cost effective way, for example through investment in prevention and health promotion.
• We already have a legislated guarantee for access to doctors through Medicare and in some areas for disability services through the NDIS. We propose to extend this principle to other services such as home care, hospitals, schools, and affordable housing subsidies for households with low incomes.
• Funding arrangements for community services should be pragmatic and fit for purpose. Reform in this area should be free of ideological assumptions: for instance, that private is more efficient than public and that costs will be reduced without sacrificing quality if governments put all services out to tender.
• Gaps in the revenue base need to be filled in order to pay for essential community services into the future. This is a better way to fund future services than user pays models or consumption tax increases. Reform of income tax is a priority to curb tax shelters such as superannuation, capital gains, negative gearing, and private trusts and companies.
• An increase in the GST would fall disproportionately on people with low household incomes. The GST raises 7% of income from the lowest 20% of households compared with 3% from the top 20%. A higher GST would require substantial compensation for people on low and middle incomes, which would reduce the funds available for community services.