Calls for energy debts to big companies to be wiped
Anglicare has released a new report finding households on minimum are struggling with as little as $33 for left over after paying for rent, food and transport.
They're now calling for more to be done including debt forgiveness for those doing it tough.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News.com.au
21 minutes ago
- News.com.au
SA moves to ban plastic items including soy sauce fish packets
Takeaway soy sauce fish packets will soon be a thing of the past in South Australia. Straws attached to drink containers and spoons and forks attached to pre-packaged foods are also on the chopping block from September 1, along with plastic fruit stickers. 'These bans encourage reusable, recyclable or compostable alternatives,' South Australian Deputy Premier Susan Close said. 'South Australians are increasingly looking at ways to reduce their reliance on single-use plastics which devastate our environment. 'The state government will continue to assist South Australian businesses via various programs to assist them transition. 'Many South Australian businesses have already moved away from single-use items and are embracing reusable and compostable items.' In September 2023, the government banned plastic stemmed cotton buds, plastic pizza savers, single-use plastic plates and bowls. Then a year later, it banned plastic bags, plastic balloon sticks, plastic balloon ties, plastic confetti, plastic bread tags and single-use plastic coffee cups and plastic lids, among other items. Since 2021, the government credits local business with removing more than eight million single-use plastic items. Evergreen Deli's Elliott Horner said the move away from plastics would help preserve the natural world. 'Being nestled within Adelaide Botanic Garden, environmental consciousness is our constant companion, as we care for the very place we call home,' the venue and events manager said. Multiple states have moved to ban single use plastics, including NSW and Victoria.
Daily Telegraph
an hour ago
- Daily Telegraph
Aussies explode over Albo's latest cash grab
Don't miss out on the headlines from Motoring. Followed categories will be added to My News. Earlier this week, we published a story about the Federal Government's intention to introduce a road user charge (RUC) for electric vehicle (EV) owners. A per-kilometre tax to replace the fuel excise revenue lost as more Australians switch to electric vehicles. The proposal encouraged more than 2000 readers to comment. What followed was a passionate public policy debate, part stand-up comedy and a masterclass in Australian scepticism. RELATED: Carmaker's fury over Albo's new road tax Federal Treasurer Jim Chalmers has long flagged the development of a new road-user charge across Australia for drivers of electric vehicles to ensure EV drivers are contributing a fair share to road upgrades. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman While the conversation is divided, a large majority of readers believe EV drivers should contribute to road maintenance. But many also say the policy must be fair, transparent and apply equally across all vehicle types. 'Tax the trucks, not the Teslas,' one reader wrote, summing up a sentiment that hundreds of readers agreed with. Another, HelpMeOverHere, accused the government of double standards: 'A mining truck the size of a suburban street guzzles thousands of litres a week and gets all the fuel tax refunded.' The 'free ride' is over Many of our readers argue it's simply time for EV owners to pay their way. They believe that EV owners are currently getting a 'free ride' by avoiding the fuel excise, which raises more than $15 billion annually. 'There is not one solitary argument that supports the notion that EV drivers should be able to use the roads and not contribute to their upkeep. Not one,' nonedeplume said. RELATED: New EV tax makes no sense Heavy vehicles cause heavy road damage. Stephen argued: 'EV manufacturers are upset that the free ride is coming to an end and the EV drivers will have to pay to use the road like everyone else.' But others saw it less as fairness, more as the government's latest 'gotcha' tax. 'It's always the proletariat that has to pay for incompetent government,' Walker Texas Ranger said. 'Just another tax to prevent us from moving up in the world.' Some readers proposed replacing the fuel excise entirely with a universal RUC. 'Why don't we scrap the fuel excise and then just apply a RUC to all road users - that would then be fair to ALL road users regardless of what type of fuel (petrol, diesel, EV, hybrid),' Gaynor said. The trucking elephant in the room A big chunk of outrage was over Australia's heavy freight industry. Many said heavy vehicles are the 'culprits' and should pay more, given their impact on infrastructure. Fair enough. RELATED: What new Albo road tax would mean for you EV owners fear a new road tax will hit them harder than fuel guzzlers. Picture: AFP Infrastructure Australia data shows that one five-axle truck causes the same road wear as 2900 cars. The actual ratio varies depending on factors like axle weight and road construction, but a truck's damage is often cited as being much higher than 2900. Currently, heavy vehicles pay a RUC of 32.4 cents per litre, set to rise 6 per cent annually until 2025-2026. They also pay the federal fuel excise, now around 51-52 cents per litre - but operators can claim back the difference through fuel tax credits, reducing their net cost by about 20 cents per litre. 'Trucks are the issue,' Grande_choice said. 'All those regional roads are getting slammed by trucks but not EVs.' Aussie drivers are split over who should really pay the price. Picture NCA Newswire / Gaye Gerard Rural drivers fear being slugged harder Polestar Australia's managing director Scott Maynard said a one-size-fits-all approach could unfairly hit regional drivers who travel long distances for essential services. According to Australians tend to drive longer distances for essentials and often live further out because property is more affordable. 'People in regional areas generally are poorer and drive more distances to get from A to B,' BobtheBuilder said. 'Hence why the CEO (Scott Maynard) makes the point that they will be discriminated against.' Reader Vicki agreed: 'I'm rural and 75km from my nearest town, doctor, supermarket…city EV owners with public transport will cost them nothing, and rural/regional drivers big money. When the policy debate turned into a comedy set In between the policy arguments came some memorable one-liners that had me chuckling hard. 'If it can't be eaten or plucked, it will be taxed.' 'The word of the day is fungible.' 'I'm just going to wait until a hamster-powered car comes out.' 'How about we bring in a tax on breathing?' Another day, another tax for Albo?. Picture: NewsWire / Nikki Short The green glow-up….or greenwash? Some readers went straight for the environmental jugular. 'It's time the idealists wake up to the fact that electric cars aren't better for the environment…they will never pay off the carbon footprint cost of making the batteries,' Mark wrote. But Adam added, 'battery disposal facilities are already at 90+ per cent recyclability…the 'cut even' point for emissions is approx 37,000km.' Trusting the government…like trusting a cheating ex Underlying much of the conversation was the distrust of the government. Even commenters who back the idea of EVs paying said they didn't trust Canberra to use the money for roads. 'For FY23-24 the fuel excise raised $15b while [the] government only spent $10bn on roads,' Bryn wrote. 'When is it enough?' 'It's just revenue raising,' Jeff said. 'Once they have you hooked, they tax you.' The road ahead So the consensus? Most readers agree that EV drivers should pay and contribute. But it's simple, they want it to be fair. If the government can deliver that, they might just win people over. But if not, they'll be left with a few angry Australians. Originally published as Aussies explode over Albo's latest cash grab
News.com.au
an hour ago
- News.com.au
‘Blown away': $49 item making 31yo more than $100,000
When Catie O'Neill was in the midst of a turbulent hair journey, she came up with a more than $100,000 business idea to solve it. The 31-year-old Melbourne local is the founder of My Glow 2, a body exfoliator brand that has garnered a cult following and is now a seven-figure business. However, while growing the business, she found herself stuck in a frustrating hair cycle. 'It would go thick and beautiful and then it would start snapping,' she told Ms O'Neill couldn't work out why her hair was so unstable, she believed she was doing all the right things. Eventually she saw a dermatologist, who told her sun damage was messing up her locks and that was the moment she realised there was a gap in the market for hair protection. This is when the 31-year-old came up with her second big business idea, Shirley's Secret, a hair mist that protects against UV damage. 'I spent two years creating a formula that focuses on scalp care and length protection, shielding hair from UV, pollution, and daily stress,' she said. 'It's like a sunscreen for your hair, but designed to be worn every day.' The 31-year-old founder said that, while there are so many products on the market that aim to fix damaged hair, there aren't that many around to prevent it. The business launched in May this year and to great success, with the brand selling over 1000 units in 72 hours. 'We were completely blown away,' she said. The $49 product didn't sellout but that was because she had worked hard to prepare for launch with the right stock levels. 'I didn't want to be a sellout brand,' she said. The fact the brand hasn't sold-out, though, doesn't mean it hasn't been a roaring success. In fact, Ms O'Neill revealed the brand is on 'track to be a six-figure business' within 12 months. The brand founder is stoked because she had to invest over $100,000 to launch the business and has decided to put-off things like becoming a homeowner to bet on her idea. 'You've got to make the decision. Do I take a gamble on myself? Or take the safer option, which is investing into real estate,' she said. For Ms O'Neill, it was a no-brainer because she's 'highly confident' in her own abilities, the brand, and the product, and the response so far has just confirmed it. Coming up with her hair protection idea was a 'light-bulb' moment and all the feedback she was receiving prior to the launch was positive. 'When I speak to people, they're like, 'wow! Why didn't I think of that?'' she said. The young Aussie argued that getting a response like that is as good as formal 'market research' because you immediately know your idea is hitting a nerve. It has also helped that this isn't her first rodeo. She launched her first business when she was 23 and, when she was younger, she found it difficult when people wouldn't take her 'seriously', but now she is far more confident. 'This time around I can navigate more difficult conversations with a lot more confidence and it is like water off a duck's back,' she said. She's also aware of what not to do. In the past she has fallen into the trap of 'chasing the shiny object' but this time she's reinvesting everything back into her one idea.
