Some questions about National's $50 crime levy
1/ How many levies will be paid for by a special grant from Work and Income? (Just as fines are paid to help beneficiaries avoid debt)
2/ If 100 percent of the 100,000 levies were collected - resulting in $5 million a year - what percentage of this sum will go on running the new structure tasked with collecting and administering them?
3/ While so many fines remain unpaid - $600 million at June 2006 - what chance the crime levy can be successfully collected?
4/ Why is the levy a flat fee when the victim of violence is likely to be more traumatised and in need of substantial reparation than a victim of property crime?
5/ If all crime attracts the same surcharge why not the same sentence?
6/ Isn't Labour justified in its derision of this idea?
7/ While National talks about compensating victims of crime is it leaving ACT to talk about reducing victims of crime?
Cam Slater: Would Helen Clark Please Just STFU
41 minutes ago
2 comments:
4/ Why is the levy a flat fee when the victim of violence is likely to be more traumatised and in need of substantial reparation than a victim of property crime?
I suspect that the levy is to be put into a general fund to provide reparation for victims - its not a specific payment to the individual victims.
7/ While National talks about compensating victims of crime is it leaving ACT to talk about reducing victims of crime?
very good.
Post a Comment