Anyone notice SIPS have gone up?

[Mike Delisser]

Anyone notice SIPS have gone up?
No I didn't think so, happened very quickly and quietly didn't it.
https://www.smartservice.qld.gov.au/services/permits/fishing/apply

I only found out after receiving an email from FFSAQ detailing Les Kowitz's letter to the Minister, and I couldn't agree with Les more. I expected an increase soon because the admin fee is capped at a max of 25% and it's almost reached that mark the last few years but how rediculous, $7.20 & $36.05. Plus the amount of consultion with stake holders shown by this department is pathetic.
I'm sure Les won't mind me posting his letter here in the Freshwater Section for Ausfish's freshwater anglers to read.
Cheers
Mike D

Hon Craig Wallace MP
Minister for Main Roads, Fisheries, and Marine Infrastructure
GPO Box 46
Brisbane Q 4001


Dear Minister,

Re: SIP Fee Increase.

FFSAQ has been informed, verbally via telephone, by Fisheries Queensland, that your Government has increased the fee structure of the Stocked Impoundment Permit scheme as from the 1st of July 2011. FFSAQ is astounded and appalled that this change was implemented without any public consultation whatsoever.

Your Government espouses a position of being open, transparent, accountable, and consultative, but once again this position has shown to be no more than just political rhetoric.

Whether or not an increase in fees is warranted or necessary, is not the issue here, the disturbing matter is that your Government saw fit to not engage the community by public consultation before a decision was made. Any view from the public was totally dismissed.

The SIP scheme was a concept introduced and endorsed by the recreational freshwater fraternity. It was administered through the then existing Freshwater MAC process that engaged and considered community views. Recommendations were then provided to Fisheries Queensland. In 2009, your Government dissolved the MAC process, and by so doing denied public input into any fisheries considerations. A new Queensland Fisheries Advisory Committee was established. Currently, the Freshwater Management Plan is being reviewed, and a Working Group is being established to assist in this process. It is understood that consideration of the SIP scheme is to be included. FFSAQ believes that this Working Group would have been the appropriate forum to discuss any possible changes in the SIP scheme. But no, your Government totally disregarded any community viewpoint before making changes.

The agencies, that collect around 80% of SIP fees, do so voluntarily with no financial recompense. This valuable commitment to the scheme is to be applauded. But now, unacceptably, have the imposition of financially reconciling miniscule numbers of cents that the new fee structure has burdened them with. If there were to be an increase, surely it could have been kept to round dollar figures. Even to those permit holders who accept an increase, this is a ridiculous arrangement. The agencies need to be supported, not burdened with more bureaucratic administration.

FFSAQ has been advised by Fisheries Queensland that the permit fee increases are based on CPI indexes and are to change each year accordingly. This apparently is to bring it in line with government policy of increasing all its charges each year by CPI. FFSAQ questions that this policy needs to be automatically extended to the SIP scheme. The SIP scheme is considered to be a unique concept between the freshwater fishing community and Fisheries Queensland and not necessarily subject to overall government policy. FFSAQ was also amazed that your government is not going to make any public or media release regarding these changes.

Minister, can you please explain to our members and the freshwater fishing fraternity in general, why these changes were made to the SIP scheme, and more specifically, why there was not a genuine, open and transparent process of public consultation.

Yours faithfully,


Les Kowitz
FFSAQExecutiveOfficer. Stocking

[NAGG]

Isn't this the first increase (ever) & equates to just a few percent
With all the losses of fish over the dam walls - the more money in the better for restocking.

I certainly dont think that there needed to be any consultation with such a small increase over a 10 year period

Chris

[Mike Delisser]

With all the losses of fish over the dam walls - the more money in the better for restocking.

Chris

Hi Chris, the increase won't mean many more fingerlings at all mate, and to be honest I got no gripe with an increase, just the annoying amount ($1.05) and like Les says I recon they could have involved FFSAQ. The consultation was pretty bad alround, it came in on July 1 and there's still outlets who havn't heard about the price rise. Our SIPS is the product of anglers and the lifeblood of the FFSAQ, and the envy of fishstocking Australia wide. Lately the State Gov has been weakning the control of the volunteer fishstocking groups inch by inch and ignoring them, dissolving the MACs and reducing the control and say of stocking groups is one example, leaving us out of the loop at Wyaralong Dam is another. I bet they're looking at that 25% cap on admin fees too. Maybe instead of an increase just to cover the State Government's administration costs the Gov could have consulted with FFSAQ and they could have looked at a $40 -$10 SIP so you could have those extra fingerlings. Also I recon with the new recreation and access policies due out later this year the more consultation the State Gov has with FFSAQ and other angler groups the better, but unfortunately it's heading in the other direction.
Cheers

[Angla]

Even though it is about $1.05 there seems to be a common thread here in relation to the fact that the Minister seems to be able to make changes without consultation as with the snapper bag limit changes.
I think someone is on a power trip in government.

Cheers
Chris

[NAGG]

Hi Chris, the increase won't mean many more fingerlings at all mate, and to be honest I got no gripe with an increase, just the annoying amount ($1.05) and like Les says I recon they could have involved FFSAQ. The consultation was pretty bad alround, it came in on July 1 and there's still outlets who havn't heard about the price rise. Our SIPS is the product of anglers and the lifeblood of the FFSAQ, and the envy of fishstocking Australia wide. Lately the State Gov has been weakning the control of the volunteer fishstocking groups inch by inch and ignoring them, dissolving the MACs and reducing the control and say of stocking groups is one example, leaving us out of the loop at Wyaralong Dam is another. I bet they're looking at that 25% cap on admin fees too. Maybe instead of an increase just to cover the State Government's administration costs the Gov could have consulted with FFSAQ and they could have looked at a $40 -$10 SIP so you could have those extra fingerlings. Also I recon with the new recreation and access policies due out later this year the more consultation the State Gov has with FFSAQ and other angler groups the better, but unfortunately it's heading in the other direction.
Cheers

Agree about the amount ..... should have been higher ($40) - I couldn't remember what the old fee was.
I guess you are right about the consultation , it should have taken into account the fisheries & the need to increase funding fast to cover the loses rather than sure up the admin costs which it appears to be the case.
So fair point

Chris

[Feral]

Yeah, rayke put up a post last week saying he had heard it was going up.

All government charges are supposed to be indexed, and go up in July, saves Anna from the embarrassment of announcing any rises. I figure Fisheries had just missed that memo in the past!

[Basstones]

As a yearly permit holder, I personally know that I would be willing to pay a little more if we saw the benefits of the extra money, particulary in increased fingerlings. If they had substantially increased the amount, or revamped the entire scheme then consulation should definitely be required, but the amount of taxpayers money wasted on the consultation would probably amount to more than what is generated from the increased fee. Although I would be interested in seeing exact numbers of current permit holders in each category.

Not saying I agree with all decisions made recently, or the admin % of the funding, but for a $1.05 increase i'll keep buying my yearly permit and would prefer to see the consulation money go straight in to more fingerlings instead.Of course, a nice even figure would have been even better.

[finga]

It's a shame that the people who are doing most of the administration (ie the tackle shop and convenience store owner's) get didly squat out of the 25% administration capping.
I know one local guy out at Warwick had his wife writing permits near full time last long week-end/Easter periods insteaad of filling gas bottles and selling shrimp traps.
These people get nothing for their time.

If I saw restocking was increased and the money went to restocking then I have not a problem with fee increases.
That why I'm a member of the local restocking association as well as paying the SIP.

[oldboot]

The blame for all this can be put squarely at the feet of that smarmy designer shoe wearing treasurer...just look at his face every time he is on television or in public.....there is a look of utter distain for the general public.

And this weird figure syndrome is everywhere...just about every government charge is made up of obtuse amounts of dollars and cents.....they just are not accounting for people using cash.

cheers

[Mike Delisser]

As a yearly permit holder, I personally know that I would be willing to pay a little more if we saw the benefits of the extra money, particulary in increased fingerlings. If they had substantially increased the amount, or revamped the entire scheme then consulation should definitely be required, but the amount of taxpayers money wasted on the consultation would probably amount to more than what is generated from the increased fee. Although I would be interested in seeing exact numbers of current permit holders in each category.

Not saying I agree with all decisions made recently, or the admin % of the funding, but for a $1.05 increase i'll keep buying my yearly permit and would prefer to see the consulation money go straight in to more fingerlings instead.Of course, a nice even figure would have been even better.

In 2007-08 Yearly $35 permits made up 58% and weekly $7 made up 30%
In 2008-09 Yearly $35 permits made up 28% and weekly $7 made up 66%
The missing % are for cons. card holders.
As you can see it varies from year to year, the drought had alot to do with numbers above.


Any consultation would cost bugger all, it would only be with one group, the Freshwater Fish Stocking Assoc of Qld, all volunteers, 1 or 2 meetings tops. In essence all the Gov does is collect the fee for the FFSAQ and take out a admin fee capped at 25%. The SIP scheme money is for the stocking groups to use, indexing increases for a SIP like every other Gov tax or fee that goes to consolidated revenue is BS, this is another example of the Gov white anting away at the volunteer stocking groups. But you watch each year when it's time to divide up the money to the stocking groups, it's the SIP money we've all paid but there'll be a press release boasting of the $721,000 (2010) the Gov has just handed out to the groups for fingerlings.
Cheers

[Basstones]

Thanks Mike, very interesting to see the breakdown of the categories. Intersesting to see the total put back in to the dams is approx $720k, meaning about $1m before the admin cost was removed. I'll be honest, that's actually a lot higher than I thought, just didn't think that many people were permit holders. Hence original thoughts of permit holders x $1.05 wouldn't amount to much, good to know I was wrong.

I don't suppose you have any numbers on whether the scheme subscription rate has been increasing over the years? Ie is more money hitting the dams each year?