Letters
to the Editor
You'll
still be 'Army'
I COULDN'T
help but smile when I read WO2 Tidey's comments regarding the Army's
new rank slides for cold-weather clothing (Army, October 9.)
Maybe if
you were being forced to wear a blue coloured uniform with ARMY written
on it, you might have cause for concern.
As most
"RAAF-ies" will tell you, we are continually being referred
to as Army whenever we wear DPCU, even with the words AIR FORCE marked
above the left breast pocket.
RAAF C-130Hs
are often referred to as "Army Hercules" because they are
green, regardless of the fact that they have the RAAF Roundel and "Royal
Australian Airforce" written down the side.
I know
that many of the RAAF personnel involved in the Bali medivacs were quite
annoyed at the media reporting of this, simply because of their "green"
appearance.
I really
don't believe there will be much risk of you losing your Army identity
just because rank has been re-positioned on one or two items of clothing.
WOFF Mick Smith
HQAC
RAAF Glenbrook
Call
it a day
I HAVE
been reading with a considerable degree of regret the letters to the
editor re Reserve Forces Day.
I have
been a member of the Ares/GRes/part-time army for 17 years and I agree
whole heartedly with Capt Morris' comments. I certainly don't see the
need to celebrate the contribution every year.
This sort
of debate adds no value and gives those with negative views from both
sides of the "One Army" something pointless to argue about
rather than looking at the real issues facing Reserves.
At a time
when part-time numbers are at an all-time low, experienced members are
leaving and critical trades such as medics and signallers can take up
to three years to train and resourcing for units even more limited,
we should be focusing on the real issue of making the Reserve a value-add
to the army.
Reserve
Forces Day has had its day and that was the first one, let's move on.
Capt Robert Ball
1 Cdo Coy
Mosman NSW
Thanks
to JMA
I WOULD
like to extend my thanks to the staff at the Joint Materiel Agency for
their outstanding efforts in providing me with equipment for a recent
operational deployment to Afghanistan. UK Land Command recently deployed
over 30,000 troops to Iraq and yet the support I received from the Joint
Materiel Agency still impressed many staff here who saw them as helpful,
responsive and typifying the Australian "can-do" attitude.
So, once
again, thank you to Joint Materiel Agency and congratulations on a job
well done.
Maj H. Kohl
HQ Land Command
Erskine Barracks, Wiltshire UK
Watch
out for the surcharge
I SEEK
your assistance to provide advice on the Medicare Levy Surcharge in
relation to Defence personnel.
While it
is clear that permanent service members are exempted persons from the
Medicare Levy because they receive medical coverage from the ADF, their
incomes that are exempted or half exempted from the Medicare Levy are
not exempted when considered for the Medicare Levy Surcharge.
If the
combined family income exceeds $100,000, the Defence family has to pay
1 per cent of its total combined income as a Medicare Levy Surcharge
if it has no private health insurance cover.
In some
cases, if both members are serving members, the private health insurance
may only be needed for one child.
If the
combined family income is less than $100,000, the family is exempted
from the surcharge.
Surely,
if a Defence member's income is exempted or half-exempted from the Medicare
Levy, then this income amount should be deducted from the total family
income in relation to the Medicare Levy Surcharge test.
Otherwise,
no consideration is given to the fact that the Defence member receives
medical and dental cover as a condition of service and does not require
private health insurance.
When the
Medicare Levy Surcharge was introduced, was Defence consulted or did
Defence put up a case for the exempted income amounts of its members
in relation to the Medicare Levy Surcharge test?
Wg-Cdmr Peter Davis
Director Personnel Reserves-Air Force
Russell Offices, ACT
James Hogan, Assistant Director, Defence Tax Management Office, responds:
The Government introduced the Medicare Levy Surcharge (MLS) as part
of a package of measures designed to encourage people to retain or take
up a private health insurance option.
Individuals
and families on higher incomes, who do not have private patient hospital
cover for themselves and all of their dependants (including their spouse
or children), may be liable to pay MLS for any period during the income
year that they did not have this cover.
By removing
the member's income, as you have suggested, from the family income test
would undermine the integrity and equity of the system.
Members
of the ADF will be exempt from MLS if they were in an exemption category
for the full income year and:
- did not
have any dependants, or
- if they
had dependants, the dependants:
- were
also in an exemption category for the full year, or
- all
had private patient hospital cover for the whole of the income year.
However,
as an ADF member you will be liable for the MLS if:
- you have
dependants who are not prescribed persons and they do not have private
patient hospital cover, and
- you have
a taxable income for Medicare levy surcharge purposes above the relevant
threshold.
Accordingly,
members who earn above the threshold amounts can prevent the application
of the surcharge by obtaining private health insurance for any dependants
who are not prescribed persons.
Although
the Defence Taxation Management Office (DTMO) does not provide personal
tax advice, they can assist in helping members locate the correct information
on taxation matters.
The contact
details for DTMO are:
Email: taxation.management@defence.gov.au
Fax: (02) 6265 2648 (+61 for overseas callers)
Phone: 1800 806 053 (in Australia)
Phone: +61 2 6265 7120 (overseas callers)
Not
a condition of service
THIS letter
is in response to the letter "A low amount" by WO2 Shane Campbell,
IRR, published in Army on October 9.
The Defence
Home Owner Scheme (DHOS) is a home-loan-subsidy scheme operated under
an agreement between the Commonwealth and National Australia Bank (NAB).
The agreement
is a commercial arrangement between Defence and the NAB that came into
effect on May 15, 1991 following a competitive tender process.
As the
successful tenderer, the NAB paid a substantial sum for the right to
manage the DHOS. The NAB entered into the arrangement for commercial
reasons, such as increasing its market share of the home mortgage market,
in order to increase profits.
Defence
initiated the DHOS as a reward and recognition for members' service.
Further, the scheme was intended as a retention measure, to encourage
home ownership as an alternative to ADF provided housing, and to assist
ADF members on discharge when re-establishing in the civil community.
In this
context the DHOS provides for assistance as a reward and recognition
of service, it is not a condition of service.
It is not
uncommon for an employer to select a single provider for the delivery
of an employee benefit. The contractual relationship between the employer
and provider usually recognises that the benefit or product price for
staff is one that cannot be routinely accessed by individual buyers
in the market.
In the
case of the DHOS assistance under the DHOS takes the form of a 40 per
cent subsidy on the interest payments for a maximum loan amount of $80
000.
The interest
rate applied to loans under DHOS is calculated on a month-by-month basis
and is known as the Benchmark Rate.
The Benchmark
Rate is the average of the prevailing housing loan interest rate of
the five major banking groups or the NAB's interest rate, whichever
is the lowest.
The implicit
argument in the member's letter - that he could get the benefits of
the DHOS as well at very low fixed rates of interest for 10 years from
a mortgage broker of his choice, has not been tested in the market.
That is,
if the DHOS was to be available through a mortgage broker, would the
benefit structure remain the same?
Probably
not.
- More
information on DHOS can be obtained by contacting the Defence Housing
Authority on 1800 802 763 (Australia only) between 8.30am and 4.45pm
(EST), Monday to Friday or by e-mailing your queries to homeowner@dha.gov.au
Lt-Col
David Tyler
Personnel Operations
DGPers-Army, Russell Offices, ACT
How
charges apply
I REFER
to WO2 Shakleton's letter (Army, October 9) regarding Departmental allotment
commission charges.
Commission
is charged on certain types of allotment. The current charges are 2.75
per cent on insurance allotments and 0.55 per cent on health benefit
fund allotments.
The reason
for the smaller commission charge on the latter type of allotment is
because the premiums are usually much higher.
The commission
is a charge on the organisation and not the member.
Its purpose
is to recover the department's costs associated with deducting and effecting
payment to the organisation.
Most organisations
do not pass the charge onto the member, hence the amount deducted is
the amount that is credited to the member's account.
It is an
organisation's own business decision as to whether they pass the cost
onto the member. Defence Health has advised that the Departmental charge
is not passed on to the member.
G. Wise
Assistant Director-Pay Administration
DEFPAC
Portsea
web site
An OCS
Portsea website is now online and requires input from members of all
the classes, from the end of 1951 to the end of 1985.
The site
is located at http://www.ocsportsea.com
and is open to all graduates, non-graduates and staff of the OCS.
Although
the site is developing, the intent and format can be clearly seen, and
it is hoped that the very finite group of ex members of the OCS Portsea
will find it a useful, interesting and valuable medium to graphically
pass on their experiences to the generations that follow.
By the
way - and not even tongue-in-cheek - a request has been sent to Burke's
Backyard (Backyard Blitz) for consideration to improve the environment
of the OCS Memorial Wall, relocated within the last couple of years
from the Portsea site to a (rather austere) area within Duntroon. The
environs of the Memorial Wall become embarrassingly obvious when seen
on the website at "In Memoriam".
Let's see
what we can do!
Lt-Col Rob de Haas
Class of December 1967
What
value is integrity?
RECENTLY
a guest in my house acquired a brand new book imported from France,
belonging to my unit.
He then
lent it to a mate. Now, the book has disappeared - apparently lost,
and neither member will claim responsibility.
My unit
- or myself - will now need to replace the book at great expense.
My biggest
concern is that these personnel have forgotten one of the values our
ADF holds dear. Integrity.
Theft in
any organisation is terrible - the fact that it happens all to freely
in the Army, is even worse.
Pte C. Sloat
Russell Offices, ACT
Mess
dress sought
203RCU,
located at Lancer Barracks in Parramatta, is looking for donations of
used mess dress white jacket for our CUOs and senior NCOs.
If anyone
has a set that they no longer require, or that they have outgrown, please
contact me at:
rcu203@yahoo.com.au
The cadet
unit will pay postage if required.
Lt (AAC) David Field
Training Officer
203 RCU, Parramatta, NSW.
Who
is responsible?
A NUMBER
of issues ago, Army [June 19] ran a story regarding soldiers' debt to
the Army and how legal means would be enforced to recover such debts
that have not been paid.
I have
recently returned from Op Falconer where on numerous occasions I received
cash in advance payments during the six-month period.
I was also
receiving an allowance that I was not entitled to while on operations,
that before my deployment I informed my pay station to cease.
During
the deployment I received two SVAs both within the first two months
where I noticed I was still being paid the allowance that I was not
entitled to. Again I informed the appropriate people to discontinue
the allowance.
During
the final week of my deployment, I was made aware that none of my cash
in advances had been recovered from my pay during my six-month deployment
and that the allowance that I was not entitled to had not been ceased.
I was in
debt to the Army some $4000, which is being deducted from my pay since.
On my return
to work I reviewed my SVAs and noticed that the debt I owed the Army
had increased from one pay period to the next.
I was informed
that my allowances were not ceased on return from my deployment on the
correct date, so yes I am in debt to the Army again.
I have
spoken to numerous people that were on the same deployment with similar
pay issues.
I find
it humorous that the Army can suggest legal process to recover debts
when it is the Army system that is the source of these pay dilemmas.
All members
of the ADF are expected to perform their duties effectively and professionally,
failure to do so may result in disciplinary charges.
Are the
individuals that fail to pay our members correctly being charged?
Sgt Scott Thomas
1 Cdo Regt
Randwick Barracks, NSW
Ask
the Chief
Would you
like to ask CA Lt-Gen Peter Leahy a question? It could be about acquisitions
or uniform, operational tempo or a general welfare issue.
As part
of hearing soldiers' views, CA has agreed to start Ask the Chief
in Army newspaper.
He wants
to know your questions so he can answer them in a future edition as
part of his look back at what the Army has achieved and been part of
in 2003.
As with
Letters to the Editor, it is the right of all soldiers to ask CA a question
through Ask the Chief in Army without using the chain of command.
Submit
your questions in e-mail form to armynews@defencenews.gov.au
with "ask the chief" in the subject line.
From
the kids...
 |
Dear
Brave Skippy,
I am against the war but I admire your courage and determination.
Every night just before I go to sleep I think of you and say a BIG
THANK U because your doing it for all the jr. skippies. Keep on
punching we know you'll get through it. We cant wait for your return.
You are my idol and I wish I could have as much courage as you have.
Yours sincerly
Matthew BURNS age:13
P.s I'll have a VB waiting, its yours.
|
|
