Canberra households are contributing nearly triple the amount of money they were paying five years ago to an increasingly lucrative emergency services levy the ACT government refuses to review.
In reports commissioned by the United Firefighters Union as part of its enterprise bargaining agreement process, public policy expert Professor David Hayward, private consultant Vin Virtue and urban statistician Liss Ralston said the levy was "poorly structured", "inequitable" and in need of "a major overhaul".
While the amount owners of commercial properties contribute to the levy depends on the value of their properties, the owners of residential ACT properties all pay the same amount.
This rate has nearly tripled in the space of five years as the ACT government transitioned to what it called "a more sustainable model" of funding the territory's emergency services.
Residential property owners will be required to contribute $344 towards the levy in 2019-20, up from $130 in 2014-15. Pensioners receive a $98 rebate. Five years ago, they got a 50 per cent discount.
The researchers said charging all residential property owners the same rate for the levy was "inequitable and inefficient for a variety of reasons".
"All households pay the same amount, even though the value of their properties (and contents) varies enormously as does their income, the size of their households as well as their locations," the researchers said in one of their reports.
The researchers said there was "a compelling case for the fire and emergency services levy to be reviewed".
They suggested the ACT government could base a new levy - taking into account each property's value, classification and location - on a successful Victorian scheme that was implemented in 2017.
But asked whether the ACT government planned to review the levy, a spokeswoman for Treasurer Andrew Barr said: "Not at this time".
The researchers who compiled reports for the firefighters' union also expressed concern that money raised through the fire and emergency services levy could be used for other purposes
They said that "by choosing to increase the percentage of the Emergency Services Agency's budget funded out of the fire and emergency services levy without increasing expenditure on these services at the same rate, the ACT government has effectively freed up remaining sources of revenue for spending on non-emergency services".
"If the current situation is allowed to continue it is our view that it will give rise to considerations that the levy or part thereof could be used as a slush or emergency fund to address politically sensitive issues," one of the researchers' reports said.
"Good public sector governance should ensure that such a situation is avoided."
The ACT government has become increasingly reliant on the levy to fund emergency services in recent years.
A spokeswoman for Mr Barr said the government's total expenditure on the emergency services still far outweighed the amount it raised through the levy, implying that concerns about money from it being spent elsewhere were unfounded.
"This financial year, emergency services expenditure is estimated to be around $161 million, while the fire and emergency services levy is expected to raise around $87 million, or 54 per cent of overall expenditure on emergency services," she said.
"In the 2015-16 budget, expenditure on emergency services was around $137 million, while the total amount raised from the [levy] was around $55 million, or around 40 per cent of overall expenditure on emergency services."
She said the ACT government made clear in the 2015-16 budget that it was moving towards "a more sustainable model", whereby between 75 and 80 per cent of emergency services funding would come from the fire and emergency services levy, the road rescue fee and the ambulance levy.
"This has now been achieved," the spokeswoman said.
