Good afternoon ladies and gentlemenAs you already know, the topic for this debate is that “the punishment for fare evasion should always be community service, as opposed to fines”We as the affirmative team believe this is a true statement.Unfortunately behind the opposition’s arguments, there is arrogance and a lack of common sense. So before I present my argument for this topic, I am going to outline the obvious flaws in the opposition’s arguments and explain why their case is entirely incorrect.Rebuttal:

I am now going to present my arguments.Today I’ll be discussing the financial framework of fare evasion and how community sentencing is beneficial to the improvement of justice relating to the Victorian Public Transport System. My argument will also encompass the financial benefits of providing a laboured force to not only aid the public but also create an awareness of the consequences of fare evading.

The basic financial framework of any business is structured to accomplish two tasks. Firstly, to provide acceptable and high quality services that accommodates the demands of the customers. Secondly to maximise profit, this can be done in two ways, determining effective methods to increase revenue and to adopt and execute the necessary “loss and prevention” practices. The Victorian Public Transport System is of course attempting to provide affordable services to customers and to eliminate fare evasion.

Lets start with some basic facts, 9.4 percent of commuters fare evade and this costs taxpayers $74 million dollars every year. In February this year, it was determined that more than 21,000 people avoided paying their fines after being booked for fare evasion last financial year. This means that 11.5 percent of issued fines were not paid or enforced. The Victorian Greens party revealed that people, who challenge their infringement notice, have over a 10 percent chance of avoiding the fine. In context to all the “there is no excuse” advertising campaigns, these statistics indicate that the current practices of punishing passengers who fare evade are disgustingly poor and that it is time to introduce new methods in executing justice. Proposed methods such as increasing the fine would be a very ineffective idea, the fine already cost 207 dollars, increasing the fine would only discourage people from paying them.

However, community service not only offers a broad range of financial benefits to the Victorian Public Transport System but also can discourage fare evasion even further. Community work offers the power of a labour force for a very minimal cost. A group of people providing services to the community is much more efficient than collecting 207 dollars that might be paid.

Public Transport Victoria would also be able to make use of the labour force. Fare evaders would be able to provide maintenance services such as cleaning vandalism and sweeping platforms. These tasks require little training as well. The labour force would also be able to assist the disabled who are using public transport and assist passengers with their journeys. The employees of the public transport system are providing many of these services. Therefore, by using a labour force that work virtually for free because of their wrong doings are able to reduce the cost of public transport and maximise the revenue.

The president of the Public Transport Users Association, Tony Morton said that fare evasion is very opportunistic due to the lack of customer service. This is why community service workers are needed. The act of community services is a very public display; this creates an entirely new and innovative method of creating public awareness about fare evasion.

Instead of all the “there is no excuse” campaigns, why not try a more practical and public approach? This would save even more money, it would be more effective for a potential fare evader to see a person working off their offense, rather than watching an over dramatic anti campaigning television advertisement about fare evading.

Not only does the proposition of community service favour financial perspectives but also perspectives encompassing common sense. Community service is definitely a much more suitable practice of punishment than fines that not all people pay. We should not invest in the productivity of variable fines; we should invest in the power of people.