Showing posts with label Liberal Party of Australia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Liberal Party of Australia. Show all posts

Wednesday 31 January 2018

Abbott on immigration


One of Australia's most notorious subsidised migrants now wants to close the door on others....

Monday 29 January 2018

One of the IPA's unofficial attack dogs is attempting to savage the charity sector once again


The Guardian, 24 January 2018:

The Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission has pushed for new powers to regulate charities' "effective use of resources" under its controversial new commissioner, Gary Johns.

The charities sector is up in arms over the proposal, seen as an attempt to control how charities spend their money from a commissioner who has argued that it is not appropriate for charities to fund advocacy.

In its submission to a review of charities law, the ACNC called for two new objects: to promote "the effective use of the resources of not-for-profit entities"; and to "enhance the accountability of not-for-profit entities to donors, beneficiaries and the public".

The ACNC's objects now are to maintain public trust in and the independence of the sector and to promote the reduction of "unnecessary regulatory obligations" for charities.

The commission argued the expanded scope was "appropriate" because "the maintenance and promotion of the effectiveness and sustainability of the not-for-profit sector" was already a factor the commissioner must consider when making decisions.

It said the new objects should come with additional powers, functions and resources.

The Community Council for Australia's chief executive, David Crosbie, said the proposed objectives were "incredibly disappointing" and amounted to a "bizarre overreach" from the regulator.

He said there was "no explanation" of how the ACNC would measure an "effective use of resources".

"It's not the role of a government regulator which may not agree with a particular charity's approach – it's absurd that should tell them how to use their resources," he said.

"As long as charities are meeting their statutory requirements and fulfilling their charitable purpose it is not up to the regulator."
He added: "The use of resources is best left up to charities, the communities they serve and their own governance structures."

Johns was a Labor minister under the Keating government and a former head of NGOWatch at the Institute for Public Affairs. After his appointment in December, Johns said when people gave to charities they expected that "most of [the donation] will be used for the charitable purpose … [and that] the work that is undertaken on behalf of a donor works". He promised to bring those matters "to the fore" in his work at the ACNC.

In 2014 Johns argued that the government should remove advocacy as a charitable purpose to "deny charity status to the enemies of progress", citing the fact the Environmental Defenders Office Queensland advocates against coal mining.

In his 2014 book The Charity Ball, he said advocacy was of "doubtful public benefit". He criticised larger charities "whose service delivery is heavily weighted towards advocacy, research, campaigning and lobbying", including World Vision Australia, the Australian Conservation Foundation and Amnesty International Australia.

Crosbie said Johns' public statements demonstrated that he believed "charities should not be advocating for extra funding from government".
He suggested that advocacy for more housing for homeless people and spending on mental health services were examples of activities that could come under attack.

Crosbie, who served on the ACNC's advisory board for more than three years, said the original objects had been developed after thorough consultation and "not once" had stakeholders suggested adding the new objectives in the ACNC submission.

Labor's charities spokesman, Andrew Leigh, accused the government of an "ongoing war on charities" and said it was "worrying that the new commissioner's first actions have already put the sector offside".

Wednesday 3 January 2018

A professed 'Christian' man named in at least one human rights complaint to the International Criminal Court vows to defend Christianity in 2018


The Sydney Morning Herald, 22 December 2017:

Scott Morrison says he will fight back against discrimination and mockery of Christians and other religious groups in 2018, in comments that position him as one of the leading religious conservatives in the Turnbull government. 

Mr Morrison also promised to play a leading role next year in the debate about enshrining further "protections" for religious freedom in law, which will be informed by a review currently being led by former Attorney-General Philip Ruddock.

For overseas readers who may not know this man, he is enthusiastic Hill Song Church devotee, Liberal MP for Cook, former Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, former Minister for Social Security and current Australian Treasurer Scott John Morrison.

On his ministerial watch alleged human rights abuses occurred in overseas detention centres on Manus Island and Nauru. These incidents included deaths of asylum seekers such as that of Reza Berati.

Alleged abuses continue to be reported to this day.

In a 2016 communique to the International Criminal CourtScott Morrison, along with Malcolm TurnbullTony AbbottKevin RuddJulia GillardJohn HowardPeter DuttonTony BurkeBrendan O’ConnorChris BowenChris EvansKevin AndrewsAmanda VanstonePhillip RuddockBaron Waqa and Rimbink Pato, was named as administrating authority having responsibility in relation to the offence of unlawful confinement.

Tuesday 2 January 2018

Australia's greenhouse gas emission abatement record goes far beyond disheartening


In 1990 Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions were calculated at 547.7 million tonnes (Mt), CO2 -equivalent (CO2-e). This represented 32.1 tonnes CO2-e per head of population.

In the following years emissions rose and fell in response to economic and environmental factors, so that in 2005 annual emissions totalled 584.2  Mt CO2-e or 28.6 tonnes CO2-e per head of population.

By 2007 these annual emissions had risen to 597.2 Mt CO2-e. That was 28.3 tonnes CO2-e
 per head of population.  [Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 4613.0 - Australia's Environment: Issues and Trends, Jan 2010]  

In 2008 total greenhouse gas emissions were still climbing to reach 618.1 Mt CO2-e.

Total greenhouse gas emissions were still high in 2009 with an annual total of 599.8 Mt CO2 -e.

At the close of 2010 national emissions had fallen to 543 Mt CO2–e for the year.

Then by the end of 2011 annual greenhouse gas emissions came to 546.3 Mt CO2–e.

Annual emissions for the year to December 2012 were estimated to be 551.9 Mt CO2-e

In 2013 annual greenhouse gas emissions were estimated to be 538.4 Mt CO2–e.

2014 saw annual emissions reach an estimated to be 535.9 Mt CO2–e.

Come 2015 and annual greenhouse gas emissions totalled 529.2 Mt CO2-e. This gives an estimated 21.1 tonnes CO2-e per head of population. [Dept. of the Environment and Energy, Progress of the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory]

However, Australia’s Emissions Projections 2017 report released last December by the Turnbull Government states in part:

“Australia’s emissions have risen in the past three years. A major factor in this growth has been the rapid expansion of the LNG sector.”

“Total emissions in 2030 are projected to be 570 Mt CO2-e.”

Back in 2015 the Australian Government promised to reduce annual greenhouse gas emissions to 26-28 per cent on 2005 levels by 2030. Based on ABS data that should equate to an estimated annual emissions level of 420.7 Mt CO2-e to 432.4 Mt CO2–e in 2030 or between 20.6 to 21.2 tonnes CO2-e per head of population.

Instead the latest report is indicating that Australia’s emissions are expected to exceed not only the base line 1990 level but also the 2005 annual greenhouse gas emissions level, with per capita emissions remaining static at approximately the 2015 figure.

It appears that policy efforts of the last twenty-seven years have been for nought, because it looks for all the world as though Turnbull & Co have abandoned any pretence they care about genuine, effective emissions reduction.

If the current federal government and industry had to sit a climate change mitigation exam today they would likely receive an F for failure  from the examiners.

UPDATE

National Greenhouse Gas Inventory data for 2016-17 show that Australia's greenhouse gas emissions stood at 550.2 Mt CO2–e as of September 2017, a 1.3% rise on the 2015-16 annual emissions total. The 2016-17 per capita estimate was 22.5 Mt CO2–e per person.

Friday 15 December 2017

"Inequality is neither a personal choice nor a national tragedy. It is a choice governments make"


Chief executive of the St Vincent de Paul Society national council Dr John Falzon, writing in The Guardian on 13 December 2017:

In 1952 a Catholic newspaper in Ireland proclaimed: “The welfare state is diluted socialism and socialism is disguised communism.”

Extreme? Yes. Dated? No. When you listen to the dying declarations of the spear-carriers for neoliberalism, it’s hard not to hear the same alarmist codswallop.

The logic goes like this: being unemployed and poor is bad because people choose to be unemployed or poor. If you receive income support, it is because you are unemployed and poor. Therefore, receiving income support is bad. Therefore, removing income support is good. Coincidentally, this means more money for the rich and less for the poor.

Social services minister Christian Porter’s recent National Press Club address was replete with denunciations of the “politics of envy” associated with redistributionist policies, as well as the “morally unacceptable” nature of social expenditure because it means placing a debt burden on the children of today to pay off as the adults of tomorrow.

These are old tropes. Joe Hockey used them regularly when he was treasurer. The intergenerational framework is always going to be a useful means of distracting from the uncomfortable reality of class inequality in the current generation.

A false divide is constructed between those who have a job (and pay taxes) and those who don’t.

It is time that we did away with this fictitious divide. It was always false. It implied that the low-paid cleaner had more in common with the mining magnate than with the person who is locked out of the labour market.

But now, especially as we try to understand the future of work and the massive changes to the structure of the labour market, it is time we consigned this nonsense to the rubbish bin of ideological history.

People who are low paid, casually employed, underemployed, unemployed, informally employed, on dodgy contracts, women who work as unpaid or low-paid carers, students who take whatever work they can get and remain silent about the indefinite training wages, sole parents, people with a disability, aged pensioners, veterans; all have more in common with each other and with other members of the working class than we dare admit.

By recognising this commonality, we can begin to reframe the way in which so-called welfare dependency and the “injustice” and “immorality” of social expenditure is presented. This is crucial at a time when the government has ruled out increasing the woefully inadequate Newstart payment, which has not seen an increase in real terms since 1994 .

The discussion needs some perspective. We have a minimum wage that sits at around 40% of the average weekly earnings and a Newstart payment that sits at around 40% of the minimum wage. The minimum wage is not a living wage and the unemployment benefit is not even a pale shadow of a living wage. And we see the consequences at the St Vincent de Paul Society every day, where topping up from charitable assistance has become the norm for many people simply to survive.

We need a solid jobs plan, and full employment should be a policy priority. Instead we keep getting served up a putting-the-boot-into-the-unemployed-plan and a slashing-social-expenditure-plan. Behavioural approaches won’t fix structural problems. The government can blame people all they like but this won’t address the inequality many are burdened with, as wages are suppressed and profits soar, buttressed by tax cuts, wage cuts and social expenditure cuts….

Our social security system was built in very different structural circumstances. The labour market is different. Work is different. We should be embarking on a serious reframing of how we can, collectively and with common resources, achieve social and economic security for everyone. We need, for example, to explore how government might play a leading role in achieving full employment instead of harassing the people who have been structurally excluded from jobs.

There is nothing innovative about marginalising people who are already made to feel that they have been stigmatised through drug-testing and cashless welfare cards.

There is nothing smart about a program like Path that uses young people for six months as cheap labour and then discards them.

We need to build a way forward that ensures that no one misses out on the essentials of life: a place to live, a place to work (or income adequacy for those who cannot engage in paid work), a place to learn (from early childhood through to university and TAFE), and a place to heal.

This means not just leaving these essentials to the whims of the market but actively ensuring that no one is excluded. This is an economic as well as a social imperative.

Inequality is buttressed and boosted by unfair rules that must be changed. We need to imagine a future predicated not on the perpetuation of inequality but the provision of social and economic security.

Inequality is neither a personal choice nor a national tragedy. It is a choice governments make.

Read the full article here.

Thursday 14 December 2017

Effect of proposed company tax cuts according to Australian Prime Minister Malcom Bligh Turnbull - "All boats will rise"



As households across the country began the count down to the holiday season, Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Bligh Turnbull smugly informed an ABC interviewer that as a result of a proposed cut in the company tax rate* everyone’s income will increase – “All boats will rise”.

This is another way of referring to that now legendary faux economic theory popular with right-wing politicians – the Trickle Down Effect.

This assertion is tested in an Australian Treasury working paper ANALYSIS OF THE LONG TERM EFFECTS OF A COMPANY TAX CUT (May 2016) which modelled a tax cut reducing company tax from 30 per cent to 25 per cent – presumably implemented over the 10 years to 2026-27 proposed by government.

Yes, this working paper estimates that for “a static representative household” “calibrated to match the expenditure, income patterns, and taxes faced by aggregate Australian households” real wages will rise if all other factors in the economy remain unchanged.

So it seems that Turnbull's claim is genuine - or is it?

What Turnbull fails to say is that this “real” wage rise will probably be a paltry est. 1.0-1.1% in total, will take at least 20 years to achieve and will only come about if the average individual also works longer hours.

Based on ABS May 2017 All Employees Average Weekly Total Earnings and an optimistically estimated average annual wages growth of 1.9 per cent; at the end of those 20 years an average worker will have received a total wage increase of est. $851 to $929. Spread out over those 20 years that works out to between 81-89 cents a week extra in his/her pay packet as a direct result of the Turnbull Government’s company tax cut.

Because in real life these company tax cuts are staged and, each stage would have a lag time, no-one is going to see 81-89 cents in their pay packets anytime soon. Indeed a great many people will probably never see this meagre increase at all as the real wages of many low-skilled workers haven't increased alongside higher-skilled workers for the last seven years and there is no indication as to if or when this trend will end.

Over this same twenty-year time period any increase in company income as a result of a 5 per cent cut in the company tax rate would result in millions to one billion plus being added to the bottom lines of a significant number of medium to large corporations. With such savings being just as likely to be diverted into bonuses paid to senior management or paid as dividends to shareholders as they are to being reinvested in a business.

Once more proving that tax cuts for industry, business and those individuals wealthy enough to incorporate their landholdings/investments, have what is essentially a neutral outcome for rest of the population.

Company tax cuts will hardly stir the water beneath those metaphorical boats belonging to ordinary workers.

Therefore this classic illustrative meme still stands under the Turnbull Coalition Government:


Something to remember when it comes time to vote in the next federal election.


Tuesday 12 December 2017

"What alternate universe does the Australian Treasurer inhabit?


According to AMP chief economist Shane Oliver “consumer spending is being dragged down by low wages growth, slowing wealth accumulation, poor sentiment, high debt levels and rising energy costs."

In the 2017 September quarter households were spending less on clothing, footware, health, furnishings, household equipment, entertainment, dining out and alcohol - as the pressure on disposable income bites.

Yet this is the Australian Treasurer in December 2017……………
The Sydney Morning Herald, 6 December 2017

Monday 11 December 2017

Turnbull Government's gift to welfare recipients this Christmas? More pain....


Nothing like receiving bad news in the lead up to the festive season......

News.com.au, 6 December 2017:

CONTROVERSIAL plans to drug test unemployed welfare recipients will be suspended indefinitely after the Senate refused to endorse the idea.

The Turnbull government had hoped to drug test 5000 Newstart and Youth Allowance recipients across three trial sites in NSW, Queensland and Western Australia from January.
But Social Services Minister Christian Porter indicated this morning provisions for the pilot will be stripped from an omnibus welfare bill and dealt with separately, so other measures can be signed off by Christmas.

“There are some difficulties that are going to be presented in getting that part of the bill through the Senate, but that does not mean that we are abandoning drug testing,” Mr Porter told Sky News.

“No one can be perfectly certain with these things but my best assessment is the rest of it, everything other than drug testing, will likely succeed through the Senate.”

Minister Porter stood by the trial last month but indicated it might be split from other reforms that were crucial to overhaul the “near to dysfunctional” welfare system.

“The bulk of that bill, which reforms the compliance system, is so critical to what we are trying to achieve that I wouldn’t want to sacrifice the bulk of that in terms of timeliness while we are still negotiating around drug testing,” Mr Porter said at a National Press Club speech in November.

One reform the government wants to pass as a priority is the new “three strike” demerit point system for welfare recipients that would mean those who continually skipped appointments or job interviews would eventually lose their payments.

Another will fold seven welfare payments into one to become the main payment for people of working age.

That is slated to begin in March 2020.

According to the Australian Council Of Social Services (ACOSS) this bill:

* Sets a dangerous precedent that allows governments to determine who is covered by social security rights and protections and who is not, without legislation;

* Would make it more difficult for people to access payments;

* Will make applicants wait much longer for first payments and, in certain cases this could be as long as 26 weeks;

* Cuts payments to people seeking work by removing back-pay provisions;

* Cuts $478m from social security payments over the forward estimates, with most losses incurred by people who are unemployed and single parents;

* Rolls Wife and Widow B pensions & allowances (including the Bereavement Allowance) into the Jobseeker Payment which will leave pension recipients worse off unless they are transferred to another pension;

* Ensures that the Jobseeker Payment keeps recipients living well below the poverty line so that they will be unable to meet essential costs; and

* The new mutual obligation requirements and breach schedule indicates that annually an est. 80,000 people will lose at least one week’s payment and an unknown number up to four week’s payment.

Sunday 10 December 2017

"Lucifer" Dutton takes up role as Australian Minister for Home Affairs on Sunday 17 December 2017


The Saturday Paper, 6 December 2017:

Attorney-General George Brandis has confirmed immigration minister Peter Dutton will take up the new home affairs “super ministry” on December 17. The home affairs portfolio, announced in July, will give Dutton sweeping powers over Australia’s intelligence, security and border control apparatuses, and has been criticised for centralising too much authority under one figure and stripping the attorney-general position of its ability to hold security agencies accountable. Brandis denied rumours he will retire from politics before the December reshuffle, saying he intended to stay put. Last week a Canberra Times investigation found a web user with an IP address connected to the Australian Taxation Office edited Dutton’s Wikipedia page, briefly changing his middle name to “Lucifer”.

The Home Affairs super portfolio will merge Australia’s immigration, border protection, law enforcement and domestic security agencies in a single portfolio, including spy agency ASIO, the Federal Police, Border Force and the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission - under the control of millionaire former Queensland police officer and Liberal National Party MP for Dickson Peter Dutton, with allegedly increased oversight by Australian Attorney-General and Liberal Senator for Queensland George Brandis.

A political pairing from Queensland which may yet turn out to be the stuff of nightmares, given these two gentlmen's attitudes to human rights and civil liberties.

Mr. Huang Xiangmo becomes terse


After allegedly giving a number of large political donations to the Liberal, National and Labor parties, wealthy Chinese national and former chairman of the Australian Council for the Promotion of the Peaceful Reunification of China, Mr. Xiangmo of Yuhu Group Australia, grows tired of the media attention ………..

Herald Sun via @johhnybridge2

Mr. Xiangmo pictured with some of his many political acquaintances

Photographs sourced from Google Images

Friday 1 December 2017

Pressure mounted in Australia for a royal commission into banks and Turnbull caved


It would appear that some federal government MPs and senators are becoming nervous about their party’s chances at the next general election and are looking for ways to appease the electorate.

So the politically insecure Australian Prime Minister and former merchant banker Malcolm Turnbull announced a Royal Commission into the alleged misconduct ofAustralia’s banks and other financial services entities in order to appease theses nervous nellies on his backbench.

Having been dragged kicking and screaming to this point Turnbull has made quite sure that the carefully worded Terms of Reference hides a scorpion with considerable sting in its tail:

1. c) the use by a financial services entity of superannuation members’ retirement savings for any purpose that does not meet community standards and expectations or is otherwise not in the best interest of members;

This opens the door for a sustained assault over the twelve months this commission is sitting aimed directly at the sixteen industry-based superannuation funds.

These low-fee super funds are supported by Australian unions and, it is no co-incidence that eight of the top 10 list for the 10 years to 30 June 2017 are industry funds.

Industry superannuation funds which the Turnbull Government wants to see transferred to the control of the big four banks.

No wonder the banks are now in favour of this royal commission.

It is being observed in mainstream media that; It is noteworthy that the letter to Morrison from the big four bankchairmen and CEOs seems to have been used as the template for the royalcommission announcement.

Brief Background

ABC News, 28 November 2017:

The calls for a full inquiry have been relentless for years, emanating from a broad section of the community — from farmers, small business and households, jaded and disillusioned with the industry's rampant profiteering, fee gouging and blatant disregard for the law.

How many times can a Commonwealth Bank chairman sincerely apologise for a yet another breach of trust? What, pray tell, will be the cause of next year's?

But the overwhelming reason for an inquiry rests on just one principle — accountability.

What has been forgotten in the endless round of scandals in recent years is that the Australian banking sector is a taxpayer subsidised industry.

It's an industry that pays ridiculously bloated salaries to its leaders; that showers itself with massive bonus payments when profits are soaring but instantly demands taxpayer protection and support when the tide turns. More on that later.

A summary of bank transgressions during the past decade compiled by former Deutsche Bank analyst Mike Mangan at https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4310476/A-Summary-of-Bank-Transgressions-During-the-Past.pdf.

The Guardian, 28 November 2017:

A majority of Australians would support a royal commission into the banks, with this week’s Guardian Essential poll showing 64% in favour, including 62% of Coalition supporters.
With Barnaby Joyce holding out the prospect that the Nationals might formally support an inquiry into the banks when the party room meets next week, and with dissident parliamentary numbers for the proposal building, the new poll finds public support for a banking royal commission has stayed constant for two years.

Support is highest among Labor voters at 72%, and people intending to vote for someone other than the major parties (71%), but there is also clear majority support among Coalition voters and Greens voters – 62%.

ABC News, 28 November 2017:

It seems inevitable that a bill calling for a wide-ranging inquiry into banks, insurers and superannuation providers would pass the Federal Parliament, after another Nationals MP pledges support for it.

Llew O'Brien is one of the fresher faces in the 45th Parliament, but he has parachuted himself into the political spotlight by confirming he would back the proposal from Nationals Senator Barry O'Sullivan.

Mr O'Brien gave his support on the condition the inquiry investigate discrimination by financial institutions against people with mental health problems.

The Australian, 24 November 2017:

Liberal National Party senator Barry O’Sullivan will move a ­motion in the Senate next week to establish a powerful probe into the financial services sector, staring down government opposition and criticism from former prime minister John Howard.

Senator O’Sullivan yesterday hit back at Mr Howard’s labelling of his proposed bank probe as “rampant socialism” after circulating a draft bill to establish a commission of inquiry into the banking sector.

Friday 24 November 2017

Can anyone believe anything Australian Human Services Minister Alan Tudge and his motley crew say?


The New Daily,  21 November 2017:

The Department of Human Services flagged the illegal sale of Medicare details on the dark web almost a fortnight before the illicit trade was exposed in a bombshell media report, The New Daily can exclusively reveal.

Internal emails, obtained under freedom of information laws, reveal that department officials discussed the security issue as early as June 22 – nearly two weeks before revelations that Medicare numbers were being sold online.

On July 4, The Guardian revealed that a dark web vendor was advertising the sale of any Australian’s Medicare number for the bitcoin equivalent of just $22 after exploiting a government system vulnerability.

In the wake of the revelations, Human Services Minister Alan Tudge said that he and his department had only learned of the illicit trade when contacted by a Guardian journalist on July 3.

However, high-priority correspondence within DHS shows that senior officials discussed the trade on the dark net, which is only accessible through a customised browser, nearly two weeks before it made the news.

On June 22, Rhonda Morris, national manager for serious non-compliance, raised the issue with Kate Buggy, national manager for internal fraud control and investigations, and Mark Withnell, general manager of business integrity, as well as several unnamed officials.

In a later email on July 3, Mr Withnell apparently connected The Guardian’s inquiries to the department’s earlier discussions on the issue, writing to colleagues: “This is the one I was mentioning last week.”

It is unclear exactly what DHS knew about the sale of Medicare details on the dark web prior to July’s media report.

Citing exemptions related to law enforcement and criminal investigations, the department redacted most of the content of the emails released to The New Daily.

It refused to release numerous other related emails entirely.

A DHS spokesman denied the department had knowledge of a specific breach in June and said its internal discussions had only related to general matters……

In September, DHS told the Senate that as many as 165 people may have had their Medicare numbers sold to unknown parties, although there had been no unauthorised access of any Australian’s health records.

Last month, a seperate review commissioned by the department recommended beefing up the authentication procedures required to access the online database used by healthcare professionals.

Although the AFP is continuing to investigate the source of the breach, the government has said it was likely the result of “traditional criminal activity” rather than a cyber attack.

In February, DHS was embroiled in controversy after it released the personal information of a Centrelink recipient to a journalist in order to diffuse claims she made in the media.

Sunday 19 November 2017

Post Same-Sex Marriage "Yes" Victory: I want everyone to have the right to discriminate against the LGBTI community


Tony Abbott on Facebook, 15 November 2017:

I always said this was an issue where the Australian people wanted their say and today’s result demonstrates that seeking their views was the right thing to do.
I congratulate the “yes” campaign on their achievement.

The people have spoken and, of course, the parliament should respect the result.
I also thank the 4.7 million Australians who supported marriage between a man and a woman.

Both the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader have pledged their support for freedom of religion.

I look forward to a parliamentary process that improves on the Dean Smith bill to implement same sex marriage with freedom of conscience for all, not just the churches.

So far, this process has been a credit to us as a nation and now needs to be completed in a way that keeps us the best country in the world.

Friday 10 November 2017

Cashless Debit Card problems ignored by Turnbull Government


“For example, data is provided which shows that 55% oftransactions on the cards failed due to insufficient funds (Orima 2017: pA6). That is nearly 21,000 transactions,where people were unable to purchase what they wanted.However, only 1% of failed transactions related to trying to use the card for prohibited purchases. This indicates some hardships and poverty and/or the problem that people did not know what their card balance was, indicating the challenge of money management using this card. Another reported problem related to the need to access phones and internet to find card balances, which can cause many problems for those without phones, phone credit, internet access, or not being in a mobile phone or internet server area.” [Hunt, J, T h e  C a s h l ess  D e b i t  C a r d  Tr i a l  E va l u at i o n : A  S h o r t  Re v i e w]

Yet another voice expressing concerns that the Turnbull Government is ignoring problems with the Cashless Debit Card system.

Opening remarks in Dr Janet Hunt’s (Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, Australian National University, Canberra) submission to the Senate Community Affairs Legislation Inquiry into the Social Services Legislation Amendment (Cashless Debit Card) Bill 2017, 2 November 2017:

Thank you for the opportunity to make this submission. I write as an experienced social science researcher with over 30 years of experience in the fields of international and Indigenous development. I am as concerned about the situation of Indigenous people in Ceduna and the East Kimberley as anyone, and very much want to see their lives improve. I am also very much driven by evidence about what works, and as a social science researcher am concerned that the evidence provided for policy making is the most robust and credible as possible. This is both in order to get the best outcomes, but also to ensure the greatest efficiency in public expenditure.

The proposed legislation seeks to make possible the extension of the Cashless Debit Card trial in Ceduna and the East Kimberley and facilitate the expansion of this program geographically. My concern is whether the evidence of the trial evaluation supports this continuation and expansion, and whether the considerable cost of this program is reaping commensurate benefits. In public policy there are always opportunity costs of any expenditure. In other words, my concern is whether this program is the best way to spend limited public funds to reach a desired outcome or if there are more cost efficient and effective alternatives.

My interest in this was sparked when the Wave 1 Report was released in March this year, and I decided to look at what the evaluation said. I was shocked when I read the report, as the Minister had already announced that the trial was a success and would be continued indefinitely. When I read the report, I discovered that it was extremely flawed and did not provide adequate evidence to draw the conclusions that had clearly been drawn. As I was extremely concerned at the poor quality of the evidence on which the Minister had made his decision, I wrote a critique of the Wave 1 Report, which was peer-reviewed and published by CAEPR. It is this Wave 1 evidence which the Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights relating to this Legislation uses to justify the proposed legislation. I argue that this evidence is flawed, and does not provide a sound basis for continuing the Cashless Debit Card Trial (CDCT) program. Whilst superficially appealing, a careful analysis of the evaluation reveals many problems with the purported findings.

Given my concerns about the quality of the Wave 1 Report and the Minister’s interpretation of data from it, I was naturally interested to read the Wave 2 Report. Just before the report was released, the Minister issued a Press Release which hailed the success of the trial without qualification. But once the Report was public it was clear that the Report’s authors had in fact qualified their positive findings with many caveats which have been completely ignored by the Minister in his public statements about the evaluation. So while I have serious problems with the evaluation design and the data presented, I am also aware that the Minister has ignored important reservations about some of the findings that the Report’s authors did make clear.
This submission outlines many of the shortcomings of the evaluation, both Wave 1 and Wave 2.

Read the full submission here with attachment.

Wednesday 8 November 2017

Australian Attorney-General, Liberal Senator for Queensland and faux Queen's Counsel fails to convince there is a need to change Sec 44 of the Australian Constitution


Commonwealth of Australia Coat of Arms 1912
Now that the High Court of Australia has removed the Leader and Deputy Leader of Coalition partner, the National Party of Australia, it seems the next move by the Liberal Party is to change the rules governing federal elections.

This was Australian Attorney-General, Liberal Senator for Queensland and faux Queen’s Counsel, George Brandis, on 29 October 2017 according to Sky News:

Mr Brandis said while the government accepted the High Court ruling, Section 44 in its current form on citizenship 'is not suitable for a multicultural democracy'.
'Australia is one of the most successful multicultural society in the world…..It is an unusual situation that there should be a provision of our constitution... where there are doubts about the capacity or eligibility of potential millions of Australians to stand for parliament.'

In 1891 the first published headcount of the Australian population occurred. There were 3.17 million people resident in the country and of these 31.99 per cent were born overseas in the United Kingdom, Europe, Asia, Africa, North and South America, Polynesia and New Zealand.

In 1901 the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution which includes Section 44 (disqualification from nominating as a candidate in a federal election/by-election) was adopted and, and the censuses of Australian states were undertaken that same year.

On 31 March 1901 the total combined population of all Australian states was recorded as 3.77 million people with 22.24 per cent of this population identified as being born overseas in the United Kingdom, Europe, Asia, Other Countries and New Zealand.

So right at the beginning of Federation this nation could rightly be considered a “multicultural democracy”.

However, one of the first pieces of legislation passed by the new federal parliament 1901 was the Immigration Restriction Act which was the basis of what became known as the “White Australia Policy”.

Ten years later in 1911 when another national census occurred 4.45 million people were recorded as resident within Australia. Despite immigration restrictions Australia was still maintaining a strong multicultural presence with 17.68 per cent of the population having been born overseas in the United Kingdom, Europe, Asia, Africa, North and South America, Polynesia and New Zealand.

In 1958 the "White Australia Policy" was finally dismantled for good and seventeen years after that the Racial Discrimination Act was pased.

At the 2016 national census there were 23.40 million people recorded as resident within Australia and 28.5 per cent of this population were born overseas in - you guessed it – Europe, Asia, Africa, North and South America, Polynesia (now recorded as Oceania) and New Zealand.

It seems that  with a few hiccups along the way such as restricted immigration, two world wars and the Great Depression – cultural and ethnic diversity by way of immigration has always been a significant part of post-colonial Australian society.

If Senator Brandis wants to convince voters that the Constitution should be changed or additional legislation created, which would allow wannabe politicians free rein to decide to ignore holding dual citizenship and determine for themselves what they can declare or conceal from the electorate on their nomination forms, he will have to think of a better argument than the one he put forward to Sky News.