Showing posts with label government funding. Show all posts
Showing posts with label government funding. Show all posts

Wednesday 1 March 2017

Tony Abbott MP: the man who lied about a carbon tax is preparing to lie to voters once again


The week former chief of staff to Tony Abbott, Peta Credlin, confirmed that he had deliberately lied when characterising the Gillard Government’s price on carbon as a "carbon tax", The Sydney Morning Herald reported this:

Tony Abbott has laid out a five-point plan for the Coalition to have a chance at the "winnable" next election, including cutting back immigration and scrapping the Human Rights Commission.

In a major speech in Sydney at the launch of a new book, Making Australia Right, on Thursday evening, Mr Abbott gave the clearest signal yet he believed the Turnbull government is failing to cut through with voters, and that the contest of ideas - and for the soul of the modern Liberal Party - between the current and former prime minister has a long way to run.

Mr Abbott noted nearly 40 per cent of Australians didn't vote for the Coalition or Labor in the 2016 election: "It's easy to see why".

In a sign a return to the leadership was on his radar, Mr Abbott set out ideas on how to take the fight to Labor and win back Coalition voters thinking of defecting to Pauline Hanson's One Nation.

"In short, why not say to the people of Australia: we'll cut the RET [renewable energy target] to help with your power bills; we'll cut immigration to make housing more affordable; we'll scrap the Human Rights Commission to stop official bullying; we'll stop all new spending to end ripping off our grandkids; and we'll reform the Senate to have government, not gridlock?"
He said the next election was winnable for the Coalition, however, "our challenge is to be worth voting for. It's to win back the people who are giving up on us". [my highlighting]

So let’s look at this jumble of potential three-word slogans being readied for the next Coalition federal election campaign.

RET –renewable energy target

In 2014 the Abbott Government ordered a review of RET. This review found that RET tends to lower wholesale electricity prices and that the RET would have almost no impact on consumer prices over the period 2015–2030.

Despite Abbott's downgrading of RET targets when he was prime minister, in 2017 the Turnbull Coalition Government (of which Abbott is a member) continues its support of these targets.

According to the Dept of Industry, Innovation and Science network costs are the biggest factor driving up the cost of electricity and  a large part of these higher costs has been the need to replace or upgrade ageing power infrastructure, as most electricity networks were built throughout the 1960s and 1970s.

Housing affordability

In December 2016 the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) recorded 11.3 million houses/units/flats purchased by investors for rent or resale by individuals and a further 1.3 million for rent or resale by others. [ABS 5609.0 Housing Finance]

The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) in June 2015 clearly indicated that purchase of housing stock by investors had increased to almost 23 per cent of all housing stock and, that increased investor activity and strong growth in housing prices were occurring along with an increase in negatively geared investment properties. [RBA, Submission to House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics Inquiry into Home Ownership]

The Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS) put the matter bluntly in Fuel on the fire: negative gearing, capital gains tax & housing affordability - The tax system at both the federal and state level inflates housing costs, undermines affordability, and distorts the operation of housing markets. Tax settings are not the main reason for excessive growth in home prices, but they are an important part of the problem. They inflate demand for existing properties when the supply of new housing is insufficient to meet demand. Ironically, many public policies that are claimed to improve affordability - such as negative gearing arrangements, Capital Gains Tax breaks for investors, and first home owner grants for purchasers – make the problem worse.

Competition between investor-developers recently saw $1.3 million added to the sale price of an older house at a Sydney metropolitan auction.

Although population growth is a factor in competition for housing stock, nowhere in reputable studies or reports can I find mention of immigration levels significantly contributing to this competition.  Which is not surprising, given that natural population increase and increase through migration do not occur uniformly within Australian states & territories and natural increase will outstrip migration in some states and territories in a given year.

Human Rights Commission

On 26 December 1976 the Fraser Coalition Government announced its intention to establish a Human Rights Commission which would provide orderly and systematic procedures for the promotion of human rights and for ensuring that Australian laws were maintained in conformity with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and in order that citizens who felt they had been discriminated against under specific Commonwealth laws such as laws relating to discrimination on grounds of race or sex (but excluding laws in the employment area) would be able to have their complaints examined.

The Commission was created in 1981 by an act of the Australian Parliament and later rebirthed as the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission in 1986 by another act of the Australian Parliament.

Whilst ever no Commonwealth statute exists which sets out the core rights of Australian citizenship the federal parliament continues to fail to guarantee protection against its own legislative or regulatory excesses.

The Human Rights Commission is one of the few points at which ordinary citizens without considerable financial means can seek redress of a wrong or harm done to them.

No new spending

I simply refer readers to Tony Abbott’s economic record in the slightly less than two years he spent as Australian prime minister, when on his watch economic growth was slowing and living standards were falling.

Senate reform

This is Section 57 of the Australian Constitution which would have to be amended and is required to be taken to a national referendum before reform can occur:

Disagreement between the Houses
                   If the House of Representatives passes any proposed law, and the Senate rejects or fails to pass it, or passes it with amendments to which the House of Representatives will not agree, and if after an interval of three months the House of Representatives, in the same or the next session, again passes the proposed law with or without any amendments which have been made, suggested, or agreed to by the Senate, and the Senate rejects or fails to pass it, or passes it with amendments to which the House of Representatives will not agree, the Governor-General may dissolve the Senate and the House of Representatives simultaneously. But such dissolution shall not take place within six months before the date of the expiry of the House of Representatives by effluxion of time.
                   If after such dissolution the House of Representatives again passes the proposed law, with or without any amendments which have been made, suggested, or agreed to by the Senate, and the Senate rejects or fails to pass it, or passes it with amendments to which the House of Representatives will not agree, the Governor-General may convene a joint sitting of the members of the Senate and of the House of Representatives.
                   The members present at the joint sitting may deliberate and shall vote together upon the proposed law as last proposed by the House of Representatives, and upon amendments, if any, which have been made therein by one House and not agreed to by the other, and any such amendments which are affirmed by an absolute majority of the total number of the members of the Senate and House of Representatives shall be taken to have been carried, and if the proposed law, with the amendments, if any, so carried is affirmed by an absolute majority of the total number of the members of the Senate and House of Representatives, it shall be taken to have been duly passed by both Houses of the Parliament, and shall be presented to the Governor-General for the Queen's assent.

The last national referendum held in Australia was in 1999 and cost $66,820,894 according to the Australian Electoral Commission for a vote on two questions.

Like 34 of the 44 referendum questions before them these two questions did not carry. In fact the last referendum questions to be carried were in 1977.

Prospect of successful right-wing reform of the Senate? 

Tuesday 28 February 2017

Australia is an upside down society with skewed values


Australia is an upside down society with skewed values if something like this can occur……

ABC News, 20 February 2017:

The coal industry's multi-million-dollar advertising and lobbying campaign in the run-up to the last federal election was bankrolled by money deducted from state mining royalty payments and meant to fund research into "clean coal".
The mining industry spent $2.5 million pushing the case for lower-emissions, coal-fired power plants in the run-up to last year's election — a cause the Federal Government has since taken up with gusto.
The source of the funds was a voluntary levy on coal companies, originally intended to fund research into "clean coal" technologies, which coal producers could deduct from state mining royalties.
Instead, some of the money raised paid for phone polling, literature and TV ads that declared "coal — it's an amazing thing".
The funds were channelled through the Australian Coal Association Low Emissions Technology Limited (ACALET), formerly owned by the Australian Coal Association and now part of the Minerals Council for Australia.
Queensland Government documents list "the COAL21 levy payable to Australian Coal Association Low Emissions Technologies Ltd (ACALET)" as an eligible deduction against royalty payments in the state…..
Coal21 was launched more than a decade ago, with the aim of creating a $1 billion fund for research into "clean coal" technologies like carbon capture and storage (CCS), but only a fraction of the money was raised or spent.
With a lack of research projects to finance, the levy was suspended in 2012. In 2013, the coal lobby changed the mandate of Coal21 to downplay research and allow its funds to be used for "coal promotion"…….
In the wake of the coal industry campaign, the Federal Government has embraced the push for lower-emissions, coal-fired power stations and is intending to use considerable public money to fund the technology.
It wants the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC), established to fund zero or very low carbon emissions technology, to be able to fund coal projects.
That will require changing the CEFC's current mandate which prohibits funding technology that reduces emissions by less than 50 per cent and excludes funding of coal carbon capture and storage.
The office of the Federal Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg has been contacted for comment.

Wednesday 22 February 2017

What were they thinking?



The  Sydney Morning Herald, 15 February 2017:

What were they thinking? On Monday three members of cabinet called a press conference to pressure the Senate to cut the dole. That's right, to cut the dole. At just $13,750 per year plus an $8.80 per fortnight energy allowance, it's already so low the Business Council believes it "presents a barrier to employment and risks entrenching poverty." The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, the research arm of the world's richest economies, says Australia's unemployment benefit has reached the point where it may no longer be effective in "enabling someone to look for a suitable job".

Even a Coalition-dominated inquiry found a "compelling case" for boosting it.

But the three ministers wanted to deny the energy supplement to new entrants on the spurious ground that this would merely remove "carbon tax compensation for a carbon tax that no longer exists". It wouldn't. The Newstart cost of living increase was cut 0.7 per cent when the energy supplement came in to avoid double counting. If the energy supplement went but the cut remained, new entrants to Newstart would be worse off than if the whole thing had never happened.

And they wanted to withhold Newstart from newly-unemployed Australians aged 22 to 25, paying them instead the lower $11,375 Youth Allowance. The under 25s would have to wait longer too – five weeks instead of the present one.

Rather than spend time arguing the merits of cutting a benefit already so low it can barely be lived on, Treasurer Scott Morrison, Social Services Minister Christian Porter and Education Minister Simon Birmingham delivered instead what amounted to a threat: if the Senate didn't cut the unemployment benefit, they might not fully fund the National Disability Insurance Scheme.

But not at first. In a burlesque twist, they opened the press conference spruiking the case for an unfunded massive company tax cut.

* Images found at Google Images

Monday 20 February 2017

Groundhog Day for women's services in Australia


Since 2013 the Abbott & Turnbull Federal Governments have announced up to $1b in savings measures that are cutting community services for the people in greatest need in Australia:

*$500 million over five years for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community services (Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet under The Hon Tony Abbott and Senator the Hon Nigel Scullion)
*$270 million over four years from social services and a freeze on indexation of sector funding (Department of Social Services under The Hon Scott Morrison)
*$15 million from the community legal sector, which remains in place for sector support and capacity, including legal aid, community legal centres, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander legal services, and women’s family violence legal and prevention services (Attorney General’s Department under Senator the Hon George Brandis)
*Foreshadowed cuts of $197 million over three years from health (Department of Health under The Hon Sussan Ley) [Australian Council of Social Services (ACOSS), 13 January 2017]

The Saturday Paper, excerpt from Federal cuts to family violence reform funding, 11 February 2017:

Just before Christmas, the Women’s Legal Service Victoria was notified that $200,000 of federal funding would be shaved. The service offers pro bono advice, representation and mediation for more than 3000 women each year, women who would otherwise not be able to afford it. They consider themselves a front-line service. “We can’t keep up with demand currently,” Joanna Fletcher tells me. “And this is before the cuts.”
Fletcher is the service’s chief executive. She is both angry and incredulous. “We’re already turning people away,” she says. “And it’s sad, because our service model is about providing service to those with barriers to justice. We’re now having to make decisions about what to cut, about what the least worst options are. We are incredibly frustrated on behalf of our clients. This is very short-sighted. We know from experience that early legal assistance is vital, for the protection of women but also for quicker outcomes.”
It’s a point made by all the family lawyers I spoke to for this piece: those in the legal system without representation spend a lot more time there. As well as diminishing a woman’s protection, it is ultimately costlier, and adds to procedural logjams. “There’s incredible commitment at the state level here,” Fletcher says, “but the apparent federal commitment hasn’t been followed by a financial commitment.” 
Fletcher’s Queensland counterparts have yet to be notified whether their funding will also be cut. They will be told at the end of March, but they are already preparing themselves for the worst. There is the same anger and incredulity there. “We’re absolutely alarmed,” says Angela Lynch, the acting co-ordinator of the Women’s Legal Service Queensland. “A 30 per cent cut would be catastrophic. Currently, we can only answer 50 per cent of incoming calls on our legal hotline. This will only worsen with the cuts. So, that’s much fewer women receiving advice and assistance. We’re a core service, and yet as it is we can’t properly service all women because we’re under-resourced. This is about women’s safety. Their lives.”
She said cuts “don’t make any sense when there’s a national plan, and the PM has made announcements. It makes no sense. We are a front-line service. And we do great work, and we push our money further than any other community service that I can think of. A third of our income is raised by fundraising or corporate partnerships. Up here in Queensland, family violence is still something that’s publicly discussed. There’s the rollout here of the Not Now, Not Ever recommendations. There was the horrific reminder of its importance last week, with the murder-suicide of Teresa Bradford. There’s momentum. But I cannot understand these federal cuts.”
Teresa Bradford was killed by her estranged husband on the Gold Coast. He was out on bail on other domestic violence charges. After Bradford’s death, the Women’s Legal Service Queensland hotline experienced a 50 per cent increase in calls, a spike common in the aftermath of atrocities. “We’re already chronically underfunded,” Lynch says. “When you’re cutting front-line services, you have to ask: is the federal government really committed to reducing family violence? Now we wait. We’ll know on the 31st of March. But we’ve survived for more than 30 years. We’ll fight on.” 
Marlene Ebejer is the principal lawyer of Ebejer and Associates, and a family law specialist. She tells me the cuts will have “diabolical” consequences. “These cuts won’t save money,” she says. “Cutting funding for women’s services cuts legal mediations, which stops things getting to court. This is an atrocious outcome. Already the courts can’t cope. There are massive delays, and delays are extended by those who aren’t represented.” 
Ebejer speaks bluntly, and passionately, about the need for legal reform but tells me that to argue for change is to experience groundhog day. Every lawyer she knows has made the same points for years: in a system where intervention orders fall under the state’s authority, and family law courts are federal, there needs to be improved cross-jurisdictional coherence. She also argues for increased mediation, to decrease the number of matters before court, and for the proper triaging of matters.
Herald Sun, 15 January 2017:
DOMESTIC violence victims and their children in regional NSW could be put at greater risk when federal government funding cuts to legal aid services begin to kick in later this year.
The cuts will also force a legal centre in southern Sydney to axe a program providing free legal advice to international students and immigrants being ripped off by their employers.
The services are among more than 15 centres across the state being forced to axe programs for vulnerable people after the funding cuts take ­affect in July this year.
Elizabeth Evatt Community Legal Centre managing principal solicitor Arlia Fleming said the 19 per cent funding cut at her Katoomba centre would force a massive reduction in services to Bathurst and ­Lithgow.
“Currently we go to Lithgow and Bathurst on a weekly basis to give legal advice and we may have to reduce that to a monthly outreach,” Ms Fleming said.
“The most common cases we deal with are around family and domestic violence issues and this could mean children are left in unsafe situations ­because people feel like they have to hand over their children to someone who has been perpetrating violence.”……
Destroy the Joint, 19 February 2017:



Friday 3 February 2017

So why are the Turnbull & Andrews Governments giving, not loaning, almost a quarter of a billion dollars to Alcoa Corp?


Every blast furnace operator has exactly the same vulnerability - lose power and you lose your primary income producing asset.

But for some reason Alcoa Corp in Victoria was happily smelting along at 85% capacity with no back-up power supply when in early December 2016 along came a storm – a big bad storm like so many these days – and took out the power grid.

The pots that were operational when this happened ‘froze’ and the aluminium inside cooled and solidified.

When the power came back on the Portland plant was only able to work at one third capacity and has since been losing about $1million a day according to media reports.

The corporation stated that this plant will not come back online for at least eight months, that is August 2017.

The Age also reported on 6 January 2017 that:

The outage occurred with remarkable timing – just days after Alcoa's 30-year government-subsidised power contract ended and with power prices set to rise after the closure of the Hazelwood power station.

So it comes as no surprise that the Turnbull Government decided to give, not loan, this approx. 128 year-old New York based multinational company $30 million dollars to continue operating at Portland for another ten years.

The Victorian Government is handing over another $210 million to this corporation and AGL has agreed to a lower price electricity supply price for Alcoa.

Now as I write Alcoa shares on the New York Stock Exchange are $36.47 and rising, with company revenue for the last quarter at $2.5 billion, up 9 percent sequentially, reflecting higher volume in the Company’s rolled products business and higher alumina pricing and a cash balance of $853 million.

Meanwhile rumours are circulating that Alcoa is intending to close the Portland plant by 2020 regardless.


These facts got up the nose of one North Coast Voices reader and he discussed the matter with a mate.

This was the result……

“This was a predictable, preventable & foreseeable occurrence and all the damage was deliberately self-inflicted by management

Every telephone exchange, every ISP, every commercial Data Centre, even every mobile phone tower has backup power.

When the floods hit the Hunter Region of NSW & knocked out power in 2015/6 for a few weeks, the mobile phones kept working - because there weren’t just batteries, there were diesel generators and contractors signed up to refuel them. We know this because it was documented in the Telco community.

So do many more ‘ordinary’ businesses, even high-rise buildings. Not to mention airports & control towers, radio & TV stations and major plant like Oil Refineries.

Grid Power is not, and never has been, a 100% guaranteed service: if that’s a problem for your business, you need to mitigate that commercial risk.
Even if you’re a big factory or industrial site, there will be unplanned outages of the external power supply.
Even something as simple as a vehicle accident taking out a pole, an animal short-circuits

Good managers take out insurance against ‘threats’ to production/income, as an integral part of their formal Risk Management Strategy
This is not odd or extreme behaviour, certainly not in high-value industrial plant….

The Alcoa management right royally screwed over their owners and workers by failing to plan for the inevitable.
And somehow that is now the taxpayer’s responsibility?.....

If Alcoa are “losing $1M/day” from two thirds of its (electric) ‘pot lines’ being ‘frozen’ (the Aluminium set, or ‘froze’) how was unknown to the management?
Every blast furnace operator has exactly the same vulnerability - lose power and you lose your primary income producing asset.

The plant operators will know to the minute how long it takes to do orderly shutdown & startup of the entire production line.
This will be formally documented in fine detail, with many checks & contingencies included.

So why did the management deliberately decide to not ‘mitigate' against this extreme impact event and like thousands of large industrial plants around the country have enough on-site power generation to do a zero-damage shutdown?”

Remembering that Alcoa Australian Holdings Pty Ltd paid no tax and Alcoa Of Australia Limited paid minimal tax  in 2014-15, and probably paid even less last financial year, I think I agree with these two disgruntled men.

I don’t care that on 26 January 2017 The Australian reported that; The head of downsized US aluminium company Alcoa has given a commitment to finding a long-term power solution at its Portland aluminium smelter in the wake of Victoria’s $200 million power subsidy agreement, saying the smelter is “modern and competitive”. The comments were made in the company’s December quarter earnings call on Tuesday night, which discussed a strong result on the back of strong margins and sent shares of its Australian junior partner Alumina soaring 11 per cent to a two-year high.
Foreign-owned Alcoa Corp right royally screwed up and it’s not up to Australian taxpayers to take up the burden of smelter repairs in order to placate the company’s major shareholders.

I don’t care how many shares/units multimillionaire Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull or members of his cabinet might hold in investment companies and banks on that list.


Saturday 24 December 2016

Yet another #TurnbullGovernmentFAIL


Turnbull Government decides Australian taxpayers should fund extremely dubious, irresponsible comment……..

The Guardian, 23 December 2016:

The Turnbull government signed an agreement to make a $640,000 grant to Bjørn Lomborg’s Copenhagen Consensus Centre nine months after plans to establish the centre had been abandoned.

The education department may have been under no legal obligation to make the grant, documents suggest.

The funding was used to support the centre’s post-2015 UN development goals project that found limiting global temperature rises to 2C was a poor investment.

A breakdown of costs released on Thursday shows that $482,000 of the Australian funding was spent on professional fees and services including research, “outreach” and forums.

About $146,000 was spent on travel in an ambitious global project convening seminars to discuss the UN development goals in Bangladesh, Brazil, Colombia, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Mexico, Nigeria, South Africa and New York.

The project formed the basis of Lomborg’s book The Nobel Laureates’ Guide to the Smartest Targets for the World, which is not widely available in Australian shops.

Documents released under freedom of information show the department only entered a formal agreement to fund the project as late as 21 March 2016. Based on those documents and answers provided by the education department it appears the government did not have any ongoing commitment to the project when the Australian Consensus Centre was canned in June 2015.

The government’s plan to establish the Australian Consensus Centre was put into effect in an agreement with the University of Western Australia (UWA) dated 24 March 2015.
But on 26 June 2015 the government and UWA terminated the agreement by consent because the university rejected the funds after a public backlash. The agreement created an obligation for the government to pay UWA’s reasonable costs, but did not create obligations to the CCC.

An education department spokeswoman told Guardian Australia no payments were made to UWA under the agreement.

The $640,000 grant is disclosed in a log of education grants dated 2 July 2015 but the spokeswoman said it was only added after the grant agreement was signed with the CCC on 21 March 2016.

In September 2015 it was referred to in an incoming ministerial brief to Turnbull’s pick for education minister, Simon Birmingham.

“The department has negotiated a funding agreement which will provide a one-off payment to the CCC for a total of $640,000 to cover costs incurred in relation to the establishment of the Australian Consensus Centre prior to the decision to cancel this project,” it said.

When Guardian Australia asked for a copy of the “funding agreement” with the CCC referred to in the briefing, the education department provided the 21 March 2016 agreement.

An education department spokeswoman said “payments were undertaken in accordance with the government’s funding agreement with UWA and the memorandum of understanding between UWA and the CCC”.

The department did not directly respond to questions about how an agreement between the government and UWA and a the memorandum between UWA and the CCC could create legal obligations between the department and the CCC.

If there was another legal obligation to pay the CCC, such as an equitable duty, the education department did not identify it after detailed questions, nor identify its source.

Neither the education department nor Birmingham explained why a new grant agreement was struck on 21 March 2016 if all or part of the $640,000 was owed by the commonwealth for some pre-existing legal obligation……

Thursday 17 November 2016

The 7th Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage report released today


Australian Government, Productivity Commission, 17 November 2016:

In April 2002, the Council of Australian Governments commissioned the Steering Committee to produce a regular report against key indicators of Indigenous disadvantage. The Steering Committee is advised by a working group made up of representatives from all Australian governments, the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples, the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

The Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage report measures the wellbeing of Australia's Indigenous peoples. The report provides information about outcomes across a range of strategic areas such as early child development, education and training, healthy lives, economic participation, home environment, and safe and supportive communities. The report examines whether policies and programs are achieving positive outcomes for Indigenous Australians.

The most recent edition of the report is, Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2016, released on Thursday 17 November 2016.

ABC News, 17 November 2016:

The report points to a failure of policy and oversight, with the commission estimating only 34 of 1,000 Indigenous programs are been properly evaluated by authorities.

Productivity Commission deputy chair Karen Chester told the ABC's AM program the findings are a wake up call for all levels of government about the reality of Indigenous wellbeing and whether the $30 billion budget is being properly spent.

"You want to know that money is being spent not just in terms of bang for buck for taxpayers, but that we're not short-changing Indigenous Australians," Ms Chester said.

"Of over a thousand policies and programs, we could only identify 34 across the whole of Australia that have been robustly and transparently evaluated.

"At the end of the day, we can't feign surprise that we're not seeing improvement across all these wellbeing indicators if we're not lifting the bonnet and evaluating if the policies and programs are working or not."

The report is being billed by the commission as "compulsory reading" and the most comprehensive report on Indigenous wellbeing undertaken in Australia….

But Ms Chester says it was now up to state, territory and federal governments to take the report on board to determine what is working and what is failing.

"I think the clock has been ticking for a while already," Ms Chester said.

"We have the data, we have the analysis and we know what indicators are linked to the others."

While the report includes case studies of examples of "things that work", it says the small number available underscores the lack of Indigenous programs that are being rigorously evaluated for effectiveness.


Key points

 This report measures the wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, and was produced in consultation with governments and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Around 3 per cent of the Australian population are estimated as being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin (based on 2011 Census data).

 Outcomes have improved in a number of areas, including some COAG targets. For indicators with new data for this report:
– Mortality rates for children improved between 1998 and 2014, particularly for 0<1 year olds, whose mortality rates more than halved (from 14 to 6 deaths per 1000 live births).
– Education improvements included increases in the proportion of 20–24 year olds completing year 12 or above (from 2008 to 2014-15) and the proportion of 20–64 year olds with or working towards post-school qualifications (from 2002 to 2014-15).
– The proportion of adults whose main income was from employment increased from 32 per cent in 2002 to 43 per cent in 2014-15, with household income increasing over this period.
– The proportion of adults that recognised traditional lands increased from 70 per cent in 2002 to 74 per cent in 2014-15.

 However, there has been little or no change for some indicators.
– Rates of family and community violence were unchanged between 2002 and 2014-15 (around 22 per cent), and risky long-term alcohol use in 2014-15 was similar to 2002 (though lower than 2008).
– The proportions of people learning and speaking Indigenous languages remained unchanged from 2008 to 2014-15.

 Outcomes have worsened in some areas.
– The proportion of adults reporting high levels of psychological distress increased from 27 per cent in 2004-05 to 33 per cent in 2014-15, and hospitalisations for self-harm increased by 56 per cent over this period.
– The proportion of adults reporting substance misuse in the previous 12 months increased from 23 per cent in 2002 to 31 per cent in 2014-15.
– The adult imprisonment rate increased 77 per cent between 2000 and 2015, and whilst the juvenile detention rate has decreased it is still 24 times the rate for non-Indigenous youth.

 Change over time cannot be assessed for all the indicators — some indicators have no trend data; some indicators report on service use, and change over time might be due to changing access rather than changes in the underlying outcome; and some indicators have related measures that moved in different directions.

 Finally, data alone cannot tell the complete story about the wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, nor can it fully tell us why outcomes improve (or not) in different areas. To support the indicator reporting, case studies of 'things that work' are included in this report (a subset in this Overview). However, the relatively small number of case studies included reflects a lack of rigorously evaluated programs in the Indigenous policy area.

Monday 12 September 2016

Turnbull Government fails to think through aged care funding cuts


Another example of the monumental cock-up that that is the Australian Federal Government under Malcolm Turnbull & Co.

Australian Financial Review, 6 September 2016:

The Turnbull government has agreed to review $1.2 billion in aged care cuts after the sector presented modelling showing the effect would be much greater than anticipated. 

As ASX-listed providers blamed the funding squeeze for a 30 per cent drop in the value of their shares, Aged & Community Services Australia president Paul Sadler said modelling revealed the cuts would reduce support per resident per year by 11 per cent, or between $6655 and $18,000. 

He told The Australian Financial Review that the government had indicated it was willing to talk about alternative ways for find the $1.2 billion in savings to what is known as the "aged care funding instrument" announced in the May federal budget. Labor had already given a similar commitment. "The government has started the process of talking to the sector about alternative approaches," Mr Sadler said.

Aged & Community Services Australia is among a number of groups and representatives that have told the government there are better ways to achieve the savings. 

The government concession comes as the trio of listed companies operating in the aged care space – Estia Health, Regis Healthcare and Japara Healthcare – experienced a sharemarket slump that they said was driven by restrictions on what they can charge residents.

The federal Department of Health clarified last Friday that providers could not charge building refurbishment or capital replacement fees on top of existing accommodation charges. 
"It's like you or I paying rent and then being charged extra to fund the cost of maintaining the building in the future," said Grant Corderoy of Stewart Brown, an accountancy firm that conducts a quarterly survey of aged care financial performance……

Aged care funding is complex.

Costs are split into two parts: healthcare and accommodation.

In the first category, funding is largely provided per resident by the federal government based the level of support required according to health needs.

Separately, accommodation is paid for via a refundable loan (paid by the resident), an equivalent daily payment (which is either covered by the government or the resident, depending on capacity to pay) or a combination of both.

There has been bipartisan support in Canberra to deregulate the accommodation part of the equation.

While the amount that can be charged for accommodation has a regulator to monitor pricing levels, residents can agree to pay extra for higher standards of food or services; a glass of wine in the evening or massage therapy, for example.

Some providers have added levies of up to $18 a day for building maintenance and building replacement.

But last Friday the department said these charges should be included into the base accommodation pricing – they could not be charged as "added extras".

The end result is a potential loss of revenue per resident of $4000 to $5000 a year depending on the extent of the additional charge……

Thursday 1 September 2016

Literally millions of Australians in the firing line as Treasurer Scott Morrison continues his assault on the poor


On current settings, more Australians today are likely to go through their entire lives without ever paying tax than for generations. More Australians are also likely today to be net beneficiaries of the Government than contributors - never paying more tax than they receive in government payments.
There is a new divide – the taxed and the taxed nots. [Australian Treasurer & Liberal MP for Cook Scott Morrison, Bloomberg address, "Australia must take action to strengthen our economic resilience", 24 August 2016]

John Passant* writing in Independent Australia on 29 August 2016 is not impressed by Scott Morrison:

THE one sided class war continues. Only the words have changed.

Under Abbott and Hockey it was "lifters and leaners" and "ending the age of entitlement".

The "logic" behind this rhetoric gave us the horror Budget of 2014 and its proposed $80 billion in cuts over time to public health and public education.

Public opposition to that Budget was widespread, and angry. The Abbott Government never recovered and the 18 months of negative polls and the prospect of a Liberal wipe-out at the election, saw Malcolm Turnbull take over and win a bare one seat House of Representatives majority and an unpredictable Senate in the July 2 election.

Treasurer Scott Morrison has found some new weasel words to try to disguise the class war he is leading against the poor, pensioners, the sick, the unemployed and low paid workers.
After years of denying it Morrison has admitted we have a revenue problem, although he called it an "earnings" problem. According to Morrison, the great divide in Australian society is between the taxed and the taxed-nots.

In ScoMo world it is "the taxed" who have been bearing the burden of Budget repair while "the taxed-nots" have been bludging off us. Time for the taxed-nots to pull up their socks and start contributing to fixing the Budget problem.

Just who do Morrison and Turnbull have in mind as the taxed-nots? Could it be the 676 big businesses (36% of the group) which, according to the Commissioner of Taxation’s corporate tax transparency reportpaid no income tax in 2013-14? Not on your life.

Could it be the likes of Don Argus – former Bank of America chairman – and his wife with their tax free pension of $1.2 million a year? Not on your life.

Could it be the 56 millionaires who pay no income tax? Not on your life.

Morrison’s prescription for the earnings problem is not to tax big business and the rich but to cut welfare payments to those who most need them — the sort of people he and others claim pay no tax.

As Duncan Storrar, in replying to one accusation that he pays little or no tax, said on ABC's Q&A:

“I pay tax every time I go to the supermarket. Every time I hop in my car.”

In fact, as I have written previously for IA:

Analysis from NATSEM, contained in the ACOSS report on inequality, shows that Australia’s tax take (including GST as well as income tax) across various income quintiles fluctuates around 25%, with those on lower incomes as a generalisation a bit below and those with higher incomes a bit above that figure. However, it gets worse when we compare the two ends of the income spectrum. The bottom 5% pay 34.2% of their income in taxes while the top 5% pay 30.1% in tax.

In other words, Australia does not have a progressive tax system.

Morrison also argued that there were millions on ‘welfare’ who paid no net income tax. By this he means that the government payments they receive are greater than the tax they pay.
Let’s be clear about this. The sort of people Morrison has in mind – and in his sights – are pensioners, the unemployed, students, the disabled, the homeless, those women fleeing domestic violence, the low paid and the list goes on.

Among these groups, the main people who pay little tax and receive much more in payments and other benefits from government are pensioners — all 2.4 million of them….

Read the full article here.

* John Passant is a former Assistant Commissioner of Taxation in charge of international tax reform in the ATO.

New Matilda, 30 August 2016:

“The new divide – the taxed and the taxed nots”

Here was an opportunity to state categorically that we need to increase our taxes, and to make those who are well-off pay their share. Instead we have been presented with a rambling discourse, dominated by his claim that there is a large proportion of Australians who “go through their entire lives without ever paying tax”.

That is plain wrong.

This year the Commonwealth is budgeted to collect $59 billion in GST, and $25 billion in excise and customs duty on tobacco, fuels and certain imports. That’s around $9,000 a household, in taxes that are practically impossible to avoid. Not even a Carmelite nun can avoid the GST.

And that’s before we consider state taxes such as drivers’ licences and car registration fees, and state and local government property taxes paid directly by homeowners or by tenants through their landlords.

Most of these taxes are regressive. The lower one’s income, the higher is the proportion of that income devoted to consumption and therefore to paying the GST, and the registration fees for a Corolla and a Porsche are pretty much the same.

That’s not to mention road tolls, private health insurance, fees at government schools and higher co-payments in health, all of which are high-cost privatised means of paying what we could be paying more fairly and efficiently through our taxes.

Morrison reluctantly admits that Australia has a public revenue problem, but he fails to acknowledge the yawning gap between what we presently collect in taxes and what we should be collecting if we are to fund adequately the public goods and a social security system appropriate for a high income country.

Our tax collections, as a percentage of GDP, are close to the lowest of all OECD countries – among prosperous developed countries only the USA collects less tax, and contrary to partisan spin, our taxes are falling.

Over the early years of this century Commonwealth taxes were around 24 per cent of GDP, before plummeting to 20 percent during the GFC and recovering to only 22 per cent now.

Read the rest of the article here.

NOTE

The Australian Goods & Services Tax (GST) taxes the final consumer of a good or service. Most unprocessed and raw foods as well as most education, childcare and medical services are GST exempt. The current GST rate is 10 per cent of the retail cost of goods and services and this tax is paid by est. 23.96 million people living in an est.10 million households. This tax is not included in government calculations of how much net tax is paid by any individual after government pensions/benefits/tax concessions received are deducted. Low income individuals/households pay proportionally more GST that middle and high income individuals/households.

[The Conversation, 24 July 2015]

Monday 4 July 2016

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Uniting Care Australia calls for halt to funding cuts targeting fail older people


United Care of Australia calls on the government of the day (whomever that may be) to halt funding cuts.....