This blog is open to any who wish to comment on Australian society, the state of the environment or political shenanigans at Federal, State and Local Government level.
With the help of two transparent autocues Trump read every last line of that speech written for him by someone who had actually mastered the English language.
Regardless of any level of skill displayed by the White House speech writer, this was still a Trump Regime speech so requires basic fact checking, which can be found here.
An interesting snippet from Australian Newspaper History Group, Newsletter, No 90, December 2016, pp.
90.1.3 China (1): Supplement to SMH and Age
On 23 September both the Sydney Morning Herald and the Age carried an eight-page supplement entitled China Watch, which contained China news and views.
The supplement clearly indicated that it had been prepared by the China Daily and that there had been no editorial involvement by the Sydney Morning Herald and Age.
This follows a precedent where in recent years the Sydney Morning Herald and the Age have regularly carried similar sponsored supplements containing news and views of Russia.
90.1.4 China (2): Australian media
Yan Xia, the editor of Vision China Times, a Chinese-language newspaper published in Australia, says a Beijing-based immigration agency was forced to pull an advertisement from his paper because it was regarded as an “anti-China” paper (Australian, 10 October 2016). The Ministry of State Security, the agency in charge of counter-intelligence and political security, had allegedly harassed the agent.
Yan Xia said, “Our lost client illustrates but one of the mounting pressures faced by independent Chinese media in Australia. Tensions have heightened over recent months, with Australia’s Chinese media under pressure to support President Xi Jinping and Beijing’s foreign policy. That pressure is part of China’s exercise in ‘soft power’. Broadly speaking, there are three types of Chinese-language media in Australia.
“The first consists of those that rely on the Chinese government and Chinese commercial ties for revenue. These outlets tend to echo and take their cues from state-run mouthpieces. The second group consists of media directed by religious groups aiming to expose China’s political, educational and socio-economic situation while promoting human rights and religious freedom. And the third is independent of political and religious influence. Its reporting is largely in line with the ideals of Western mainstream media and generally gives holistic views of Canberra’s policies and sentiments.
“Our outfit fits this last category. While independent media outlets are standard in the West, a one-party state cannot accept that media outlets “do not follow directives” and, by its reckoning, do damage to ‘national interests’. In China, national interests are synonyms for ‘the party’s interests’.
“In recent months it appears the Chinese government’s influence in Australia has become more open and, thus, more easily observed. For Chinese media platforms whose goal is to serve as the bridge between the Chinese community and the Australian mainstream, the challenge lies in reporting fairly and accurately on matters of conflict between the two countries. We choose to remain unyielding in our approach, reporting according to Western journalistic ideals. This has been tested during recent times, which have seen a deluge of articles examining issues that Beijing considers unpalatable.”
It’s been half a decade since the co-founder of Avaaz, Eli Pariser, first coined the phrase “filter bubble,” but his prophetic TED Talk — and his concerns and warnings — are even more applicable now than they were then. In an era of fake news, curated content, personalized experiences, and deep ideological divisions, it’s time we all take responsibility for bursting our own filter bubbles.
When I search for something on Google, the results I see are quite different from yours, based on our individual search histories and whatever other data Google has collected over the years. We see this all the time on our Facebook timelines, as the social network uses its vats of data to offer us what it thinks we want to see and hear. This is your bubble…..
Filter bubbles may not seem too threatening a prospect, but they can lead to two distinct but connected issues. The first is that when you only see things you agree with, it can lead to a snowballing confirmation bias that builds up steadily over time.
They don’t overtly take a stance, they invisibly paint the digital landscape with things that are likely to align with your point of view.
A wider problem is that with such difference sources of information between people, it can lead to the generation of a real disconnect, as they become unable to understand how anyone could think differently from themselves.
A look at any of the left- or right-leaning mainstream TV stations during the buildup to the recent election would have left you in no doubt over which candidate they backed. The same can be said of newspapers and other media. In fact, this is true of many published endorsements.
But we’re all aware of that bias. It’s easy to simply switch off or switch over to another station, to see the other side of the coin.
Online, the bias is more covert. Google searches, social network feeds, and even some news publications all curate what they show you. Worse, it’s all behind the scenes. They don’t overtly take a stance, they invisibly paint the digital landscape with things that are likely to align with your point of view…..
This becomes even more of a problem when you factor in faux news. This latest election was one of the most contentious in history, with low-approval candidates on both sides and salacious headlines thrown out by every source imaginable. With so much mud being slung, it was hard to keep track of what was going on, and that was doubly so online, where fake news was abundant.
This is something that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has tried to play down, claiming that it only accounted for 1 percent of the overall Facebook news. Considering Facebook has near 2 billion users, though, that’s potentially a lot of faux stories parroted as the truth. It’s proved enough of an issue that studies suggest many people have difficulty telling fake news from real news, and in the weeks since the election, both Google and Facebook have made pledges to deal with the problem.
Also consider that 61 percent of millennials use Facebook as their main source of news, and you can see how this issue could be set to worsen if it’s not stoppered soon…..
While Zuckerberg may not think fake news and memes made a difference to the election, Facebook employee and Oculus VR founder Palmer Luckey certainly did. He was outed earlier this year for investing more than $100,000 in a company that helped promote Donald Trump online through the proliferation of memes and inflammatory attack advertisements. He wouldn’t have put in the effort if he thought it worthless.
Buzzfeed’s analysis of the popular shared stories on Facebook shows that while fake news underperformed compared to its real counterparts in early 2016, by the time the Election Day rolled around at the start of November, it had a 1.5 million engagement lead over true stories.
That same analysis piece highlighted some of the biggest fake election stories, and all of them contained classic click-baiting tactics. They used scandalous wording, capitalization, and sensationalist claims to draw in the clickers, sharers, and commenters.
That’s because these sorts of words help to draw an emotional reaction from us. Marketing firm Co-Schedule discovered this back in 2014, but it’s likely something that many people would agree with even without the hard numbers. We’ve all been tempted by clickbait headlines before, and they’re usually ones that appeal to fear, anger, arousal, or some other part of us that isn’t related to critical thinking and political analysis. Everyone’s slinging mud from within their own filter bubbles, secure in the knowledge that they are right, and that everyone who thinks differently is an idiot.
And therein lies the difficulty. The only way to really understand why someone may hold a different viewpoint is through empathy. But how can you empathize when you don’t have control over how the world appears to you, and your filter serves as a buffer to stories that might help you connect with the other side?
Reaching out to us from the past, Pariser has some thoughts for those of us now living through his warning of the future. Even if Facebook may be stripping all humanity from its news curation, there are still human minds and fingertips behind the algorithms that feed us content. He called on those programmers to instill a sense of journalistic integrity in the AI behind the scenes.
“We need the gatekeepers [of information] to encode [journalistic] responsibility into the code that they’re writing. […] We need to make sure that these algorithms have encoded in them a sense of the public life, a sense of civic responsibility. They need to be transparent enough that we can see what the rules are and […] we need [to be] given some control.”
That sort of suggestion seems particularly pertinent, since it was only at the end of August that Facebook laid off its entire editorial team, relying instead on automated algorithms to curate content. They didn’t do a great job, though, as weeks later they were found to have let a bevy of faux content through the screening process.
While it may seem like a tall order for megacorporations to push for such an open platform, so much of a stink has been raised about fake news in the wake of the election that it does seem like Facebook and Google at least will be doing something to target that problematic aspect of social networking. They can do more, though, and it could start with helping to raise awareness of the differences in the content we’re shown…..
We’ve all heard about “fake news” and how it now pervades our daily life.
What we are not always aware of is how social media sites like Facebook aggregate the news to focus on what our browsing history tells it we may like and, how it indiscriminately serves up these fake sites as genuine news in the feeds it presents online.
Fake news sites are not satire or comedy - they have been deliberately created to sway public opinion and voted intention.
Here's the thing: Facebook is using an algorithm to provide you "news" that it thinks you want to see. So, if Facebook has identified you as someone who supports Trump, it will pump in things like this deceptively-edited clip that you will, almost certainly, take as gospel truth. You likely won't dig deeper into the story to make sure that the clip is legit; it affirms your view that Obama and Democrats are bad and are encouraging illegal behaviour and, therefore, requires no checking. It's literally too good to check.
This creates a dangerous echo chamber during periods of social or political unrest and even during run-of-the-mill election campaigns.
The mainstream media – now bereft of the financial and journalistic manpower resources in had in former times to explore or fully investigate issues often becomes part of that echo chamber.
Thus we find the likes of Anthony John Abbott and Donald John Trump (who were either enthusiastically promoted in the media or not critically evaluated sufficiently) elected to the most powerful positions in their respective countries.
I have to honestly say that in my opinion Facebook since its inception has been the worst offender when it comes to promoting extreme right-wing or downright fascist politicians, falsely labelled lobby groups and fake news sites.
To date Facebook’s alleged response to public criticism of its news algorithm has been less than effective.
I suggest that Australian readers of online news who wish to keep abreast of genuine domestic and international news reports avoid Facebook until Mark Zuckerberg demonstrates he is serious about delivering legitimate news on his social media platform.
Last Sunday, Malcolm Turnbull sent out an email — Re: “My Dad” — inviting us all to reflect upon and share the story of his upbringing by his late father, Bruce. It was a deliberate decision by the Prime Minister to personalise the election campaign. The exercise was well calculated, but a couple of lines, about Bruce Turnbull in particular, were noticeably selective.
“We didn’t have much money. He was a hotel broker and for most of that time he was battling like a lot of people are — a lot of single parents are, certainly. He did well after a while. In the latter part of his life he kicked a few goals after a lot of effort …”
Malcolm Turnbull the politician has consistently downplayed his father’s success as a small businessman, and the substantial inheritance he received when Bruce died in a plane crash near Gloucester in 1982, age 56.
While researching my biography of the Prime Minister, Born to Rule, I spoke with old friends and business associates of Bruce. They remembered a fit man’s man, sharp witted and deal savvy. Many profiles over the years make the easy assumption that Malcolm Turnbull inherited his celebrated intelligence from his mother, the actor, writer and academic Coral Lansbury.
Having spoken to some of Bruce’s mates, I am not so sure.
Prestige property agent Bill Bridges, who has sold and resold many of Sydney’s best homes over a career spanning 50 years, was in a running club with Bruce that included Bruce Gyngell and NSW Supreme Court judge John Sackar. Bridges told me that “there was no one more streetwise than Bruce Turnbull, and that’s the best education you can get”.
Bruce Turnbull was a country boy and former electrician from Maitland, near Newcastle, who came to Sydney in his twenties. Bruce truly was self-made. He married Coral a year after Malcolm was born in 1954 and for the most part the couple lived in a flat on New South Head Road, Vaucluse, in Sydney’s salubrious eastern suburbs, which land title records show Bruce co-owned through a private company.
Young Malcolm lived here happily, walking to and from Vaucluse Public School. In 1963, he was sent to board at Sydney Grammar’s preparatory school at well-to-do but distant St Ives. What he would not have known is that his parents’ marriage was failing. Coral had fallen in love with another academic and she left Bruce suddenly, taking the furniture — and the cat — and moving to New Zealand, where she remarried.
This was undoubtedly a tough time for Bruce and his son. They moved out of the Vaucluse flat and into a series of rented flats — including one in Gladswood Gardens, a red-brick block in a dead-end street in Double Bay.
During the next five years, Bruce’s hotel business really hit its straps and by 1970, when Malcolm was in Year 10, he had bought a luxurious three-bedroom apartment in Point Piper — a stone’s throw from the waterfront mansion Malcolm Turnbull lives in now. The apartment had smashing water views and cost Bruce $36,000. Today it is worth millions. When not boarding at Randwick — where he moved once he reached high school — this was Malcolm’s base for most of the next decade.
Bruce added to his portfolio in the 1970s, buying a unit in Bellevue Hill and two houses in Randwick. He almost doubled his money on a slice of the historic Hermitage Estate in Vaucluse, which he sold within 18 months to a company owned by Kerry Packer, a powerful early patron to his son.
Malcolm, who worked as a journalist through his years of law study, inherited his father’s penchant for property investing, and started early: at age 23 he bought a semi-detached house in inner-Sydney Newtown for almost $50,000 and at age 25 he bought a Redfern terrace for $40,000. He sold both for tidy profits. Turnbull bought his own first home, for an undisclosed sum in Potts Point, after returning from his Rhodes scholarship at Oxford University and marrying Lucy Hughes.
Bruce Turnbull was semi-retired by 1982, when he laid down almost $600,000 to buy a stunning farm at Rossgole, near Scone, which Malcolm has since expanded and which ABC viewers have seen on Australian Story and Kitchen Cabinet.
It is difficult to get the full picture of Bruce’s estate because it was accumulated before property records were computerised, and pre-ASIC. But friends say he, like many a real estate agent, would keep the best hotel deals for himself and his partners, picking up watering holes in thirsty locations like St Marys in Sydney’s west, Warners Bay at Lake Macquarie, and Newcastle……
Malcolm was also a hotel licensee, and on top of all this was getting a steady income stream from a 10 per cent share of the earnings from his broking licence, which he had contracted out…..
A glowing 1988 magazine profile estimated Turnbull inherited about $2 million when his father died, which would be worth almost $7m in today’s dollars. To inherit such a sum at the age of 28 is a life-changing event in anyone’s language. Turnbull went on to make a motza, but people who knew both father and son well point out, “he inherited a motza, too”……
Certainly Turnbull carried some resentment at his father. A flash of insight comes from an unpublished screenplay about the 1986 Spycatcher trial, by Turnbull’s old friend the late Bob Ellis and Stephen Ramsay. The script was written with the creative collaboration of Malcolm. It is fascinating to read a section where Malcolm, talking to his wife during a low point in the trial, throws down his whisky glass in despair, smashing it, and tells Lucy:
Malcolm: I wish dad was alive.
Lucy: (alarmed by this) You hated him.
Malcolm: I know. (Getting up, punching the door) But I didn’t want him dead. Not so soon.
After his success in the Spycatcher case, Turnbull turned his back on his promising career in the law and used his inheritance to set up a cleaning company, Allcorp, with then recently resigned NSW premier Neville Wran. He also founded a merchant bank with Nicholas Whitlam, son of the former prime minister (both Packer and Larry Adler gave their financial backing for a short time).
Striking out on his own, Turnbull was hungry and savage. Packer famously said he would not like to come between the young Malcolm and a sack of gold. It was not the trappings of wealth he was chasing but the substance: the independence of not having to work for someone else and the security that comes with prime real estate.
Malcolm had his father’s nose for a deal. During the next 15 years, he made a fortune as a merchant banker, as an adviser to Fairfax, an investor in unbelievably risky ventures such as logging in the Solomon Islands and gold mining in Siberia, and as an early backer of OzEmail and shareholder and partner in Goldman Sachs, where he helped Rodney Adler sell doomed insurer FAI to HIH.
By 1999, Turnbull had debuted on the BRW Rich List with a fortune of $65m. After Goldman Sachs listed on the New York Stock Exchange the following year, Turnbull’s fortune was bumped up to $90m, and that was conservative. It has more than doubled since, mainly by appreciation. The building blocks were in place by 2001, when Turnbull turned his attention to politics.
Nowadays, people who know Turnbull say he wears his wealth rather like a hair shirt. The PM does not apologise for his success, but he goes close sometimes, acknowledging there are “taxi drivers that work harder than I did”.
The PM consistently downplays his father’s wealth and his inheritance because he wants to underline that he is a self-made man. This is a hot-button issue for voters: they respect someone who gets rich off their own effort, but not someone who inherits.
By any reckoning, Turnbull had unbelievable advantages. Reading through Twitter feed #MalcolmWasSoPoor gives a flavour of the cynicism surrounding Turnbull’s “battler” story. Could Turnbull have done it all without his inheritance? Given his abilities, connections and prodigious work ethic, almost certainly yes. But did he? No.
In 1957 when this article was
published in The Sydney Morning Herald's Women's Section the average
female annual income was £1,200 pounds a year. Malcolm's mother was earning over four times that income.
Prior to meeting Bruce Bligh Turnbull she had been the recipient of £9,000 a year (for life or until remarriage) from her late first husband's estate and, in November 1954 reached a lump-sum settlement of $3,100 in lieu of her interest in the the estate.
Malcolm's father would have had an
annual income in 1957 that would probably never had fallen below average
male earnings, so the combined household income would have been at least £8,700 to £9,700
a year.
This was what voters were presented with when Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull came into the Northern Rivers to try and shore up Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan.
The prime minister will be campaigning in the marginal Nationals-held seat of Page on Friday, announcing a jobs and investment package.
Kevin Hogan holds Page with a 3.1 per cent margin over former Labor MP Janelle Saffin.
The coalition is desperate to hold Page, which is developing a reputation for being bellwether seat.
The region has one of the worst unemployment records in the state, with youth unemployment nearing 20 per cent in some areas.
The coalition hopes the $25 million investment will give businesses incentives to invest and help boost employment in the region, not to mention boosting their chances of re-election.
It includes providing business innovation grants to help adopt new technology, upgrading local infrastructure and delivering targeted skills and training programs for regional shortages.
Kevin Hogan quoted in the Echo NetDaily on the same day:
Page MP Kevin Hogan welcomed the announcement.
‘The jobless rate in the Clarence Coffs area has fallen to 4.2% – well below the NSW and national average (4.95% and 5.5% respectively),’ Mr Hogan said.
‘Since July almost 2500 people in Page have found on-going work through the Coalition’s Jobactive programme. But more still needs to be done.
‘I set up a local Job Strategy Group over six months ago to bring companies looking to expand to the North Coast. This package will certainly be an incentive for those businesses that have been thinking about making the move but aren’t ready to commit,” he said.
So is Hogan right about unemployment levels on the NSW Far North Coast and the Page electorate in particular?
Here are the facts which he appears to want to fudge by quoting the much broader statistical region – Clarence-Coffs – which extends as far south as the Bellingen area.
And if readers want to know all Coalition's Job Active "ongoing-work" - I refer them to an excerpt from this previous post:
For that amount of money the Abbott-Turnbull Government expects the Jobactive scheme to have placed 380,000 jobseekers in often wage-subsidised employment in 2015-16, at a cost of est.$2,500 per placement covering Employment Fund expenditure, service fees and outcome payments.
Unfortunately 68% of these placements are likely to last only 4 weeks before the person is unemployed once more. I suspect the percentage of temporary jobs is so high because this allows service providers to bill the government again and again for ‘helping’ those same job seekers find other temporary jobs once the initial placement dissolves into thin air and, via the $1.2 billion national wage subsidy pool potentially allows employers to 'churn' new employees on short term contacts so that employers receive financial benefits from the pool but employees are unemployed at contract's end.
None of the departmental employment sustainability measures encompass positions lasting longer than six months, so it is unclear as to whether there is a genuine expectation that job service providers will assist in finding permanent employment for anyone.
In September 2013 the average number of weeks an unemployed person spent looking for a job was 39, with an est.134,400 people looking for 52 weeks and over.
In June 2014 an est. 123,800 15 to 24 year-olds were looking for full time or part-time work. By March 2016 the number of young people in this category had risen to 133,000. [ibid]
Richmond-Tweed (including Tweed Heads, Byron Bay, Lismore, Mullumbimby) in the NSW Northern Rivers region had a youth unemployment rate of 14.5% in January 2015 and by January 2016 this rate had risen to 17.4% [Brotherhood of St Laurence,Australia’s Youth Unemployment Hotspots: Snapshot March 2016, p. 3]
This scare campaign is looking suspiciously as though it is being made up as the proponents go along. The Sydney Morning Herald, 23 May 2016:
Research intended for use in a bid to discredit Labor's negative gearing campaign was commissioned after a meeting between Scott Morrison and a close friend and senior figure in Australia's property industry.
But the draft report contains a series of factual errors and makes bold claims of a "resale price cliff" and "social dysfunction" that have alarmed some in the real estate industry to whom it has been circulated.
An email obtained by Fairfax Media shows Greg Paramor, the managing director of property company Folkestone, discussed the need for a study critiqueing Labor's policy with Brian Haratsis, the executive chairman of advisory firm MacroPlan Dimasi. Mr Paramor, who is a friend of Mr Morrison and former president of the Australian Property Council, made the request after his encounter with the Treasurer.
"Greg recently had the opportunity to meet with The Hon. Scott Morrison to discuss negative gearing," the email notes. "As a result of that meeting, Greg agreed to provide a report to the Treasurer – he asked Brian Haratsis to undertake a study on the impact of the proposed negative gearing changes."
The email, sent from an unnamed person inside Mr Paramor's company, was sent to senior industry figures last week.
It also asks for feedback as "the Treasurer is keen to get the report next week".
Entitled "Short Memory: Negative Gearing and Capital Gains Tax: Foundations of the New Australian Housing Model," the attached draft report is also presented with an alternative title: "Shortened Memory".
It claims Labor's policy would remove 205,000 dwellings from the rental housing stock over a decade, adding to housing stress. Asked why removing dwellings from the rental stock would add to housing stress when the dwellings would still be available for use, Mr Haratsis said the phrase was meant to refer to low-income rental dwellings.
Illustration: Ron Tandberg
The draft says Labor's policy would both make housing less affordable and create a "resale price cliff" as large numbers of apartments were sold at a loss. Mr Haratsis explained the apparent contradiction by saying the market was bifurcated and that different parts of it would react differently….
The Treasurer's office denied he had asked for a report to be prepared or that he or his office had received copies.
The report also says Australian governments would need to stump up an extra $3.3 billion per year for social housing and rent assistance should Labor's policy became law, more than the $3.2 billion per year it would raise.
The total economic cost of Labor's policy would be $5 billion per year, a reference Mr Haratsis said has since been removed from the document after acknowledging that it was arrived at by adding up payments without subtracting receipts.
"I am writing this as we go, and there are a number of references that you are looking at that won't be there in the final," he said. "I want to go back and recalculate the numbers."
Prepared in haste with what appears to have been a speech recognition program, the draft at one point refers to Labor's promise to "grandfather" the entitlements of existing investors as a promise to create "ground furthered" properties.
The leaking of the report potentially blunts another avenue of attack on Labor's plan to restrict negative gearing to new properties only and halve the capital gains tax discount to 25 per cent, which has been the subject of a fierce government scare campaign.
Mr Haratsis insisted it was his decision to initiate the report after his meeting with Mr Paramor, that he would fund the work himself and that it was planned for release next week - at which point "I could maybe give it to the Treasurer".
The report critiques organisations such as the Grattan Institute, which engages in "Robin Hood economics" and chooses to "ostracise high income individuals" instead of focusing on tax efficiency.
This was Australian Immigration Minister Peter Dutton quoted in The Sydney Morning Heraldon 18 May 2016:
"They [refugees] won't be numerate or literate in their own language, let alone English," Mr Dutton said.
"These people would be taking Australian jobs, there's no question about that.
"For many of them that would be unemployed, they would languish in unemployment queues and on Medicare and the rest of it so there would be huge cost and there's no sense in sugar-coating that, that's the scenario."
This is a copy of a Peter Dutton media release published by My Sunshine Coast on 18th of May 2016:
Labor and Greens jeopardise refugee outcomes
Labor and Mr Shorten's arbitrary doubling of Australia's Refugee and Humanitarian Programme is all about politics and was a crass attempt to win over the left on boat turn backs.
About 70 per cent of Australia's migration programme is made up of skilled migrants and Australia's annual net migration figure is approximately 190,000.
In addition under the Refugee and Humanitarian Programme we accept 13,750 people per year. We provide services to applicants who by definition come from war-torn countries and situations where people face persecution.
Our Government provides significant funding on settlement services to help people within the humanitarian and refugee programme with services such as education, training, accommodation, English language lessons and trauma counselling.
Our programme grows gradually from 13,750 per annum. Labor's decision to just double the figure was done solely for political purposes. There was no science in doubling the figure – it was purely done to try to win over the Left during the debate at ALP conference on boat turnbacks.
Here are the facts on people coming in through the Refugee and Humanitarian Programme: * 44 per cent of the female arrivals and 33 per cent of males do not understand spoken English prior to arrival * 23 per cent of female arrivals and 17 per cent of males are illiterate in their own language * 15 per cent have never attended school * 46 per cent have never undertaken paid work
Data from the Building a New Life in Australia study, the Longitudinal Study of Humanitarian Migrants (BLNA) which remains ongoing, indicates that humanitarian entrants face considerable economic and social challenges to settling successfully in Australia. The BNLA found humanitarian settlers fill low skill and low paid occupations.
Other studies have found that humanitarian entrants generally have poorer employment outcomes than other migrants, particularly in their early years of settlement.
The Australian Census Migrants Integrated Dataset shows that for humanitarian entrants 32 per cent are recording as being 'in the labour force' while 45 per cent were 'not in the labour force'. The Australian Bureau of Statistics found that in March the general Australian population had a Labour Force Participation Rate of 65 per cent.
The Personal Income Tax Migrants Integrated Dataset indicates humanitarian visa holders reported income of around $25,000 well below the national average of just under $50,000 for Australian taxpayers.
During the data matching period less than 20 per cent of these humanitarian migrants submitted a tax return.
What this shows is that it is vital to be able to provide the housing, employment, health and integration services that provide the base for these migrants to build a new, happy, healthy and successful life in our country – a process that can take years, even a generation.
A doubling of the Refuge and Humanitarian Programme annually as committed to by Labor would cost an estimated $2.5 billion dollars over the four year period of the Forward Estimates.
The Greens proposal to quadruple the intake to 50,000 annually would come at an estimated cost of $7 billion dollars over the Forward Estimates.
Australia is already one of the most generous nations in resettling refugees.
We rank in the top three nations for providing permanent resettlement of those most in need from around the world.
Refugees and humanitarian entrants are selected not because they have skills, but because they face persecution or serious discrimination. Many will have been denied basic services such as health and education in their own country and will have suffered trauma or torture for years.
Given those circumstances, we should not be surprised that entrants under the Refugee and Humanitarian Programme need considerable and specialist long term support to settle into our country.
That is why the Government is committed so strongly to funding settlement services, but it comes at a cost.
The size and composition of the Refugee and Humanitarian Programme is carefully considered annually to ensure sufficient resources are available to successfully process and integrate those fleeing persecution.
The Labor/Greens proposals risk jeopardising settlement outcomes.
Australians support an organised migration programme; Australia is a nation of immigrants.
But the programme needs to remain manageable and acceptable to maintain that support from the broad Australian population. Australia has proudly and successfully resettled more than 825,000 refugees and others in humanitarian needs since World War II and we have the capacity to continue this generosity in a managed process.
To assert that virtually overnight you can double (Labor) or quadruple (The Greens) – on an annual basis – this intake of vulnerable people with many special needs is the height of irresponsibility and jeopardises the current community support for the refugee programme.
One only has to look at the influx of more than 50,000 people illegally on boats during the last Labor Government to see how unrealistic both the Labor and Greens proposals are.
The Department of Immigration and Border Protection will take at least the next three years to simply process these people.
The special intake of 12,000 Syrians and Iraqis from the war-torn Middle East will take a number of programme years, simply because we cannot cut corners in regards to the various checks, but particularly security checks, that we must carry out on people before we offer them the opportunity to resettle in Australia. The Government has committed over $800 million to this special intake alone.
We live in a dangerous and uncertain world in terms of security and we need appropriate processes in place to ensure we are assisting those most in need with the least prospect of returning to their previous lives.
One only has to look at the recent events in Europe to realise that secure borders and organised migration are vitally important to the security of any nation.
Only the Coalition is committed to strong border protection policies to keep Australia as safe and secure as is possible.
THE HON. PETER DUTTON MP MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION AND BORDER PROTECTION
So what are voters supposed to conclude from this election campaign spiel?
Apparently it’s that we are all supposed to be concerned that refugees will take our jobs or become a burden on the welfare system because they are illiterate and unemployed.
What Peter Dutton is careful not to say about the incomplete longtitudinal study he is quoting is that it is examining the lives of 2,399 recently arrived humanitarian migrants – 64 per cent of whom had been in Australia less than six months and 83 per cent less than one year.
Anyone fleeing from war-torn countries to an essentially monolingual country (where unemployment is running at 5.8%) who finds permanent full-time employment in under a year is likely to be an exceptional person, so it is hardly surprising that in those first months on Australian soil a number are unemployed.
However, when it comes to looking at humanitarian refugees 15 years of age and over with labour force status recorded in the 2011 Australian Census, what Dutton does not mention is that (using New South Wales as the example) 79.34% of Iranians, 78.6% of Iraqis, 78.4% of Afghans and 66.3% of Sudanese were in employment. Nor does he draw attention to the fact that those refugees classified as 'not in the labour force' would include children under 15 year of age. Of those recent humanitarian refugee units arriving in Australia 50% contained children.
As for recent humanitarian refugees having incomes of around $25,000 a year – well so do an est. 1.365 million other people according to Australian Bureau of Statistics published data.
One would have to be profoundly stupid to take Peter Dutton’s demmed furriners spray at face value.
This was Australian Attorney-General and Liberal Senator for Queensland George Brandis as reported byABC Newson 15 May 2016:
In 2009 Peta Murphy was among a group of lawyers who made a submission to parliament urging the Government to deny police and the domestic spy agency ASIO stronger powers to detain terror suspects without charge.
Attorney General George Brandis said he was "very alarmed" at Ms Murphy's stance and demanded Mr Shorten immediately dump her as Labor's candidate.
"That submission was made a matter of weeks after it was disclosed that the Al-Shabaab terrorist group had been engaged in a plan to attack the Holsworthy Barracks in Sydney," he told reporters.
"It is shocking that the Labor candidate … should be a person who, within weeks of people being charged for an attempted terrorist strike against an Australian military base, should be calling into question both whether or not Al-Shabaab should be listed as a terrorist organisation, which she did, and whether we should have specific anti-terrorism laws, which she also did."
In 2009, Ms Murphy was a signatory on a submission by Liberty Victoria sent to then Labor attorney-general Robert McClelland calling on him to deny the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation and the police stronger powers to detain terror suspects without charge.
So what did Ms. Murphy sign that was supposedly so shocking? On 25 June 2009 the Senate referred the private member’s bill Anti-Terrorism Laws Reform Bill 2009for inquiry and report.
In August 2009 three men were arrested and charged with terrorism offences committed between 1 February and 4 August that year. At that time Al-Shabaab was not listed as a terrorist organisation by the Australian Government [See Fattal & Ors v The Queen [2013] VSCA 276]. These men were not brought to trial until mid-2010.
The submission to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Committee George Brandis was referring to appears to be one submitted by the 77 year-old advocacy group Liberty Victoria (Victorian Council of Civil Liberties Inc.) on 9 September 2009 which was co-signed by Peta Murphy as a council committee member.
None of the other 2009 archived submissions* listed on the Liberty Victoria website which address national anti-terrorism legislation carry her name as a specific co-signatory.
Currently Ms.Murphy is a Labor candidate in the Dunkley electorate and is a barrister who has worked at the Victorian Law Reform Commission, as a Senior Public Defender for Legal Aid and as an adviser in the Australian Parliament.
To understand what an incredible distortion of fact the accusations made by George Brandis are, here is that Liberty Victoria submission in full:
*One other 2009 submission by Liberty Victoria sent on 25 September to the Assistant Secretary, Security Law Branch, Attorney-General’s Department referred in part to the same private member's bill and was signed not by Ms.Murphy, but solely by the then president of the Victorian Council of Civil Liberties. It can be viewed here.
Australian unions, the successful not-for-profit super funds they administer and enterprise agreements are all well and truly in the firing line as Australia enters the 2016 election year.
A new clash is looming over rules that can ban millions of workers from choosing their own retirement fund as the government tries to increase choice in the $2 trillion superannuation industry.
Despite fears it will be accused of running an “ideological” campaign against funds that are backed by unions, the Coalition will move to scrap a key part of the industrial relations regime that gives unions and employers the right to limit fund choice for up to 4.7 million workers.
The push sets up a new fight in the Senate after parliament resumes within weeks, but armed with a warning from trade union royal commissioner Dyson Heydon against the “tyranny of the majority” being allowed to dictate where workers put their retirement savings, the government will insist that the choice of fund cannot remain a bargaining chip in workplace deals.
Assistant Treasurer Kelly O’Dwyer will make the issue one of four major changes to the superannuation sector this year in a reform plan that appears certain to deepen the divisions in the fund industry while sparking renewed objections from Labor.
Ms O’Dwyer told The Australian a government analysis indicated that 26 per cent of enterprise bargaining agreements gave workers no choice of super fund and another 5 per cent allowed only limited choice. “We think that everyone should have a choice about where their money goes — after all, it’s their superannuation, it’s their retirement,” she said. “That money should be provided to a fund of their choice.”
At stake is control of tens of billions of dollars that flow into super funds every year from employee pay packets under terms negotiated by unions and employers in more than 20,000 enterprise agreements that cover 40 per cent of the nation’s workforce.
The move opens a new front in attempts to overhaul the wider super system after Ms O’Dwyer last month failed to persuade crossbench senators to legislate governance changes that would require all funds to appoint independent directors.
Labor and the unions have claimed the Coalition is seeking to undermine the not-for-profit industry funds set up by employer groups and unions decades ago, and which often have the advantage of being named in EBAs or as the “default” option in industrial awards……
Today the Government announces that it will re-introduce legislation to re-establish the Australian Building and Construction Commission in the first sitting week of 2016 and will seek to have it passed by both chambers before the end of March…..
The Government will therefore introduce additional legislation to further strengthen the Registered Organisation Commission [previously rejected by the Senate].
Taskforce Heracles - the existing Federal and State Police Taskforce attached to the Royal Commission - will be funded to continue its work investigating referrals [from the Royal Commission into Union Governance & Corruption].
National Pharmacies is attempting to cut pharmacists' penalty rates by as much as 50 per cent for certain hours on Saturday shifts. Double-time Sunday rates would remain in place.
The company also wants to lower overtime pay, freeze the wages of existing pharmacists and introduce a two-tiered pay scheme that would slash the wages of new employees, according to the union.
The union, Professional Pharmacists Australia, estimates the proposed cuts could trim new pharmacists' pay cheques by up to $10,000 a year…..
"The company is disappointed that enterprise agreement negotiations have failed to reach agreement,…. Liberal Party member & IPA Deputy Executive Director James Paterson appearing on Sky News on18 December 2015:
As to be expected,
far-right Institute of Public Affairs' propaganda deliberately forgets to mention that 87.6 per cent of public servants have a base salary which is less than $80k, as well as failing to mention that almost half of all public servants receive an employer superannuation contribution
below the 15.4 per cent quoted by Paterson. See Australian Public Service Commission's2014
remuneration survey.
North Coast Voices no longer allows the Facebook Button sited at the end of each blog post to activate when it is clicked on by a reader.
This button has been deactivated because it has become clear that Facebook Inc. is not now and has never been a corporation genuinely committed to principles of digital privacy and security of Internet users' personal information and other associated data.
Unfortunately, because Blogger installs this button as part of a set, Gmail, Blog This!, Twitter, Pin Interest and Google + have also been deactivated and, we apologise to readers who may use these features.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 19
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
[Adopted and proclaimed by United Nations General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948]
Hi! My name is Boy. I'm a male bi-coloured tabby cat. Ever since I discovered that Malcolm Turnbull's dogs were allowed to blog, I have been pestering Clarencegirl to allow me a small space on North Coast Voices.
A false flag musing: I have noticed one particular voice on Facebook which is Pollyanna-positive on the subject of the Port of Yamba becoming a designated cruise ship destination. What this gentleman doesn’t disclose is that, as a principal of Middle Star Pty Ltd, he could be thought to have a potential pecuniary interest due to the fact that this corporation (which has had an office in Grafton since 2012) provides consultancy services and tourismbusiness development services.
A religion & local government musing: On 11 October 2017 Clarence Valley Council has the Church of Jesus Christ Development Fund Inc in Sutherland Local Court No. 6 for a small claims hearing. It would appear that there may be a little issue in rendering unto Caesar. On 19 September 2017 an ordained minister of a religion (which was named by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in relation to 40 instances of historical child sexual abuse on the NSW North Coast) read the Opening Prayer at Council’s ordinary monthly meeting. Earlier in the year an ordained minister (from a church network alleged to have supported an overseas orphanage closed because of child abuse claims in 2013) read the Opening Prayer and an ordained minister (belonging to yet another church network accused of ignoring child sexual abuse in the US and racism in South Africa) read the Opening Prayer at yet another ordinary monthly meeting. Nice one councillors - you are covering yourselves with glory!
An investigative musing: Newcastle Herald, 12 August 2017: The state’s corruption watchdog has been asked to investigate the finances of the Awabakal Aboriginal Local Land Council, less than 12 months after the troubled organisation was placed into administration by the state government. The Newcastle Herald understands accounting firm PKF Lawler made the decision to refer the land council to the Independent Commission Against Corruption after discovering a number of irregularities during an audit of its financial statements.The results of the audit were recently presented to a meeting of Awabakal members. Administrator Terry Lawler did not respond when contacted by the Herald and a PKF Lawler spokesperson said it was unable to comment on the matter. Given the intricate web of company relationships that existed with at least one former board member it is not outside the realms of possibility that, if ICAC accepts this referral, then United Land Councils Limited (registered New Zealand) and United First Peoples Syndications Pty Ltd(registered Australia) might be interviewed. North Coast Voices readers will remember that on 15 August 2015 representatives of these two companied gave evidence before NSW Legislative Council General Purpose Standing Committee No. 6 INQUIRY INTO CROWN LAND. This evidence included advocating for a Yamba mega port.
A Nationals musing: Word around the traps is that NSW Nats MP for Clarence Chris Gulaptis has been talking up the notion of cruise ships visiting the Clarence River estuary. Fair dinkum! That man can be guaranteed to run with any bad idea put to him. I'm sure one or more cruise ships moored in the main navigation channel on a regular basis for one, two or three days is something other regular river users will really welcome. *pause for appreciation of irony* The draft of the smallest of the smaller cruise vessels is 3 metres and it would only stay safely afloat in that channel. Even the Yamba-Iluka ferry has been known to get momentarily stuck in silt/sand from time to time in Yamba Bay and even a very small cruise ship wouldn't be able to safely enter and exit Iluka Bay. You can bet your bottom dollar operators of cruise lines would soon be calling for dredging at the approach to the river mouth - and you know how well that goes down with the local residents.
A local councils musing: Which Northern Rivers council is on a low-key NSW Office of Local Government watch list courtesy of feet dragging by a past general manager?
A serial pest musing: I'm sure the Clarence Valley was thrilled to find that a well-known fantasist is active once again in the wee small hours of the morning treading a well-worn path of accusations involving police, local business owners and others.
An investigative musing: Which NSW North Coast council is batting to have the longest running code of conduct complaint investigation on record?
A which bank? musing: Despite a net profit last year of $9,227 million the Commonwealth Bank still insists on paying below Centrelink deeming rates interest on money held in Pensioner Security Accounts. One local wag says he’s waiting for the first bill from the bank charging him for the privilege of keeping his pension dollars at that bank.
A Daily Examiner musing: Just when you thought this newspaper could sink no lower under News Corp management, it continues to give column space to Andrew Bolt.
A thought to ponder musing: In case of bushfire or flood - do you have an emergency evacuation plan for the family pet?
An adoption musing: Every week on the NSW North Coast a number of cats and dogs find themselves without a home. If you want to do your bit and give one bundle of joy a new family, contact Happy Paws on 0419 404 766 or your local council pound.
When making comment defamatory statements, racist remarks, hate speech, incitement to violence, gratuitous insults, obscenities, sexual innuendo, active matters before the courts and linking to commercial products/promotions should be avoided.
Trolling will not be tolerated. Spam will not be accepted.
The blog administrator reserves the right to reject comments which ignore this policy.
