This document is part of an archive of postings on Australian Politics, a blog hosted by Blogspot who are in turn owned by Google. The index to the archive is available here or here. Indexes to my other blogs can be located here or here. Archives do accompany my original postings but, given the animus towards conservative writing on Google and other internet institutions, their permanence is uncertain. These alternative archives help ensure a more permanent record of what I have written. My Home Page. My Recipes. My alternative Wikipedia. My Blogroll. Email me (John Ray) here. NOTE: The short comments that I have in the side column of the primary site for this blog are now given at the foot of this document.

Two of my ancestors were convicts so my family has been in Australia for a long time. As well as that, all four of my grandparents were born in the State where I was born and still live: Queensland. And I am even a member of the world's second-most condemned minority: WASPs (the most condemned is of course the Jews -- which may be why I tend to like Jews). So I think I am as Australian as you can get. I certainly feel that way. I like all things that are iconically Australian: meat pies, Vegemite, Henry Lawson etc. I particularly pride myself on my familiarity with the great Australian slanguage. I draw the line at Iced Vo-Vos and betting on the neddies, however. So if I cannot comment insightfully on Australian affairs, who could?

****************************************************************************************




No posts on Sat 30th


29 November, 2019

Jason Murphy launches another attack on the elderly

This time he makes it clear that it is only home-owners who are in his sights. But he also loathes superannuants.

Some people scrimp and save to pay off their own home. It usually takes them many years.  Other spend all their spare cash on beer and cigarettes (etc.).  Which group should we encourage? Neither, seems to be Jason's answer. Yet the savers take a huge burden off the taxpayer.  They get reduced pensions and no housing allowance.  In a rational world the savers would be praised but Murphy is clearly a Leftist envier.

He is right that a small number of homeowners and superannuants live more comfortable lives in retirement than others do but that is so throughout a capitalist system.  Some people are better at using their opportunities and may be envied for it,  but the alternative -- communism -- just makes everyone poor, the nomenklatura excepted, of course.

It's the whole capitalist system that Jason dislikes.  Capitalism runs on incentives and incentives produce very uneven results. Because of that unevenness in results Jason wants to take the incentives away.  He apparently wants, for instance, to abolish the tax concessions to superannuation. 

But those incentives are there for a good reason.  They were put in place to encourage more people to save for their own retirement and not depend on the pension.  And they do exactly that.  That the concessions benefit some people more than others is what Jason dislikes.  He wants a Soviet-like system for us  -- with enforced equality.  I will not be alone in saying "no thanks" to that.


Part way down page 17 in a long report released last week, Treasury boffins buried a landmine.

“Where one generation is required to fund their own retirement as well as the retirement of a previous or future generation they may view this as inequitable," they wrote.

No kidding, Treasury. No kidding.

This line comes from the consultation paper on a retirement income review the government is doing. The review has promised to recommend no changes, lest the powerful be disturbed.

Nevertheless my former colleagues at Treasury, perched in their modernist office block on the shores of Lake Burley Griffin ought to be careful.

Last week, I wrote a story about the immense privileges being provided by our system to the boomer generation, and the backlash was strong.

People contacted me in droves to tell me they knew someone who was struggling. I called the boomers a “luxury generation" and the response I got was #NotAllBoomers.

You know what, fair enough. I should have been more specific. If you’re 65, renting a place to live and reliant on the pension, you’re having a bloody hard time. I’m sorry. I didn’t mean to be unkind to you.

Poverty among people aged 65 and over who don’t own their own home is extremely high. It’s a genuine issue; but, of course, they are not the only ones doing it tough. The type of household with the worst rates of poverty is the sole parent. There are more children in those households living in poverty (230,000 children) than there are people over 65 renting and living in poverty (135,000 over 65s).

Anyway, that’s beside the point. Because the point of the boomer wars is not to focus on people in poverty, it’s to focus on people who have many millions and are getting more.

The boomers I don’t mind niggling a little are the ones who point to the two million dollar home they bought for $50,000 and say “we earned this!".

The ones who strolled out of school into a labour market with 2 per cent unemployment and found jobs with no degree.

The ones who like to chirp about how they endured 17 per cent interest rates without ever mentioning that, in 1974, average weekly ordinary time earnings rose 28 per cent in one year alone (and then rose 20 per cent the next year, and 13 per cent the year after).

The ones who feel, when they structure their financial affairs in order to maximise the tax breaks available through superannuation and home ownership, that these are the product of a universe where all is suitable, appropriate, just and correct.

People in the top 1 per cent of the income distribution get a very handy $700,000 helping hand from the government in preparing for their retirement. That compares very generously to people at the middle of the income distribution who get $250,000.

The biggest helping hand for lower income earners is the pension. That’s not available at the top. But what they lose on the swings, they gain on the roundabouts, because the superannuation earning tax concessions really start to kick in.

When your super investments earn income (eg, dividends), they are taxed. But unlike income from working and other income earned outside the super system, this income is treated differently. It gets tax concessions. Earnings inside super get taxed at 15 per cent.

Superannuation contribution tax concessions also help. Money you put into super is taxed on the way in too, at 15 per cent, which is potentially a lot lower than your marginal tax rate. These contribution tax concessions are not quite so powerful at the top of the scale thanks to some recent changes that double the tax rate on contributions for people earning more than $250,000.

It certainly causes a person to wonder if the taxes on superannuation are designed to help those that need help in getting ready for retirement. Treasury is calling for comments on its retirement income review. It is sure to be besieged by furious people calling for the benefits to be retained.

But there’s a trap here for any young person who wants to play the intergenerational equity game. Any push for fairness here will probably be introduced gradually. Which is to say that it will be staged and scheduled in such a way that it hits not the retirees currently floating off the Whitsundays, but the ones who intend to give up work in two or three decades time. That is, you and me.

SOURCE  





Advance Australia’s new boss Liz Storer says political correctness is alien to Australian culture

If Bob Hawke was an early career politician today, the plain-talking larrikin would’ve inevitably offended a certain cohort on Twitter and become a victim of “cancel culture".

That’s the view of Liz Storer, who’s settling into her new role as the boss of Advance Australia – the right’s version of left-wing activist group GetUp.

The 36-year-old former political adviser believes there are “millions more of us" than what she describes as the “radical left".

It’s just that her potential supporters – quiet Australians, to borrow a phrase from Scott Morrison – haven’t felt a sense of urgency to get involved in “boots on the ground" activism.

Until recently, that is.

“You know what I think the vast majority of mainstream Australians miss? The straight-talking Aussies of the past. I know I do," Ms Storer told new.com.au.

“This political correctness rubbish has absolutely undermined our culture – our larrikinism, our very heritage. What we’ve become … this is not us."

Ms Storer claims the broader community has been paralysed by fear – a fear of saying the wrong thing, being shamed, having their businesses boycotted or being “bullied" online.

“I used to love watching political clips of Paul Keating, (Bob) Hawke – those guys were straight shooters before political correctness rotted the way we talk, the way we relate to each other, the way we do business, the way we conduct politics.

“These days, they would’ve absolutely been de-platformed.

“It’s why politicians now are having to dumb down their speech, to try to say things in a way that ticks the PC box."

She believes many figures in Canberra – of all ilks – are a shadow of what they used to be – not saying or doing much out of fear of losing votes.

“Say it like it is, call it like it is. If you want to be respected by the Australian public, that’s what you’ll do. So far, the only role political correctness has played is to eat away at our heritage, our very culture as Aussies."

It might come as no surprise who she blames for the trend.

“This culture of pandering to the radical left, can’t be seen to call a spade a spade, dance around it, we want everyone’s votes come the next election, it has such far-reaching effects," Ms Storer said.

Ms Storer points to the recent decision by Inner West Council in Sydney to cancel Australia Day festivities on January 26 out of respect to Indigenous peoples – a decision reportedly based on just 37 survey responses.

“Whether it’s climate alarmism, cancelling Australia Day, threatening free speech … it’s this squeaky wheel getting the oil. But the radical left are not the majority.

“It’s a small contingent getting upset about what the majority of us mainstream Australians are up to."

She also attacked the “de-platforming" of Australian tennis great Margaret Court and rugby union star Israel Folau over their religious views and homophobic remarks.

“This constant bullying by the left – you’re not allowed to have a dissenting opinion," Ms Storer said. “People cop it because they won’t bow a knee to the PC authoritarian rubbish.

“I do believe mainstream Australians are well and truly waking up to this. They’re sick and tired of the tripe."

While she wouldn’t be drawn on whether she accepted some of Ms Court and Mr Folau’s remarks were offensive to the LGBT community, Ms Storer said it was unfair for anyone to suffer because of their personal beliefs.

“There’s no mainstream Australian who’ll look at that and think it’s fair and it’s OK," she said. “Once again, it’s the radical left."

Advance Australia launched about a year ago in a bid to mobilise the centre right to champion its own issues of importance.

“The centre right is best known for our thought leadership," she said. “There are lots of groups out there doing good work, but we’re lacking in boots on the ground."

Ms Storer, who has worked as an adviser to Liberal MPs at a state and federal level, was herself a local councillor in Perth for two years. Her efforts now will be focused on expanding Advance Australia’s membership base and campaigning efforts.

In Ms Storer’s view, “there’s no end of work to do", but she identified free speech, climate change “alarmism" and national sovereignty as major concerns.

Advance Australia has 45,000 members across the country, she says, and they call the shots, deciding what campaigns are rolled out.

While the group might be on the right, Ms Storer isn’t shy to criticise her own side when the need arises.

“We (recently) saw our PM give $1 billion more, taxpayer dollars, to the CEFC (Clean Energy Finance Corporation). For what? These guys started back in 2012 as a Labor-created, snot wad of a useless body," she said.

“They sunk $11 billion into it at the time. It’s done absolutely nothing, except ruin our grid with a pile of unreliable renewables.

“We’ve heard en masse from our supporters saying they elected a Liberal Government that have just enacted a Labor Party.

“I don’t care whether you’re in opposition or in government, Advance Australia is here to speak for the mainstream. Whether you’re blue team or red team, we will fight you if you’re not representing us.

“We will be speaking up and calling out hypocrisy. You certainly cannot be elected saying one thing and less than six months, change and do another. You’re not going to get away with it."

Despite some of her pointed language when discussing “the left", Ms Storer doesn’t believe Australians are any more divided now than they have been.

She even claimed to champion a respect for differing opinions and political views.

“We can respectfully disagree with each other – we live in a representative democracy," she said.

“Australia is the land of opportunity. That is the best thing about this place. We (can be) a lot better than we are now.

“I’m optimistic about the future because Australia, in my humble opinion, and I’ve travelled the world, is the best country on earth."

But Ms Storer then added: “But are the radical left undermining that? Absolutely."

SOURCE  






A politically correct but mostly imaginative rewrite of Aboriginal history

If indigenous author Bruce Pascoe is correct, most of what we were taught of how Aboriginals lived prior to the arrival of Europeans was based on a combination of ignorance, omissions and lies.

In his landmark book Dark Emu, Pascoe claims indigenous Australians were not hunter-gatherers but were sophisticated in the ways of food production, aquaculture, and land management. They were not nomads but lived in large towns in permanent dwellings. Their civilisation was, he wrote last year, “one that invented bread, society, language and the ability to live as 350 neighbouring nations without land war, not without rancour … but without a lust for land and power, without religious war, without slaves, without poverty but with a profound sense of responsibility for the health of Mother Earth for more than 120,000 years." According to him they also invented democracy and government.

The book won the 2016 NSW Premier’s Literary Award and has sold over 100,000 copies. The ABC and Screen Australia have provided funding for a documentary series written by Pascoe. According to the head of ABC Indigenous, Kelrick Martin, the book “offers a revelatory context for future generations of Australians and ABC Indigenous is proud to work alongside Bruce Pascoe … to correct these stereotypes." A children’s version, “Young Dark Emu: A Truer History", is now part of school curriculums.

Much of Dark Emu’s positive reception has to do with Pascoe’s masterful presentation skills, for he is naturally telegenic. Showing a knack for reading his audience, he can be avuncular, affable, disarming, reserved, and even melancholic. He is articulate, an orator, persuasive and endearing. Complementing this is his disdain for modernity and his claim that we can control climate change by using the techniques of the “old people", as he refers to them, thus “calming the bush down".

He has admirers aplenty. Such is their effusiveness, you could say Pascoe is the Tom Jones of historians. To his detractors, he is a revisionist and fantasist. Writing for the Weekend Australian Magazine in May this year, journalist Richard Guilliatt observed “many academic experts also believe Dark Emu romanticises pre-contact indigenous society as an Eden of harmony and pacifism, when in fact it was often a brutally tough survivalist way of life". But as Guilliatt also noted, there is a reluctance in academia to make public these criticisms given the author’s popularity and aboriginality.

If you think that is too much of a stretch, remember that this year the University of NSW’s science faculty distributed guidelines to lecturers, warning them that it was “inappropriate" to specify an estimate of when the first human migration to Australia occurred. Instead, staff were told it was “more appropriate" to say Aboriginals have been here “since the beginning of the Dreaming/s", as this “reflects the beliefs of many Indigenous Australians that they have always been in Australia, from the beginning of time, and came from the land".

That a science faculty would resort to this is ridiculous. While some studies estimate that Aboriginals have been here for as long as 65,000 years, the conservative estimate is 50,000 years ago. You would think then that any public figure who claimed it took place 120,000 years ago would be asked to justify that estimate. Yet I know of at least three occasions this year when Pascoe has repeated that claim when interviewed by an ABC presenter, none of whom even so much as sought clarification.

The ABC’s political correspondent, Andrew Probyn wrote this month that Dark Emu “demolish(es) the myth that Australia at the time of white settlement was a wilderness occupied by merely hunter gatherers". ABC presenter Wendy Harmer referred to Pascoe as an “oracle", and chief political writer Annabel Crabb tweeted admiringly regarding Dark Emu: “I don’t think I’ve ever learned so much from one slim volume". Another ABC presenter, Benjamin Law, said “reading it should be a prerequisite to non-Indigenous citizenship". Just this month RN Drive host Patricia Karvelas concluded an interview with Pascoe with a fawning endorsement of the book, urging listeners to buy it. “Just do it now," she stated.

If scholarly authenticity in the fields of history and anthropology were determined by the number of “oohs" and “aahs" uttered into an ABC microphone, Dark Emu would be nothing short of magisterial. In reality, such recognition is properly realised only through sources that are both primary and verifiable. Even then, the mere inclusion of this material is nothing more than window dressing if the analysis and conclusions are far removed from those sources. The “feel-good" factor should never be a criterion in such evaluations.

Those giving accolades to Pascoe seem oblivious to the many instances, particularly on the website Dark Emu Exposed, where readers have highlighted stark inconsistencies regarding what appears in his claims and what is outlined in the respective primary source. Peter O’Brien, a Quadrant magazine contributor and retired military officer, has written a book “Bitter Harvest: The Illusion of Aboriginal Agriculture in Bruce Pascoe’s Dark Emu" highlighting what he claims are Pascoe’s omissions, mischaracterisations, and distortions.

The stoush has been described as a resumption of the history wars, a term I think unhelpful, for it leads to much distraction in fruitlessly arguing solely about the motives of historians. If anything, and for once I am not being facetious, the modern historian’s role is in one way analogous to that of today’s comedian. Both professions now operate according to the woke expectation that practitioners must always “punch up", never down. A historian can be sure of at least a favourable reception, as in Pascoe’s case, if he or she promotes and defends the wretched at the expense of a so-called privileged demographic.

To do the reverse, however, is taboo. Many of you will remember the furore that erupted in 2002 following the release of historian and now Quadrant editor-in-chief Keith Windschuttle’s book “The Fabrication of Aboriginal History: Van Diemen’s Land 1803-1847". Taking issue with many historians, Windschuttle disputed the theory that indigenous Tasmanians were the subject of genocide, arguing they had succumbed largely through introduced diseases. He also dismissed the romantic theory that the original inhabitants had engaged in “guerrilla warfare" against Europeans, stating their attacks were motivated by a desire for tea, sugar and flour.

To question the narrative was unforgivable, but what made it worse in the eyes of leftist academics was that Windschuttle both exposed and embarrassed many a historian by forensically analysing their footnotes. What he demonstrated was both revelatory and disconcerting. Historians had inflated the figures of killings, misquoted colonial administrators to give the appearance of malevolent intent towards Aboriginals, and even listed as sources local newspapers that had not yet existed at the time of the historical incidents in question.

The response from the historical establishment was both defensive and risible. As reported by The Australian’s Ean Higgins in 2004, the Australian Historical Association even discussed enacting a code of ethics to prevent historians from criticising their peers’ integrity in public. One academic described his astonishment at the “pack mentality" of his fellow historians. “It was like ‘let’s get a group of people together to ambush Windschuttle’," he stated.

The Australian’s Janet Albrechtsen wrote nearly 10 years ago to this day of visiting the National Gallery of Victoria and seeing an exhibition surrounded by a fence. In the confines pasted individually on the floor were the 472 pages of Windschuttle’s book. The work, by artist Julie Gough, was designed for visitors to walk over the exhibition and thus, in her words, “blacken and erase this text". As Albrechtsen states, this was an example of “the Left’s addiction to emotion, feel-good symbolism and an infantile rejection of facts as heresy".

Despite the many misgiving concerning Pascoe’s research and findings, Dark Emu shows every sign of being regarded as the most authoritative text in its field. Whether it be apathy or pusillanimity, our public institutions accept without question his conclusions, irrespective of the anomalies, or how ludicrous his premises. Only last year Pascoe wrote “Almost no Australians know anything about the Aboriginal civilisation because our educators, emboldened by historians, politicians and the clergy, have refused to mention it for 230 years" – a claim that can only be described as a conspiracy theory.

Indigenous and non-indigenous Australian students alike are entitled to a history curriculum based on fact, whether the subject matter is triumphs, tragedies or atrocities. To have it any other way is a politicisation of the discipline. It is time Pascoe responded to his critics. Only then can readers decide whether Dark Emu is historical fact or a flight of fancy.

SOURCE  






ASX200 hits new all-time high

PM Morrison take a bow

The Australian share market has hit a fresh intraday all-time high in early trading before fading a bit in the afternoon.

The benchmark S&P/ASX200 index traded as high as 6,869.5 points before closing on Thursday at 6,864, up 13.4 points, or 0.2 per cent, from Wednesday.

The broader All Ordinaries was up 15 points, or 0.22 per cent, to 6,965.6 points - also a record.

SOURCE  





NSW Labor Leader: Shorten Daylight Saving Time To Fight Climate Change

Labor leader Jodi McKay has lobbied the NSW government to consider a request made by one of her constituents that daylight saving be shortened to help combat climate change.

In the letter sent by the Strathfield MP to Energy Minister Matt Kean, Ms McKay writes that her constituent "advises that daylight saving time in NSW had made last summer too hot for walking in Hammond Park, her local park, at 8pm as the temperature at that time remained at the 40°C mark".

"[The constituent] has requested the duration of the daylight saving period in NSW be shortened as it has a significant impact on climate change," Ms McKay wrote on October 11. "I await your consideration and response on this matter."

Daylight saving has been a fraught issue since being introduced in 1971, with multiple referendums in Queensland and Western Australia rejecting the arrangement.

Over the years, critics have attributed the change of time to a fall in robberies, increased petrol sales, a jump in heart attacks, less milk being produced by cows and faster fading curtains.

There are also various studies that show the change in time leads to higher or lower energy use.

A spokesman for Ms McKay said it was not her view that daylight saving should be changed. "Strathfield has a diverse community with a wide variety of views," he said. "It is the job of the local member to represent those views to government without judgment ... she will never apologise for making sure that members of her community have their concerns heard."

Mr Kean, who is in London, declined to comment.

Without daylight saving, which begins on the first Sunday of October and continues until the first Sunday in April, the sun would rise in Sydney between 4.30am in summer and 7am in winter.

Ms McKay's constituent is not alone in calling for the daylight saving period to be shortened. Adam Marshall, now the Agriculture Minister, told the Moree Champion in 2015 that he would propose cutting the first and last months of the daylight saving period.

"While it's not in my top two or three burning issues, it's an old chestnut, but it's a real burr in the saddle and it grates for many of my constituents," he said at the time.

Despite the Strathfield electorate resident's concern, and numerous university studies, there appears to be no strong connection between daylight saving and climate change.

A 2011 study published in The Review of Economics and Statistics found daylight saving time increased the social cost of pollution emissions by up to $US5.5 million that year. Another paper, published in the journal Energy Policy in the same year, found energy had been saved in southern Norway and Sweden.

Earlier research by two University of California, Berkeley, academics — which focused on Sydney during the 2000 Olympics — decided there was no effect on energy consumption whatsoever.

SOURCE  

Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





28 November, 2019

Australia fails on early childhood education

We read below: "The report shows children who attend early learning services are as much as 33 per cent less likely to be developmentally vulnerable when they start school "

But why?  Does it mean that mothers who do all the caring are harming their kids?  Is the contrast with care-by-mother?  Probably not.  The report below admits that Aborigines and the poor tend not to send their kids to kindergarten.  So the comparision is between the poor and the rest. 

The results below are NOT a comparison between mothers of equal status, some of whom use kindergartens and others who do not.  There is no evidence that going to kindergarten is of itself better for the child


The percentage of Australian families with two parents in the workforce is increasing, as new data shows the number of couples with both adults employed full time doubling.

Data from the latest snapshot of early learning in Australia shows in 2013 the number of couple families in which both parents worked full time was 16 per cent. By 2017, the number was 33 per cent.

The Early Childhood Australia report, to be released on Monday, shows women remain more likely to be the primary carer for children, and  the proportion of families with a single earning father, whose partner is not in the labour force, decreased from 36 per cent in 2013 to 31 per cent in 2017.

Australia's upward trajectory in rates of female workforce participation — up by 1.5 percentage points in the past decade — aligns with trends in OCED countries, and brings the economy closer to Sweden, often viewed as an international leader in gender equity in the workforce.

The report shows children who attend early learning services are as much as 33 per cent less likely to be developmentally vulnerable when they start school than those who do not attend early learning services.

Disparities in access to early learning persist, however.

While nearly 45 per cent of children used early learning services in 2018, those living in remote areas, children from Indigenous and non-English speaking backgrounds and those with a disability are under-represented in early learning services.

For preschool programs in the year before full time schooling, enrolment levels are over 90 per cent. But actual attendance at preschool varies widely across the states and territories and economically disadvantaged and Indigenous children are less likely to attend.

Indigenous children are more likely to be developmentally vulnerable when they start school than non-Indigenous children. States where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are provided free or near-free access to preschool from age three tend to achieve the national Closing the Gap target of 95 per cent enrolment in the year before school.

Low-income families  spend a higher proportion of their income on early learning services, despite subsidies from government.

The report shows those on the lowest incomes pay almost double the proportion of their income after subsidies, at 8 per cent, compared with those on high incomes, who spend 4.7 per cent.

Australia falls below average the average investment levels for OECD countries, 0.7 per cent of GDP, and ranks 11th among the 21 member countries.

"While the headline figures indicate strong national progress in early childhood education and care provision and quality, closer examination highlights significant pockets of unmet need, and problems of affordability and workforce planning," the report said.

"The picture also differs between states and territories, where differences in the early childhood education and care landscape combine with varying policy settings to produce inconsistent results for children and families.

"The goal of fully realising the benefits of early learning for all children in Australia has not yet been reached."

The report will be released at federal Parliament. It notes a decline in investment in early learning per child occurred under the Turnbull and Morrison governments.

SOURCE  





Bunnings' iconic sausage sizzle raises $600k for bushfire victims after hardcore vegans demanded the hardware giant CANCEL the fundraiser

I have no objection against people believing anything they like.  They can believe the moon is made of green cheese as far as I care.  It is when they want to impose their beliefs on others that I object

Bunnings raised more than half a million dollars for bushfire victims with a national sausage sizzle, despite a flock of irate herbivores campaigning for the fundraiser to be cancelled.

The hardware giant hosted the fundraising event last Friday with all stores across Australia raising money for those affected by bushfires that ravaged the eastern states.

The sausage sizzle raised more than $580,000 and Bunnings contributed an extra $20,000.

But the event drew criticism from the vegan community.

'Why oh why are people selling sausages to raise money when it's known that meat is a contributing factor to climate change? Which is a contributing factor to these fires!', one woman wrote on a vegan Facebook page.

'It honestly baffles my mind and makes me so sad. It's a heartbreaking cycle.'

The post went viral and has since been deleted, but dozens agreed with the woman's notion. 'They can shove their sausage where the sun don't shine,' one said.

But others believed they were looking at the fundraiser in the wrong light. 'Right now, helping those fighting the fires is more dire than fighting the meat industry for climate change,' one user posted.

'Sorry what? There is nothing they can do about the sausages already produced but they can sell them to raise funds for fire fighters who are actually facing the real fires happening right now,' another comment reads.

Despite the uproar, Bunnings Chief Operating Officer Debbie Poole thanked the thousands of people who supported the cause.

'We are so grateful that people from across Australia dropped by their local Bunnings' on Friday to buy a snag and donate to help those in need. The result would not have been possible without their generosity,' she said.

Hardware store employees in fire-affected communities helped support evacuation centres.

The funds will be donated to GIVIT - a charity that assists communities during disaster. GIVIT CEO Sarah Tennant said the money will be used to to buy items for farmers and communities in drought-affected regions, and supporting households and communities affected by bushfires.

'We will be working closely with our charity and community service partners on the ground to ensure people are getting what they require, whether that be a fridge, a table, school uniforms, or fuel and grocery vouchers.'

Four people died in unprecedented fire conditions across the eastern seaboard. 

More than 600 homes were destroyed in New South Wales since bushfire season began on October 1.

SOURCE  






Insane wages for buiding workers proposed

A new Queensland Government plan could reportedly see lollipop workers earn close to $180,000 a year. The massive wage would apply to jobs on regional construction projects under minimum conditions being considered by the Labor Government.

The Government is trialling minimum requirements for major state-funded projects, similar to a Construction, Forestry, Maritime, Mining and Energy Union’s industry agreement.

It will force builders to ensure subcontractors apply the rates, but builders claim the move will drive up costs by at least 30 per cent.

They also say it will put principal contractors at risk of breaching workplace laws on adverse action and coercion in relation to subcontractors.

The requirements would apply to projects worth more than $100 million, the first understood to be the $130 million expansion of the Cairns Convention Centre.

The project’s 122 pages of minimum conditions, sent out to tenderers in October, include five per cent annual pay increases, requirements to pay weekend hours at overtime rates of 200 per cent and 12 per cent superannuation contributions, according to the Australian Financial Review.

Under the plan carpenters would earn $198,000 a year on a 46-hour week and traffic controllers about $178,000, according to calculations from the Master Builders Association.

MBA Queensland chief executive Grant Galvin attacked the policy as “Orwellian". “They’re not minimum conditions – they’re maximum conditions," he told AFR.

“The fact that the state government would even trial a policy which ensures that the most expensive and restrictive work practices in Australia are applied to all major government jobs across the state, is beyond comprehension."

Mr Galvin said that money represented less the government had to spend on teachers, nurses or other public infrastructure. “We have strongly requested that they review this policy approach in the knowledge that these conditions don’t improve quality, safety or productivity," he said.

“They just increase costs, particularly for regional areas and undermine the government’s ‘buy local’ policy."

Queensland Major Contractors Association chief executive John Davies said the minimum conditions were 75 per cent higher than current market rates for civil construction.

The policy could result in breaches of the Fair Work Act, which could see employers banned from federally funded building work.

CFMEU Queensland secretary Michael Ravbar argued that the minimum conditions were “nothing like" the union’s agreement.

He said the government was trying to ensure that taxpayer money filtered down to the workers.

He said traffic controllers wouldn’t earn $180,000 a year because they “were lucky to get permanent employment for three to four weeks".

SOURCE  






"Green" Victoria is locking up almost all publicly-owned land from any use

Victoria is the vanguard of states in major struggles over the control and use of public lands.  These comprise around 35 per cent of the state, the majority of which is in parks and reserves that aim to minimise human impact. Such areas have long been seen as under-managed and infested with exotic flora and fauna. They are increasingly recognised as perilous host to ferocious and destructive fires.

The rest of the public land is state forest, traditionally available for forestry, grazing, mining and a whole range of leisure activities such car rallies, hunting, horse riding, camping and dog walking, none of which are generally permitted in National Parks.

Two developments are changing the nature of Victoria’s public lands. The first is increasing restrictions on the activities allowed in the state forests. Over the past 30 years governments have progressively constrained the use of the forests for timber harvesting and grazing.  Grazing has been all but eliminated and only 6 per cent of Victoria’s public forests are available for timber production, the annual harvesting area having been reduced from 25,000 hectares 40 years ago to just 3,000 hectares today.  Last week, the Andrews government announced a 2030 phase-out of all timber-getting in the state forests.

The second change is the conversion of state forest to national park and other conservation reserve categories.  This not only imposes restrictions on use but is also an essential step to converting the land to Aboriginal title, which unlike Native title, grants beneficial-use and veto rights over the activities and intentions of others.  Even within the remaining state forest, the government is moving to enhance designated Aboriginal groups’ influence by granting them controls over exploration licences.

To effect the transfer the title of the land to National Parks or similar classifications, the government funds the Victorian Environmental Assessment Council (VEAC), an environmental bureaucracy comprised largely of former eco-activists, to sequentially investigate regional areas. Under the guise of community engagement, VEAC acts largely at the behest of environmental activists and Aboriginal groups (see, for example, the latest annual report).  The latter are paid to rediscover long-dormant attachments to the area under investigation and, with the prospect of title and financial support for management, are quite naturally all in favour of a change.

VEAC also hires economic consultants, who over the course of several investigations have demonstrated a skill for divining how much people supposedly value land being redesignated as being exclusively for conservation. In their most recent investigation, applying an alchemistic methodology called “contingent valuation" VEAC’s consultants have estimated that the Victorian public would be willing to pay $247 million in order to convert 60,000 hectares of state forest in the Victorian Goldfields (the Central West) into National Park.

The valuation ($4600 per hectare) of restraining public use of public land is not based on some marginal change to land use.  It would be equally applicable to the whole of the state. Its logic means people would be willing to sterilise all of the 3,100,00 hectares of state forest from commercial and most leisure uses and consider themselves to be $14 billion better off as a result!  It would mean that, if half the state’s agricultural land were to be surrendered to non-uses, we, the people, would be better off! In addition, the consultants place a trivial value on the loss from preventing car rallies, hunting, horse riding and camping. They do so with little evidence of usages.

In the case of forestry, there has been a steady, politically-driven erosion of the area permitted to be harvested.  The Regional Forest Agreements at the turn of the century were supposed to have settled the conservation/harvesting split, but harvesting has since been reduced by three quarters.  The latest proposals envisage further reductions on the road to the total embargo.

VEAC’s consultants also argue against mining and prospecting and claim that future mineral discoveries are well-nigh impossible. This view about minerals is remarkable since the Geological Survey of Victoria estimates that half the state’s gold is yet to be found, and the area has hosted much mineral production in the past.  In relatively recent times, two major gold mines have been opened near the area – one of which, Fosterville, actually has the second-richest gold concentrations of any mine in the world and is presently producing at over one billion dollars per annum.  Moreover, entrepreneurs risking their own money take a different view to VEAC – expenditure in the 42 exploration licenses current in the area is around $9 million a year. A recent discovery in the area of a nugget worth $160,000 by an amateur prospector is further evidence of the region’s prospectivity. Uncovering any further hidden wealth would be foreclosed by reclassifying the land as National Park which VEAC have recommended.

So, we have a double whammy.  First, policies are being pursued to banish commercial and much leisure-use activities that have proven to be perfectly compatible with forest conservation.  Secondly, requiring the cessation of commercial forestry also means eliminating many of the roads, and thereby heavy machinery, essential to fight fires. It would be hard to devise a more destructive set of policies.

Several hundred regional forest workers have held a rally outside Parliament House to protest the new measures that will bring needless and counterproductive job losses.  Coalition MPs showed their solidarity, but with green philosophies dominating the bureaucracy and a state government  determined to court inner-city votes, the march to transform Victoria into an unproductive tinderbox continues apace.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here



   

         
27 November, 2019

Christian schools join to train teachers

This is a very positive development, as secular teacher traiing has very low standards in every respect.

It is however regrettable that they have followed the secular example and mandated four years for teacher training.  That was always a highpoint of out-of-control credentialism.  Teachers in times past did perfectly well with a one-year diploma and "Teach for America" sends graduates into difficult schools with only months of preparation.

A saving grace may be that the new arrangement will see trainees spending much more time in the schools than they do in the secular system

The Pentecostals have provided the lead for the new setup but the participating schools are mostly Anglican, so the  new setup is non-denominational, in the best Protestant tradition.


Five Sydney schools have joined together to pilot a training program to ensure the future supply of high-quality teachers for their schools.

Trainee teachers will enter into a four-year undergraduate or two-year postgraduate degree program with a big difference: the trainee teachers will be working in the schools with students for their entire tertiary education.

The Teaching Schools Alliance Sydney has been established by Blue Mountains Grammar School, St Andrew’s Cathedral School, The Scots College, Inaburra School and William Clarke College. The Alliance will partner with Australia’s largest Protestant-affiliated tertiary provider, Alphacrucis College, to deliver the degree program.

The Alliance hopes to address wider social concerns about student teacher quality, high attrition rates in the profession and classroom readiness of graduates. The pilot program will lead the way in directly addressing these issues and becoming a model that can be replicated across Australia, particularly in regional areas.

The initiative reconnects schools with the training of the next generation of teachers and utilises the tertiary partnership to form a ‘Teaching School Hub’. The model is already operating successfully in the Hunter Valley NSW with a cluster of schools from St Philip’s Christian College group of schools.

Each Hub will assess applicants on the basis of proven volunteerism, ethos alignment, EQ, IQ and appropriate academic standards before commencing training.

Alphacrucis liaison for the Alliance, Dr David Hastie, said that the ‘Hub model’ of teacher training provides significant benefits to the schools as well as the trainee teachers. “The clinical training approach embedded in the model has proven to be effective across the globe, but this Hub model adapts it for our unique Australia education context. The model provides professional and contextual preparation with a wealth of experience in curriculum development, assessment, small group teaching, parent interaction, problem-solving and conflict resolution."

“The trainees are also well supported, their tuition fees are subsidised, they are paid part-time as a teaching assistant and they graduate with significant work experience."

A typical Alliance trainee will spend 1-2 days per week paid to work in the classroom with a Mentor Teacher, which means that by the completion of their degree the trainee will already have hundreds of days of school-based experience.

The academic program includes a mixture of local face-to-face intensives, mentor training, and online coursework. A significant point of difference from existing models is that the training follows the rhythms of the school calendar rather than the traditional university calendar. This means that trainee teachers are receiving 40 weeks of training each year rather than the common university calendar of two 13-week semesters.

The degrees awarded are the same degrees awarded at traditional universities with the same standards, rigour and accountability to the governing bodies that set and monitor academic standards in Australia. In addition, the pilot is to be evaluated by an independent research team.

Full and partial scholarships are available to prospective trainees.

Background:

Blue Mountains Grammar School is a co-educational Pre-Kindergarten to Year 12 Christian school in the Anglican tradition. The school has two campuses located at Wentworth Falls and Valley Heights.

St Andrew’s Cathedral School is a co-educational Kindergarten to Year 12 Anglican school located in Sydney’s CBD.

The Scots College is a Pre-Kindergarten to Year 12 non-selective Presbyterian boys' school for day and boarding students. The College has campuses in Bellevue Hill, Rose Bay, Dolls Point and Kangaroo Valley.

Inaburra School is a co-educational Kindergarten to Year 12 Baptist school located in Sydney’s South.

William Clarke College is a Pre-school to Year 12 co-educational Anglican College located in Kellyville in Sydney’s north west.

Alphacrucis College is Australia’s largest Protestant-affiliated tertiary provider, and is aligned to the Pentecostal denomination. Founded in 1948, the College’s main campus is located in Parramatta with additional campuses in Brisbane, Melbourne, Hobart, Adelaide, Perth and Auckland.

Media release. Contact: Dr David Hastie – 0405 153 048. Alphacrucis College, Associate Dean, Education Development. david.hastie@ac.edu.au






Lure of big cities too strong for regional Australia to keep migrants, despite government efforts

Over four decades, country towns have mostly failed to retain migrants, according to the most comprehensive snapshot of Australian migration ever collated.

And this trend of migrants moving to the cities appears to be increasing, despite repeated government efforts to make life in the regions more appealing.

Professor James Raymer, who led a team of Australian National University (ANU) researchers to collect and refine almost 40 years of data, said migrants in a regional or remote area have a "very low chance" of staying in that area, and this pattern has been "very consistent over time".

"Most will leave within a five-year period, over half, if not 70 per cent, will leave, and if they're going to stay in Australia they're going to go to one of the big cities, probably Sydney or Melbourne," he said.

"What we actually see in the data, the chances of them leaving remote and regional areas has been increasing for a lot of the newer migrant groups."

Same access to services

Immigration Minister David Coleman is confident the new visas will attract migrants to regional communities and keep them there.

"We want skilled migrants to settle in regional areas long-term and want to ensure they are not disadvantaged compared to permanent migrants in our major cities," he said.

The visas require migrants to work in regions on temporary visas for three years before they are eligible for permanent residency.

Proposed laws will give these temporary visa holders the same access to welfare and government services as permanent visa holders.

"This Government will continue to back those migrants who commit to living and working in regional areas, to support local economies and contribute to regional communities," Mr Coleman said.

Details of the visas are still emerging, as the Department of Home Affairs holds briefings with migration agents and lawyers around the country.

However, the Migration Institute of Australia has criticised the decision to require regional-based migrants to earn $53,900 a year in order to qualify for permanent residency.

"While the Government is telling regional Australia it is listening to concerns about skills shortages, they are going to make it as hard as possible to fill them," institute president John Hourigan said.

"The requirement to earn this level of income for three years is not reasonable given the already suppressed nature of rural economies struggling with drought and diminishing investment."

New glimpse of internal migration

The ANU data is the most comprehensive picture of regional migration ever collected in Australia.

Across 47 regions and 19 nationality groups, the project tracks who has moved where every year back to 1981.

It finds that regions in Queensland, Western Australia and the Northern Territory have the lowest rates of retention of migrants.

Professor Raymer said his study also found that, for the most part, people were becoming increasingly settled. "The likelihood of us moving in Australia has been decreasing, so we're less likely to make moves across Australia these days as we were in the 1980s."

SOURCE  






Medicine prices in Australia among the cheapest in the world, research shows

If you take medication for several health issues, you may be surprised to find out Australia has some of the cheapest prescription drugs in the world.

A recent drug price index compared the cost of 13 common medications across 50 countries and found on average the prices were 25 per cent below the median global cost.

These medications were used to treat common health conditions including heart disease, asthma, depression, anxiety disorders and erectile dysfunction.

Australia ranked as the 11th most affordable place to buy common prescription drugs, including antidepressant fluoxetine (better known as Prozac) and erectile dysfunction drug sildenafil (marketed as Viagra).

"I wasn't surprised to see us the top of the list for affordability," said Anna Kemp-Casey, research fellow at the University of South Australia who was not involved in the study.

"Our Commonwealth does a really good job of negotiating prices for things that go on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme."

In Australia, the vast majority of prescription drugs are subsidised by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) which aims to ensure people have access to affordable medication.

The price index, conducted by healthcare company Medbelle, found drugs were cheapest in Thailand, Kenya and Malaysia, while the US topped the list for having the most expensive pharmaceuticals.

"Mostly that's to do with lack of regulation around pricing," Dr Kemp-Casey said.

"It's a free market in terms manufacturers being able to charge what they like, which is not the case in Australia."

Australia fared best (in terms of affordability) with cholesterol-lowering drug atorvastatin (brand name Lipitor), our second-most commonly prescribed medications, and sildenafil.

The cost of life saving lung cancer and leukaemia drugs will soon be slashed after the Government listed new medications on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme.

There are, however, a handful of medicines the index found to be significantly more expensive in Australia than in other parts of the world, such as the sedative alprazolam (marketed as Xanax) and insulin glargine (branded Lantus), used to treat diabetes.

But Dr Kemp-Casey said the drugs found to be less affordable in Australia weren't a cause for great concern, since they are either new (and so don't have a cheaper generic version) or aren't doctors first choice of treatment.

"Our ability to negotiate a low price with the manufacturers is much less than another country who is using [a drug] first line ... because their market is much bigger," she said.

"It makes sense to pay more for something we don't want to use as much of. "In terms of things we'd be expect people to be using a lot of in Australia … they are the very low-priced ones, and that makes sense."

Generic drug prices in Australia were more than 36 per cent lower than the global median, while brand drug prices were 7 per cent cheaper, the index found.

While Australia fared well in the ranking, Dr Kemp-Casey said this index should be interpreted with some caution, as it only looks at 13 types of medicine.

"When you look at a larger range of generic medicines, things might come out a little differently," she said.

Medicines still too expensive for chronically ill

In 2017 a Grattan Institute Report found Australians were still paying too much for prescription drugs because of "loopholes" in PBS pricing policies.

Dr Kemp-Casey said the Australian system was largely affordable for people in good health, but those with chronic illness or multiple diseases found the cost of medicines prohibitive.

Under the PBS, the government subsidises the cost of medicine, so that general patients pay no more than $40.30 (for most PBS medicines), and concession card-holders pay a maximum of $6.50.

"It's not unusual for me to hear about someone who has 15 or 20 different medicines they take in a month," she said. "You multiply each one of those by $6.50, and you can start to see how things get very expensive for people, especially on low income."

The PBS Safety Net is designed to protect patients (and their families) who require a large number of medicines in one calendar year by discounting or eliminating the cost of drugs once they reach a certain threshold.

But Dr Kemp-Casey said, unlike the Medicare Safety Net, in which medical expenses are automatically recorded, patients using the PBS are required to keep track of their own spending.

"Unless you go to the same chemist every time … those records aren't all kept in one place," Dr Kemp-Casey said. "So, a lot of people are probably eligible for the safety net who don't actually get there … that causes extra hardship too."

SOURCE  






Thriving in drought: How investing big in water saved the Brown family

The Barkly Tableland is a large inland area about half way between Darwin and Alice Springs, a most unpropitious location for any economic activity.  But grass does grow there most years

When Adrian and Emma Brown bought Amungee Mungee Station in 2014 to build intensive cattle production in the Northern Territory, they were warned it could be an expensive project that may not succeed.

But five years on, their business has been thriving. They haven't had major destocking, like most nearby properties on the Barkly Tablelands

Their bold cattle management strategy allows them to run more cattle without degrading the land

The Browns have built some of the most significant water infrastructure in the northern pastoral industry and it's holding them in good stead amidst the lowest rainfall on record in the Barkly Tablelands.

As a result of the drought, hundreds of thousands of cattle have been trucked from properties in the region, and the Browns say if it wasn't for the water infrastructure development, they would have de-stocked too.

"We're really starting to push forward at a rapid rate and this drought probably won't hold us back," Mr Brown said.

But Ms Brown said investing in this water infrastructure wasn't just about drought-proofing but also getting better use of the entire property during all types of conditions.

"There was never a question of let's put a massive development in for the one in seven years where we don't get a wet season," she said. "It was … we've got an investment here, we've spent the money buying the land but we're not using it, so it's like having a hotel and only using the bottom floor when there's another 20 floors above it.

"So, we basically said let's be able to utilise as much of the country as we can and do it in a way that it's sustainable long term.

"We don't want to put 1,000 cattle on a watering point and run them there for the rest of time, we want to be able to have 200 cattle in a paddock, do a slow rotation system so the country is getting spelled and there is no land degradation happening."

Within three years at Amungee Mungee, carrying capacity increased from 2,600 cattle in a normal season to over 40,000.

"Our feed quality has improved so we're now in a position where we can actually sell at this time of the year which is great," Ms Brown said.

The family also doesn't have the stress of needing to scramble to buy cattle once the drought does break, where prices will probably go up and quality breeding cattle will be in demand.

"This de-stocking program hurts for three to four years ahead," Mr Brown said.

So how does it work?

The Browns say it's a simple strategy that includes restricting the cattle numbers in a paddock by fencing off paddocks extensively, installing more water tanks and troughs so cattle walk no more than four kilometres for a drink.

This means they don't lose condition and allows them to graze across more areas. It also means less land degradation.

At Amungee Mungee there are also 200 sites where pasture is monitored and water quality is tested, and this helps them with long-term budgeting for grass.

The Browns have now expanded their project to other stations.

Along with their long-term investor, billionaire Brett Blundy, the Browns have now purchased two more stations, Walhallow and Creswell Downs on the Barkly Tableland.

The same infrastructure and cattle management plans will be rolled out at those stations over the next few years.

But building the infrastructure in conditions where temperatures push over 40C can test workers. Gary Cutting, who's in charge of fencing more than 1,000 kilometres on Creswell Station, says it's hard work, but they've found ways to cope. "We get to rotate and sit in the aircon for 400 metres so it's not too bad," Mr Cutting said.

Innovation is part of the solution; Mr Brown and his team invented a fencing machine that can cover more than six kilometres in a day using a GPS and a barbed wire machine that strains the fence as they go.

Unlike building in the city, popping down to the local hardware store isn't an option — so thousands of pieces of this infrastructure puzzle all have had to be brought in from hundreds of kilometres away.

Dealing with those long distances led the Browns to another idea.

Innovation in the outback

They were unhappy with the quality of polythene pipe and concrete troughs being brought up from southern states, so they decided to build their own.

They'd also seen the limited options for products to build up infrastructure on Ms Brown's family property Beetaloo Station on the edge of the Barkly Tableland.

"We just saw a market, there was no-one specialising in that, so we basically moved to Katherine and started the trough business," Ms Brown said.

Since then the products have been in such demand from pastoralists and the mining sector that the Browns recently opened a new factory and large extrusion shed in Darwin to bring all of their manufacturing into one location.

They can produce tanks, troughs, barbed wire and polythene pipe of different sizes.

The Browns say they're motivated by a desire to show the rest of the country what can be done in northern Australia if the right investment is made.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here




26 November 2019

Marine heatwaves threatening Australia's oyster industry and affecting Great Barrier Reef, scientists warn

Note the dog that didn't bark below.  The people involved are NOT barking about global warming.  They cannot logically do so.  If waters are warming much more rapidly than the global rate, it is not global warming!  Sometimes a tautology is needed

Waters off parts of Australia are warming at some of the most rapid rates in the world, threatening the future of some of the country's most important marine industries, scientists say.

Scientists say the heatwaves are having a severe impact on oysters — and threaten the future of the industry — as well plants and creatures that rely on the ocean for life, pushing some into new areas, while killing others.

"The oceans are really ringing the alarm bells," said CSIRO biological oceanographer Alistair Hobday, a leading expert on MHWs.

"[The oceans] are telling us we've got big problems and those problems are not going to go away."

A MHW is defined as a period of warm water that lasts five days or longer, where temperatures are in the top 10 per cent of events typically experienced in that region.

They are graded in severity — similar to how cyclones are — with category five being the most intense.

The heatwaves lead to outbreaks of diseases that can be fatal to oysters and other molluscs, and reduce the reproduction rates of species such as salmon and abalone as well as killing seagrass and kelp.

"[We thought] marine heatwaves were an example of what the climate would look like in 100 years time," Dr Hobday said. "But we [are] getting it today."

SOURCE  





The federal bureaucracy has continued to shed jobs and is now at its smallest size in 13 years, after losing more than 3,000 staff over 12 months

This is good news, somewhat tempered by the increased use of  contractors.  Contractors are under much more pressure to perform

The Australian Public Service (APS) has been shrinking since 2012 — a trend that has coincided with increased government spending on consultants and labour-hire firms.

The latest snapshot of the public service shows it employed 147,237 staff on June 30 — 2.1 per cent less than a year earlier.

Most of the job losses were in the Tax Office and Services Australia, which includes Medicare and Centrelink offices.

The Government explained the reductions in a report, saying "fluctuations in the overall [staff] headcount occur for many reasons, including seasonal patterns, business and government requirements, and demand".

The decline of the APS workforce divided political parties during this year's election campaign. A parliamentary committee had also been examining the growing use of businesses to do government work, but its inquiry was abandoned when the election was called.

Labor pledged to end staffing cuts and reduce spending on contractors and consultants, saying the loss of government jobs was a "false economy" because buying the skills from elsewhere cost more.

Australian National University academic Leo Dobes also warned the reliance on consultants had left the APS with too few skilled economists and "a woeful lack of ability and knowledge in that area".

However, the Coalition argues that using outside expertise makes the Government more flexible and efficient.

Finance Minister Mathias Cormann told public servants last year that contractors and consultants could "keep the overall cost of government administration low, when the business needs to access relevant skills and expertise, or a surge in demand for certain public services is temporary".

The federal budget papers also point out that per capita spending on administration (whether on public servants or businesses) is falling, which Senator Cormann says is good — it should be "as much as necessary but also should be as little as possible".

A former deputy head of the Finance Department, Pegasus Economics director Stephen Bartos, says the private sector can be more cost-effective — if used sparingly.

"Unfortunately, what we have seen, in … some departments, is over-reliance on consultants, when there is ongoing work that would be more cheaply and effectively done by public servants," Mr Bartos said.

Lure of cities too strong?

Former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce managed to move an agriculture regulator — the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority — from Canberra to his regional New South Wales electorate, provoking an uproar and staff resignations in the process.

But the Government's policy of shifting the APS workforce out of the nation's big cities appears to have failed so far.

Since the policy was announced in 2017, the proportion of public servants who work in Australia's six largest cities (Canberra and larger) has remained exactly 82 per cent — a ratio that hasn't budged in seven years.

SOURCE  






Parents give Australian school policies poor report card

Parents are generally satisfied with how much money their child’s school has, but they don’t agree with how it is spent. If that sounds familiar it’s because it echoes what the CIS has been arguing for years.

The results of a national survey of more than 1,000 parents (relating to 1,394 children) — revealed in the CIS policy paper released this week: What Do Parents Want from Schools? — show that 88% of parents believe their child’s school has enough or more than enough funding. This includes 86% of parents with a child in a government school.

This cuts against the dominant education policy discourse — driven by the union movement and progressive educationalists — which both major parties have swallowed hook, line and sinker.

It is already clear that huge increases in public funding aren’t delivering educational improvements. This new research also shows that it is also not what parents want either.

The unions have rallied — and largely won — for money to be spent on endlessly reducing classroom sizes (presumably unsatisfied until we are practically educating one-to-one), increasing teachers’ pay (presumably until it’s in line with doctors), and amassing an army of support staff in schools.

In contrast to these priorities, parents say that they want to see better facilities and more extra-curricular activities offered at their chosen schools. This could be because funding for capital works is around one-eleventh of that of the spending on staffing. And extra-curriculars are generally paid for out of parents’ own pockets and in their own time.

The research also found that a considerable proportion of parents regret their choice of a school for their children, with around 40% saying they either would not choose the same school again or were unsure if they would.

This means that around 1.6 million students are enrolled in a school that their parents aren’t happy with. However, some appear to be more happy than others.

Unsurprisingly, those that felt limited in their choice — around two-thirds of surveyed parents — are less satisfied with the school their child is in.

Those that chose a non-government school, for instance, appear to be happier with their choice. This appears to be linked with findings of higher levels of confidence in how funding is being used in non-government schools, compared to their government school peers.

And parents who sought independent sources of information to help with their choice of school — like meeting with school staff, visiting school websites, and checking the MySchool website — are more likely to be happier with their choice. As the old adage goes, more informed shoppers are happier shoppers.

When it comes to school funding and school choice, this research is a poor report card on policymakers in state and federal government. It’s past time for government to listen to the message that parents want to see a spending shakeup and that more choice is indispensable to educational improvements.

SOURCE  





A friend of free speech bows out, integrity intact

In the final months of 2016, a jaded Cory Bernardi was cooling his heels on a 12-week parliamentary secondment to the UN in New York.

The conservative Liberal senator was fed up with the leftward drift of the party under the prime ministership of Malcolm Turnbull, who had limped across the line at an election earlier that year having wrested the leadership from Bernardi’s good friend Tony Abbott the year before.

Bernardi, a lifelong Liberal supporter, was having dark thoughts. Through circumstance, he was now living in the same city as his mentor, former Howard government minister Nick Minchin, who was then the Australian consul-general in New York.

Minchin had sponsored Bernardi’s rise through South Australian Liberal ranks in the early 2000s as a powerful and intelligent young conservative, challenging the state’s historic moderate domination. Minchin knew where Bernardi’s mind was at, and he set to work. “While Cory was in New York we spent many a while together talking it through," Minchin tells The Weekend Australian.

“There were quite a few of us who had difficulties with Malcolm’s view of the world. But I did a lot of work to persuade him not to leave. I wanted him to grit his teeth and hang in there. I understood what he was thinking because I had also been shattered by the Turnbull coup against Abbott, but I was desperate to keep him in the party."

Minchin’s pleas failed to convince Bernardi, who on his return home in 2017 quit the party in ­disillusionment at Turnbull’s lead­ership and founded the unsuccess­ful Australian Conservatives.

“I understood why he did it. But he sacrificed what would have been a long and successful senior ministerial career. He could have gone all the way," Minchin says.

This week, Bernardi announced he was leaving politics for good, but with no sense of ­regret at having quit the Liberals or derailing his own career. “I remember those chats with Nick and he definitely did sound a cautioning note in our conversations," Bernardi tells The Weekend Australian.

“I had confided in a couple of people about where I was at. He said that I needed to realise what it would mean for my life and my ­career. It was a mentor’s concern, that I needed to understand the implications of leaving. But like all my good friends he understood the motivations for my decision. And I can console myself in the fact that the people who said bad things about me after I quit were already saying bad things about me before then ­anyway."

Bernardi may be unique in the annals of Australian political betrayal in that he is the only politician to have “ratted" on his party and still received a warm send-off from many of the people he abandoned.

Bernardi, who turned 50 this month, will leave the parliament at the end of the year, with the SA Liberals to hold a fresh preselection to find his replacement.

The announcement came almost three years after he walked away from the Liberal Party, for whom he was elected a senator for South Australia back in 2006.

Unlike most other famous political defections and departures, Bernardi’s was motivated by ­neither spite nor self-interest.

He wasn’t Mal Colston walking out on Labor in 1996, enraged at having been denied the glorious honour of elevation to the Senate deputy presidency.

Bernardi’s reasons — like Bernardi himself — were 100 per cent ideological.

He had come to regard his relationship to the Liberal Party, then under the leadership of Turnbull, as akin to a bad marriage, where he felt that his own role was pointless and that he was living a lie ­remaining in a party that, he believed, was swinging leftward away from its traditional values.

And rather than acting out of self-interest, he acted against his own interests, in that the party he founded on his departure, ­Australian Conservatives, endured what Bernardi described with trademark bluntness as “an unmitigated disaster" at this year’s election, polling just 16,000 first-preference votes in his home state, less than one-third the result enjoyed in South Australia by One Nation.

The fledgling party had been caught in a pincer movement with traditional Liberal conservatives returning to the fold once Scott Morrison replaced Turnbull, and the headline-grabbing Pauline Hanson scooping up disaffected blue-collar and regional right-wing voters.

“The inescapable conclusion from our lack of political success, our financial position and the re-election of a Morrison-led government is that the rationale for the creation of the Australian Conservatives is no longer valid," Bernardi wrote on the party’s website in June on announcing its deregistration.

Bernardi is now in the business of cleaning out his office in the inner-eastern suburb of Kent Town ahead of a return to the family business where he received his start in the 1990s, as publican of the now-defunct hotel Bernardi’s, a rollicking city pub propped up by an army of drunken journalists from the neighbouring Advertiser building.

Bernardi became famous for a string of so-called controversies that stemmed from his enthusiasm for plain speech, be it on ­issues such as banning the burka or his defence of the traditional family unit. While in New York, he had a front-row seat for the unheralded rise of Donald Trump, deliberately goading his lefty critics back home by posing on social media wearing a red “Make America Great Again" baseball cap.

He says this week he has been reflecting on the battles he has had during the past 13 years, most of which emanated from his lived commitment to freedom of speech. He fears that censorship, self-censorship and a growing inability to agree to disagree are now the biggest threat to the exchange of ideas.

“A lot of the battles I had were really because people weren’t ready for the conversations," he tells The Weekend Australian.

“In the fullness of time we can now have mainstream talk about the problems with China and its interference in our political system, the merits or otherwise of high immigration levels, or altering our cultural norms. I am happy to have participated and in some cases led those ­debates.

“If we stifle free speech or the battle of ideas we will go backwards as a country. I know it’s not what Australians want.

“When I consider the relationships I have formed in Canberra, there are people I respect on all sides of the political divide. It’s because I respect their intellect, their consistency, their application of principle, and the fact that they are prepared to counter the political battle in a rational and sensible way. The ones I have the least ­respect for are those who are reactive, emotionally driven, rather than driven by an actual factual nature.

“We can’t have a society where we say ‘we are going to denigrate your character because we disagree with what you say’.

“Now too often it’s about shrillness and denigrating others. Any society where 100 per cent of the people are agreeing 100 per cent of the time is a false one. You can go to North Korea for that."

Minchin says that when Bernardi emerged on the SA political scene in the late 1990s, he was keen to enlist him to the cause in a state where the party had been historically dominated by small-l Liberals. At the time, Minchin was at the height of his enmity with moderate powerbroker Christopher Pyne. The Howard cabinet also replicated the SA factional split, with Minchin and foreign minister Alexander Downer flying the flag for the Right in a sometimes uneasy coalition with moderate ministers Amanda Vanstone and Robert Hill.

“When I got to know Cory I was struck by our common judgment on a whole range of issues," Minchin says. “He and I shared a common view of the world. He was a fellow traveller for me, a fellow conservative. He was also a very commanding figure, and a good mate. A loyal mate. Someone who was keen to get stuck in and help the party.

“My friends and I were always on the lookout for young conservative talent to bring through the ranks. He wasn’t someone who was there out of ego or a thirst for self-promotion. At the time the moderates did have a bit of a grip on the younger side of the party and Cory helped challenge that. He did it by being honest and ­direct. He was never a game-player, he was never devious, he was what you see is what you get, not like some of the cockroaches that scurry around."

Bernardi feels no qualms about ending his career the way he did. “I don’t take any angst or unhappiness out of this. I’ve had a wonderful journey and I’ve met some extraordinary people. Your opponents often make you better. The qualities I admire in others — integrity, honesty, resilience — are all enhanced by your opponents picking on you when they think you’re wrong."

And while he won’t name names, he confirms that there are several farewells planned in Canberra by his former party colleagues. “There are a lot of dinners," he says. “They’re all secret though."

SOURCE  

Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here






25 November, 2019

Are the Left now toning down the hate?

I believe Joe Hildebrand is right below in saying that the current level of hate in Australian Federal politics is an historical departure. 

Sir Robert Menzies, Australia's most storied conservative Prime Minister, ran Australia for most of the 50s and 60s and always had a good reply to his Leftist critics.  And he kept them out of office over many elections. 

In his retirement he wrote two autobiographies.  I read both  shortly after they came out.  That is a long time ago so I remember now little of what I read then.  The one thing in them that has stuck in my mind is his praise for his erstwhile opponents in the Labor party.  He described them quite warmly -- as good and sincere men who honestly believed they were working for the good of the country.

So what Hildebrand says below of the Hawke era in fact goes back a long way.  Politics in Australia were for a very long time marked by real interpersonal civility


I was talking to Bob Hawke’s widow Blanche d’Alpuget.

It was the first time we had spoken since Hawke’s death – which is hardly surprising since we hardly know each other – but like anyone with a passing relationship with the Labor Party, I somehow felt that they were part of my extended family.

At any rate, I certainly felt very close to her then and as we talked about Bob’s death it was clear that she was a woman blown apart. You could see right through to her shaken soul.

But when we talked about Bob’s legacy that soul turned to steel. Hawke was, above all else, a consensus builder – a peacemaker. He took not just his party with him on his and Keating’s grand economic project but often the opposition too.

As Blanche angrily lamented, even amid all the fire and fury of political and parliamentary life, politicians always used to work together behind the scenes to get things done. They would shake hands, do deals and share jokes behind the Speaker’s chair. They would work across the aisle – bridging the often artificial divide between left and right – in pursuit of what used to be known as the common good.

This was Australian politics’ dirty little secret: The people that pretended to hate each other actually quite liked each other.

And this was the culture that prevailed in Canberra under both Labor and the Coalition for a quarter of a century – so much so that when an escalating travel rorts war resulted in a senator attempting suicide both sides immediately agreed to a ceasefire.

But a decade ago that all changed. A nasty condition known as “the NSW disease" crept into Canberra, a culture in which leaders were brutally knifed at the first whisper of discontent and which swept through both the Labor Party and the Coalition, decimating them both.

It is no coincidence that all of this took place in the new age of social media – in which politicians, activists and any member of the public could slug it out directly without the niceties of standing orders or news cycles.

And it is no coincidence that it happened amid the online news revolution, in which both old and new media outlets became more tribal than ever in an effort to hold or attract their audience.

One man who was at the centre of it all was Craig Emerson, a softly-spoken economist and academic who was an adviser to Hawke before entering parliament and becoming a minister under the fractious Rudd and Gillard governments.

Emerson’s latest thankless task for Labor was to find out how it lost the unlosable election, which he and former premier Jay Weatherill dutifully performed. Their conclusion is neatly summarised in the report as follows:

“Labor should position itself as a party of economic growth and job creation. Labor should adopt the language of inclusion, recognising the contribution of small and large businesses to economic prosperity, and abandon derogatory references to ‘the big end of town’. Labor’s policy formulation should be guided by the national interest, avoiding any perception of capture by special interest groups."

In short, the party needed to be inclusive, not divisive. And it was a philosophy Emerson took to heart when he bravely defended Barnaby Joyce in the unbecoming shitstorm that accompanied last week’s bushfire disaster.

Emerson observed that contrary to the outrage being generated by both social and mainstream media, Joyce had not been attacking two dead bushfire victims for being Greens supporters but clumsily trying to say that he wouldn’t – albeit for reasons known only to Barnaby himself.

For this attempt at nuance Emerson was naturally crucified on social media, leading him to write a thoughtful piece for the Australian Financial Review lamenting the blind ideological tribalism that had taken hold of politics.

And of course for this he was naturally crucified by blind ideological tribalists. He was condemned for breaking a cultural embargo in his effort to bridge the divide.

But he was not alone. In the small pond of Australian politics, Emerson’s piece received a tsunami of support – not from alt-right fascists, as his extreme left accusers tried to claim – but from the leading lights at the ABC. The Germans might have brought down the Berlin Wall but it was Annabel Crabb who brought down the AFR paywall when she tweeted a picture of the whole column as a vital read for her half a million followers.

And of course Emerson joins a growing number of leaders from the moderate left who are coming to realise the extreme left poses a greater threat to their cause than the moderate right does. No less a figure than Barack Obama this month condemned “woke" cancel culture and plenty of once-woke celebrities from Sarah Silverman to Michael Leunig have found out the hard way that the hard left only loves you until they come for you.

The champions of censorship like to claim that they are on the right side of history but it is just possible that future historians may remember this November as the time when cancel culture got cancelled.

Man, I hope I live to see that.

SOURCE  





Update from Bettina on firefighters

Just a quick post-script to my recent firefighter skirmish.

Last week I heard from a professional firefighter telling me he’d approached his employers for funding for a small event to be held on International Men’s Day. He was told none was available but he could “apply for funding" for possible future events. Last March their organization, which consists of over 95% male employees, held lavish celebrations for International Women’s Day.

Here’s what he wrote to me: “I would love for you to be a voice for male firefighters to bring attention to this brazen inequality and insult to men; who risk their lives for others day in day out during their professional careers as firefighters. As you know, sadly in this current climate it is probably not wise for me to make noise about it myself for the backlash and fallout may be career limiting. ??"

I was very happy to be able to appear on Sky News last Tuesday, for International Men’s Day. And my short interview with Chris Kenny did focus on our brave firemen and the fallout over former Victorian equal opportunity commissioner Moira Rayner’s attempt to smear me.

We’ve made a short video of that interview. Given that over 5,600 people ‘liked’ her twitter post having a go at me, it would be great if you could circulate this video so people know she fell flat on her face. Here’s the link:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDYF3hSAgG4

Via email




Decline in nurse education standards

Union claims graduates unable to perform basic tasks

Student nurses nearing the end of their training are unable to perform basic tasks such as calculate medication doses, set up IVs or take blood pressure, leaving them flailing in high-pressure hospital wards.

Explosive claims by the Nurses Professional Association of Queensland highlight the career is in crisis and some graduates are declaring their $20,000 nursing degrees are worthless.

The union says the "dumbing down" of bachelor of nursing degrees means necessary practical skills are missing, knowledge of anatomy is poor and patient interaction often appalling, posing serious risk not only to patients but to the students themselves who are filled with anxiety and fear.

Veteran nurses report that many registered nurse trainees lack the stamina for a busy shift in today's hospitals that have fast turnover of patients and some have no more knowledge of health conditions than the patients themselves.

The Queensland Nurses and Midwives Union says that the problem lies with the lack of time available for experienced clinicians to act as mentors and instructors to students on clinical placement and to nurses at other stages of practice development.

"That is the systemic fix we need far more than any tinkering with the educational preparation program," QNMU assistant secretary Sandra Eales told The Sunday Mail. The QNMU insists that nursing work is at the core of why hospitals exist and nurses are not "bottom rung".

The Nurses Professional Association of Queensland was set up five years ago as an alternative to the QNMU. It is not a registered industrial body but has close to 4000 members.

Phill Tsingos is 'a clinical nurse in the emergency department of a Queensland hospital. He has been nursing for 27 'years and is a supervisor to student nurses, and is very concerned about the level of nurse education. "I have worked with students who were doing a bachelor of nursing and gained access to the degree with an OP 20.[A very low high school mark]

I see some in their third year and am stunned at times over the lack of knowledge. "Don't get me wrong, we have some great young people but the general standard is not up to scratch," he said. "Many do not know how to spike an IV fluid bag or calculate medication doses when they are at the end of their degree. "Patients often know more about health conditions than the students. "I would struggle to trust some of the students."

Mr Tsingos says student nurses need more on-the-job experience rather than being stuck in a classroom learning the difference between private and public hospitals.

"The universities are turning out a glut of nurses, many of whom have little chance getting a job," he said. "One girl went for an interview for one of 30 jobs in Brisbane and there were 90 plus vying for the positions. "The whole sector needs an overhaul."

State Health Minister Steven Miles says he is disappointed to hear an association talk down the skill set studies of nurses. "We have highly trained and hardworking nurses and midwives employed in our public hospitals," he said. "There are many rutal areas in Queensland that are struggling to recruit nurses  and midwives.

"The National Graduate Outcomes Survey suggests that 90.4 per cent of graduate nurses were employed in 2019 and 91.5 per cent in 2018." Tertiary education, including university places, are the responsibility of the Federal Government.

Flagging the need for change, an independent national review "Educating the Nurse of the Future" has just been completed and the final report, taking into consideration 83 submissions, has been presented to federal Health Minister Greg Hunt. The report will be considered by government and a plan for public release developed soon. The review was announced as part of the 2018-19 Federal Budget.

Ms Eales says there is no evidence of admissions to nursing with OP 20s. "Skills acquisition within the workplace, both practical and theoretic, is as important as classroom or simulated learning environments," she said. "Professional Practice Environment is key to ensure safe learning at all levels and stages of nursing practice development."

NPAQ founding director Graeme Haycroft says if there is a shortage of nurses their value goes up. "The first responsibility of any union is to ensure there is a 'small' shortage of your member base skills," he said. "If there is a shortage of nurses wages go up in response."

Mr Haycroft says there has been an ongoing campaign by the QNMU to constantly train and recruit more nurses to the point that there is a glut "There are thousands and thousands of three-year degree nurses who will never get a fourth and final grad year enabling them to become a trained nurse who can start on the bottom rung in a hospital" he said.

From the Brisbane "Sunday Mail" of 24 November, 2019





Fuel tax hike will send us broke, truckies warn

A massive hike in trucking taxes, being secretly considered by state and federal transport ministers, could send firms broke and increase the cost of groceries and other goods, the industry warns.

Transport industry associ­ations have told The Australian they are aware of plans to increase the Road User Charge, which already adds 25.8c to the cost of every litre of diesel used by heavy trucks.

The Queensland Trucking Association said it understood the hike, ending a three-year freeze on RUC rises, to be as much as 11.8 per cent over three years when combined with increases in the roads component of state registration charges.

“When you’re looking at companies on margins of about 4c in the dollar, an increase like this could well send a number of businesses to the wall," QTA chief executive Gary Mahon said.

“It is three times the CPI for three consecutive years. It may only be 3c a litre but when you look at the consumption levels of our industry, that is big money.

“The second biggest bill a transport company gets is fuel, after wages. It’s a significant component of road freight, and there is nothing that happens in the economy that road freight does not underpin."

He said the proposed tax hike would cost trucking companies an estimated $650m over three years, flowing through to consumers when contracts were renegotiated, or else forcing firms to cut jobs or close.

In an industry contributing to 8.6 per cent of the nation’s gross domestic product, this could have a disastrous further dampening effect on the sluggish national economy.

“One way or the other, the taxpayer is going to feel the difference," Mr Mahon said.

The Transport and Infrastructure Council of state, federal and New Zealand ministers is due to meet in Melbourne this week to discuss the proposed tax hike.

Any commercial heavy vehicle weighing more than 4.5 tonnes pays the RUC, as well as state heavy vehicle registration charges, with proceeds used to fund road construction and maintenance. The federal transport minister can vary the rate and collects the diesel component of the charge, which was set at 25.8c per litre in November 2016.

Mr Mahon said the industry already paid its “fair share" towards road funding. This included via toll charges, which had grown in recent years to raise $1.5bn a year along the eastern seaboard alone, an amount equal to ­registration charges levied by all jurisdictions.

The industry believed increases in the RUC above inflation treated the sector as a “cash cow" and were unjustified and “intolerable".

The national Australian Trucking Association has been in talks with federal Infrastructure and Transport Minister Michael McCormack, seeking to head off the plan.

ATA chairman Geoff Crouch, also managing director of Ron Crouch Transport, said trucking firms were already overcharged for their impact on roads.

“The projected over-recovery for 2018-19 was $189.5m, all money that trucking operators should have been able to use to employ more staff and buy new equipment," Mr Crouch said.

“There is no justification for ­increasing the Road User Charge and registration charges.

“It’s a tax grab by the state and territory governments, and comes on top of dramatic increases in toll road and port access charges. The trucking industry simply can’t ­afford another tax hit."

Mr McCormack’s spokeswoman said: “No decision has been taken on heavy vehicle road users. This is a matter for all states and territories to discuss at a ministerial council meeting next week. “No changes will be made without extensive consultation with industry."

SOURCE 

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here




24 November 2019

The politicians are responsible for Australia's big fires, says the NYT

The NYT has noticed Australia's bushfires.  Bushfires suit their agenda a lot better than the punishing cold that is gripping most of America at the moment. On the U.S. data they would have to be talking about global cooling!

As was to be expected from the NYT, the fires are said to be all due to global warming.  Global warming explains everything, it seems. 

It would be good if we DID have warming at the moment.  Ocean warming would evaporate off more water vapor, which comes back down as rain, which would tend to put the fires out.  A warmer world would be a wetter world, much less conducive to fires.  Bring on that elusive warming!

Excerpt only below


When a mass shooting shattered Australia in 1996, the country banned automatic weapons. In its first years of independence, it enacted a living-wage law. Stable retirement savings, national health care, affordable college education — Australia solved all these issues decades ago.

But climate change is Australia’s labyrinth without an exit, where its pragmatism disappears.

The wildfires that continued raging on Wednesday along the country’s eastern coast have revealed that the politics of climate in Australia resist even the severe pressure that comes from natural disaster.

Instead of common-sense debate, there are culture war insults. The deputy prime minister calls people who care about climate change “raving inner-city lunatics." Another top official suggests that supporting the Greens party can be fatal. And while the government is working to meet the immediate need — fighting fires, delivering assistance — citizens are left asking why more wasn’t done earlier as they demand solutions.

“We still don’t have an energy policy, we don’t have effective climate policy — it’s really very depressing," said Susan Harris Rimmer, an associate professor at Griffith Law School. [LAW school?]

But in Australia, where coal is king and water is scarce, the country’s citizens have spent the week simmering with fear, shame and alarm. As a 500-mile stretch from Sydney to Byron Bay continued to face catastrophic fire conditions, with 80 separate blazes burning and at least four deaths reported, Australians have watched, awe-struck, as life-changing destruction has been met with political sniping.

Michael McCormack, the No. 2 official in the conservative government, kicked it off on Monday, telling listeners of the country’s most popular morning radio programs that fire victims needed assistance, not “the ravings of some pure, enlightened and woke capital city greenies."

Barnaby Joyce, the government’s special envoy for drought assistance, followed up by suggesting that two people killed by fires near a town called Glen Innes over the weekend might have contributed to their own deaths if they supported the Greens.

The victims’ neighbors called his comments “absolutely disgraceful."

But a Greens party senator responded with his own outrage: He said the major parties were “no better than arsonists," an insult carrying special weight for the world’s most arid inhabited continent....

Just a few days before the fires, for example, Prime Minister Scott Morrison told a mining group that new laws were needed to crack down on climate activists and progressives who “want to tell you where to live, what job you can have, what you can say and what you can think."

What’s galling for many scientists is that the public wants the federal government to do more; polls consistently show that Australians see climate change as a major threat requiring aggressive intervention.

SOURCE   







Aborigine shot after attacking police

He was an habitual law-defying criminal so his behaviour was in keeping with his record.  But because he was black there is a furore

He was a decorated rookie cop commended for his bravery. Now, he stands accused of the shooting murder of a young Aboriginal man.

Footage from police body cams will likely play a vital role in finding out exactly what happened last Saturday night that led to the final moments of the teenager’s life.

Police and the family of 19-year-old Kumanjayi Walker dispute what occurred in those fraught and violent few minutes before Constable Zachary Rolfe allegedly shot him either two or three times, splattering his blood across a mattress.

The footage may shed a light on why the cop made the decision to unload his firearm.

Police said Mr Walker was attacking officers. His family say the force used was out of proportion and he could have been Tasered rather than shot multiple times.

There are also questions as to why there were no medical staff in Yuendumu, deep in the Northern Territory, that night.

And why locals weren’t told of Mr Walker’s death until about 10 hours after it was confirmed as police tuned off the lights at the station and refused to speak to the distraught family outside.

Yesterday, Constable Rolfe, 28, was charged with murder.

At court hearing in Alice Springs, Constable Rolfe was granted bail and suspended with pay. The NT Police Association said he would plead not guilty. He is understood to have now left the Territory due to death threats.

The killing, which has been declared a death in custody, has stirred up ongoing anger about the deaths of Aboriginal people at the hands of police.

Again, questions are being raised as to whether the police’s responses to incidents involving Aboriginal Australians veer too quickly to lethal force.

This morning, NT Chief Minister Michael Gunner urged people to let the justice system do its job. “There are many people hurting in Yuendumu and around the Northern Territory and in our police force," he said. “As Territorians we have been through challenging times before, we cannot and will not let this divide us."

Constable Rolfe was a decorated officer before he was charged with murder.

According to the NT News, he was a star pupil at exclusive private school Canberra Grammar before joining Northern Territory Police in 2016.

Just days after he graduated from police college, he rescued two Hong Kong tourists who had been swept away in floodwaters at Alice Springs.

His valour won him the National Bravery Medal and the Royal Humane Society’s Clarke Medal for bravery, and Hong Kong awarded him the Bronze Medal for Bravery, the first time a foreigner had been given the gong for an incident outside of the Chinese territory.

As last Saturday dawned, police set off for Yuendumu, 300km northwest of Alice Springs.

Their plan was to arrest Mr Walker, a Warlpiri man. He was released from prison in October after serving eight of a 16-month sentence for unlawful entry, property damage and stealing offences with the remainder suspended, AAP reported.

But Mr Walker was allegedly breached his parole by removing an electronic monitoring device, among other offences.

Police had agreed to postpone the arrest to later that day to allow Mr Walker to attend the funeral of a relative.

It was a busy day in Yuendumu. As police were arriving and the funeral preparations were under way, medical staff were shipping out. There had been break-ins at the local clinic and rocks thrown through the car windows of staff. Health bosses said it wasn’t safe.

Once the funeral was done, at least two officers, including Constable Rolfe, went to arrest Mr Walker. It was 7pm and there was no immediate medical staff available should the arrest turn violent.

Which it did in the worst way.

“They came with two police cars; one parked on the other side of the house," witness Elizabeth Snape told The Australian.

According to some reports, Mr Walker was on his bed looking at his phone when police entered the property.

The NT News has quoted a source “close to the police" who said there was “face-to-face combat" between Mr Walker and the officers. One officer was reportedly stabbed, which allegedly led to the teen to be shot.

“During that time a struggle ensued and two shots were fired and he sadly passed away later," NT acting deputy commissioner Michael White said.

The teenager allegedly lunged at one officer as the pair tried to arrest him. “My understanding is he was armed with a weapon," Mr White said.

SOURCE  







Farmers ‘subsidising drivers of electric cars’

Farmers who drive long distances, and pay hefty petrol excise, are subsidising inner-city electric car drivers who pay none, prompting a peak infrastructure body to call for a “road user charge" on electric vehicles to share the tax burden more fairly.

Rapid forecast growth in electric vehicle sales will sap federal government fuel tax revenue but give state governments an ­opportunity to secure a growing source of revenue, according to a report by Infrastructure Partnerships Australia. “Applying a simple distance-based charge to electric vehicles will ensure every motorist makes a fair and sustainable contribution to the use of the roads and will help secure a vital stream of transport funding for generations to come," said IPA head Adrian Dwyer.

The report, released on Thursday, says: “Electric vehicle motorists pay nothing at the pump, and only contribute to the road network through state-based road access charges such as registration and licence fees.

“All motorists should pay their fair share. Without reform fewer road users, especially in regional areas who drive vast distances, will increasingly subsidise electric vehicle motorists."

Fuel excise collected per kilometre driven has steadily fallen from more than 7c in the late 1990s to just over 4c in 2017 as consumers switch to more ­efficient cars and electric vehicles, which are expected to grow from 0.3 per cent of new car sales in 2018 to 8 per cent by 2025.

“While a shift to electric vehicles could be great for the environment, we still need to make sure we can fund transport services to help people spend less time in their cars," Mr Dwyer said.

The IPA said a 4 cent per kilometre road user charge, broadly equivalent with what most other motorists pay, wouldn’t discourage take-up of electric vehicles, which are expected to increase in cost effectiveness against petrol-powered cars as battery technology improves and charging stations become more prevalent.

It was imperative to act soon, though, given electric vehicles made up only 0.076 per cent of the light vehicle fleet, before a new tax became politically untenable. “While the revenue raised is unlikely to be substantial in the short term, it could raise rapidly as uptake grows — into the hundreds of millions each year for a large state and the billions by 2030," the report says.

The NSW government’s review of federal financial relations, released last month, canvassed alternative state revenue sources to replace “highly inefficient" property stamp duty, shrinking coverage of the GST, including road user chrging.

The Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics predicts the electric vehicle share to hit 27 per cent in 2030 and 50 per cent by 2035.

SOURCE  






Phonics a recipe for reading progress

Independent schools across NSW have bolstered thousands of students' early literacy skills through an evidence-based explicit phonics program. Data from the program has revealed a substantial lift in the number of first-year primary students mastering the key foundational skill of phonological awareness, which includes the blending of sounds to form words, from 13 per cent at the beginning of 2018 to 84 per cent by the end of the school year.

The word-reading ability of Years 1 and 2 students also improved, with at least three-quarters of them able to read fluently from a selected list of single-syllable words by the end of the year, up from 42 per cent and 30 per cent respectively.

The targeted initiative, rolled out to 38 previously underperforming schools across the sector, has so far trained 600 teachers to provide explicit and systematic literacy and numeracy instruction to students.

In the case of literacy, phonemic awareness and phonics, which is the ability to map speech sounds to letter patterns, are considered key components of effective early reading and writing instruction.

Despite research recommending the skills be taught explicitly, systematically and sequentially, many schools continue to preference a "whole language" or "balanced literacy" approach, which emphasises learning whole words and phrases in "meaningful contexts", such as reading a book or a poem, rather than through phonics exercises.

Association of Independent Schools NSW chief executive Geoff Newcombe said the pro-gram was a "resounding success", having benefited more than 6300 students. "The initiative has had an amazing impact on the students and teachers in the schools where it is being implemented," he said. "It ensures K-2 teachers are supported and equipped to teach foundational skills to students who would otherwise struggle."

Participating school St Philip's Christian College in Cessnock has recorded impressive results since introducing an explicit and systematic approach to teaching phonics two years ago. At the K-12 college, which operates in a low socio-economic area, it is not uncommon for students to start school lacking basic early literacy skills. Among the current Year 2 cohort, 80 per cent started kindergarten below the expected level for a five-year-old, with 40 per cent flagged for needing "significant support".

Two years into the new program, almost all of the 80-plus students are performing at expected levels. Its NAPLAN results have also shown sustained improvement, with Year 3 spelling and grammar average scores lifting from below state average in 2017 to at and above average in 2019. "We've seen a massive difference," said principal Darren Cox. "The pace of lessons is a lot quicker, students are focused and on task ... every teacher knows with certainty what they need to deliver and when."

Mr Cox said a similar explicit approach to teaching mathematics had also improved base numeracy skills.

From the "Weekend Australian" of 16/11/19






Government flags changes to union laws

The Morrison government has released its proposed amendments to union-busting legislation after extensive negotiations with Senate crossbenchers.

Katina Curtis, AAP Senior Political Writer
Australian Associated PressNOVEMBER 22, 20195:10PM
Union officials could rack up $37,800 in fines in a 10-year period before being sacked under government amendments to its union-busting legislation.

The government hopes changes released on Friday will get its "ensuring integrity" laws over the line in the Senate.

Unions have flagged a last-ditch lobbying effort to battle the laws.

The new so-called demerits scheme would also apply a threshold of $189,000 in fines to an organisation before it could be deregistered.

Industrial Relations Minister Christian Porter says the "sensible" amendments were developed in discussions with Senate crossbenchers.

"Both Centre Alliance and One Nation have engaged by suggesting and discussing amendments; their constructive engagement on the bill to address issues of relevance has been a very positive process," he said.

"The amendments circulated by the government today reflect those discussions and provide additional safeguards, whilst still ensuring the bill is able to achieve its key purpose - ensuring registered organisations and their officers finally obey the law."

Other changes include removing the minister's power to apply for deregistration, reducing the grounds for disqualification, and only applying a public interest test to union mergers if one of the organisations has a history of rule-breaking.

ACTU president Michele O'Neil said while the union movement appreciated the efforts of crossbenchers, the amendments did not stop attacks on ordinary working people.

"If the tests in these amendments, and this bill, were applied to politicians, political parties or corporate executives many would not be able to continue to hold office or run corporations," she said in a statement.

"We will now meet with the crossbench senators and ask them to only consider their final position on the bill after they have heard from and considered the views of those directly affected and experts in this area of law.

"This proposed bill will have serious implications for all Australian workers and should be treated with the utmost care."

The government needs crossbench support to pass the legislation because Labor is staunchly opposed to what it sees as an existential attack on unions.

Opposition industrial relations spokesman Tony Burke says even with the changes, the bill remains "fundamentally unfair".

"It will entrench the double standard where if a bank breaches the law 23 million times the prime minister considers it 'a matter for the board' - but three paperwork breaches could bring down an entire union without the members getting a say," he said in a statement.

"The truth is these laws will hurt ordinary workers by taking away their advocates: the organisations that fight for better wages, combat wage theft and exploitation, and keep workers safe."

The legislation is set to be debated in the upper house on Monday.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here







22 November, 2019

Children who start school later gain advantage, new study shows (?)

The paper underlying this report does not yet appear to be online but the Centre seems very Leftist so the research is unlikely to be very rigorous.

Even the report below does however reveal a lack of rigour.  It is apparently based on the nonsensical "all men are equal" dogma.  No attempt is made to take account of student IQ. High IQ students have often been shown to thrive when enrolled early and the usual squawk about their social fitness has been shown to be a snark.  Smart kids are in general better socially as well as academically

So the study tells us nothing certain.  There were presumably a number of low IQ students in the sample who would benefit from a late start.  So the finding of an overall benefit from a late start could be entirely a product of the low IQ element in the sample.  How students of around average IQ fare is simply not addressed


Children who are held back and start school later than their peers gain an advantage that is still felt up to six decades later, a new study shows.

They are more self-confident, resilient, competitive and trusting, which tends to be associated with economic success.

The analysis of 1007 adults aged between 24 and 60 illustrates the “potential adverse effect of school entry rules," lead author Lionel Page from the University of Technology, Sydney said.

“Our findings indicate that school entry rules influence the formation of behavioural traits, creating long-lasting disparities between individuals born on different sides of the cut-off date," he said.

School starting ages vary between Australian states. In Victoria, children starting school must turn five by April 30 in the year they start school, whereas in Queensland and Western Australia the cut-off is June 30. In South Australia,, they must be five by May 1 and in Tasmania they must be five by January 1.

Dr Page said the study’s findings suggested the relative age at school had an impact on people’s success in adulthood.

“We find that participants who were relatively old in school exhibit higher self-confidence about their performance at an effort task compared to those who were relatively young," he said.

“Moreover, they declare being more tolerant to risk in a range of real-life situations and trusting of other people in social interactions.

“Taken together, this set of results offers important insights on the long-term effects of relative age at school on behavioural traits."

The new study was published by the Life Course Centre, a joint research project between the federal government and the University of Queensland, the University of Sydney, the University of Melbourne and the University of Western Australia.

It involved adults from Queensland, Tasmania, Victoria and Western Australia.

The findings come as a UNSW study found a quarter of students are held back so they start school when turning six, not when they turn five.

SOURCE  





‘Offensive and wrong’: Proud Baby Boomers hit back

I commented on this issue yesterday

How sad it is to see yet another economist joining the “bash-the-Baby-Boomer" bandwagon.

Yesterday, news.com.au published a piece declaring Baby Boomers to be the “luxury generation", who have “a sweet ride on a gravy train consisting of franking credits and loopholes in superannuation and pension rules".

There has to be smarter and kinder way to find policies that will take our country forward into continuing economic prosperity without playing the old class warfare or generational warfare cards that so easily divide us.

Many Baby Boomers have long argued for a more balanced tax system but so far none of the political class have had the wit or the courage to make the changes necessary so that everyone from students to nursing home residents would receive a fairer go.

And speaking of fairness, franking credits are frequently raised, as they were in yesterday’s piece, as an example of an unfair policy that largely benefits retirees. But it’s not as simple as that - most simply, franking credits exist to stop tax being paid twice. If a company has already paid tax on its profits, why should its shareholders have to pay again?

Negative gearing is another policy touted to favour older people - but that ignores the fact that negative gearing and investors have driven the surge in Australia’s property market, boosting our economy in the process.

As economists and academics seek to influence the debate about the growing cost of our ageing population they would do well to steer clear of the sort of inflammatory rhetoric that caused such controversy when “smashed avocados on toast" stole the headlines.

For those of us who have worked full-time for more than 40 years and dutifully paid our taxes while raising families, educating children, creating wealth and – by the way – generating decades of sustained economic growth and national good fortune, the idea that we should be tagged the “luxury generation" is offensive and wrong.

If retirees decide to spend some of their hard-earned superannuation savings or a windfall from downsizing on an overseas trip, they should not be vilified by people who feel there is no golden future for them and who would happily sentence their parents’ generation to a life of poverty.

Many older Australians may not have enjoyed overseas trips as they raised their families, paid their mortgages, taxes and super contributions. It would be interesting to see how many overseas holidays have been taken by 25- to 45-year-olds compared with their Baby Boomer parents at the same age.

Here are some of the things that Baby Boomers didn’t have early on, that have made life much better for all Australians since then:

* Free tertiary education, until 1973: The first wave of Baby Boomers – born between 1946 and 1955 – had to either pay for it themselves with no student loans or else win scholarships that were only available to the few. And there were only a handful of universities, so there were far fewer places.

* Medicare, until Bob Hawke introduced it in 1984.

* Compulsory superannuation – until the Hawke-Keating government introduced it in 1991.

* Easy access to subsidised childcare at regulated childcare centres.

* Flexible working conditions.

* Paid (and unpaid) maternity/parental leave.

* First homebuyer government grants (or, for the most part, the “bank of mum and dad").

* Anti-discrimination legislation until racial discrimination was outlawed in 1975 and other laws followed on.

* The power to say “no" to military conscription between 1964 and December 1972.

The nation does have an ageing population crisis and successive governments have been warned about it for decades, but what have they done? Answer, very little.

Bob Hawke and Paul Keating gazed into the demographic crystal ball and saw compulsory superannuation as a key component of the solution.

Now we are faced with academics and economists arguing against increasing super to 12 per cent while applying heavier taxes to the national nest egg. If they succeed then the very problem they are concerned about will worsen exponentially.

One way to ease the burden is to keep older Australians in the workforce, but that would involve a total rethink of the ageist policies adopted by both the private and public sectors that openly discriminate against older worker despite the law.

Some enlightened sectors of the economy have come up with ways to keep older workers and their wisdom and experience on the payroll, but sadly most haven’t. Age discrimination is rife.

One of the most bizarre attacks against Boomers involves the family home. It is rare to hear anyone complaining about inheriting a property, whether valuable or quite modest, that was paid for by the sweat and tears of their parents.

SOURCE  







Uncaring Australian army top brass

Maybe just another bureaucracy but if he had been female you would never have been able to shut them up about it.  They are very politically "correct" these days and real heroism such as we saw from Ben are old hat or even contemptible in that mindset

The country's most decorated soldier, Victoria Cross recipient Ben Roberts-Smith, has lashed out at the nation's defence chiefs for failing to publicly back him as his reputation and military record suffered sustained attacks over allegations he committed war crimes during his service in Afghanistan.

Mr Roberts-Smith said be had recently been contacted by .the Australian Defence Force to conduct a "welfare check", seven years after he left the army and nearly two years after he first appeared in a series of media reports accusing him of war crimes.

The call came just days after he publicly criticised the leadership of the ADF for failing to look after soldiers after they left the military.

Mr Roberts-Smith confirmed he had been contacted by the ADF, telling The Weekend Australian: "While I appreciate the sentiment of a welfare check, it does highlight the issue at hand — it is a reactive step that occurred after my public comments."

Mr Roberts-Smith said the ADF culture "has always been this reactive self-protection from the senior leadership" and criticised the lack of support offered to transitioning Diggers, who were statistically at a higher risk of suicide after they left the military.

Mr Roberts-Smith is locked in a personal battle to clear his reputation after being accused of war crimes in a series of stories by Nine Media. He is also being investigated by the Australian Federal Police over a possible war crime committed in the Afghan village of Daman in 2012.

Mr Roberts-Smith vehemently denies any wrongdoing and is suing Fairfax Media, now owned by Nine, over the stories. He said he was loathe to compare his own troubles with those of struggling former soldiers, who he said were at greater risk. But he noted that at no point had his former bosses offered any public comment of support; despite the allegations against him being unproven.

"Given the public scrutiny I've faced and the false accusations made against me, I would have assumed the Defence Force, which created my profile and placed me on a pedestal in the public arena, would have made some public comment about my good character and service given that at no stage have I ever been approached by law enforcement," Mr Roberts-Smith said.

Mr Roberts-Smith clarified he was. not calling for Defence chiefs to be sacked after being quoted on Friday morning saying he "absolutely" believed new leadership was needed at the top of the ADF.

National president of the RSL Greg Melick said there was no need for ADF leadership to step down because of their treatment of veterans. Mr Melick said if this was the view of Mr Roberts-Smith, then "I don't agree with him".

From the "Weekend Australian" of 16/11/19






Leaked emails show ABC journalists conspiring on Global Warming

Leaked emails have shown ABC journalists and producers conspiring together behind closed doors to push an ideological line on Global warming.

The first leaked email was sent on Sunday to journalists at the taxpayer funded public broadcaster by Melbourne executive producer Barbara Heggen. Heggen wrote that she was inquiring after “interest in an ABC-staff climate crisis advisory group". The purpose of this new group was to “gather together the brains trust of the ABC staffers to develop ways to report on and inform Australians about the climate crisis using a solutions journalism approach"  and “to report back to ABC management our ideas and strategies for responding to the climate crisis both internally and externally".

For those unaware, Ms Heggen is the woman responsible for such sterling journalism as this article discussing the possibility of fleeing to Tasmania to escape climate change and this radio segment talking about whether or not Australians should stop having children to save the planet.

The “Solutions journalism approach" she advocates is a theory of journalism developed in the late 90s which suggested that journalists shouldn’t simply report the facts but should suggest “solutions" to social problems. How this fits in with the obligations of the ABC charter is of course an interesting question.

Barbara’s friends and colleagues were excited at the prospect of what would effectively be an internal lobby group inside the ABC pushing for even more extreme alarmism and bias than currently. The ABC’s national rural reporter, Dominique Schwartz replied: “I’m keen. I have just been looking into how other media organisations are dealing with coverage of climate change."

Investigative reporter Stephen Long agreed: “Also keen to discuss this. You should be aware also that [Editorial Policies] is having a look at this issue." To get an insight into Stephen’s view on the matter one only needs to peruse the over two dozen articles he’s written slamming the proposed Adani coal mine, plus his other articles spruiking the benefits of renewables and downplaying the threat of blackouts caused by them.

ABC PM Presenter Linda Mottram also agreed: “We must report established science, the evidence, and not myth." Presumably when Ms Mottram is speaking of reporting “evidence" instead of “myth" she’s referring to stories such as the one from earlier this month where the ABC breathlessly announced that 11,000 scientists were “declaring a climate emergency. The ABC of course neglected to mention during this “evidence" based reporting that many of the signatures were obviously false and that one of the signatories was a Professor “Mickey Mouse".

I guess if they want to improve their “evidence" based reporting they can always give Tim Flannery another bag full of money to film yet another series. Maybe this time he can expand on his belief in a Gaia-like earth spirit.

The ABC receives over a billion dollars a year of taxpayer funds. If its journalists weren’t publicly funded then these leaked emails showing them conspiring to slant coverage behind closed doors would be annoying; but as an organisation funded by involuntary contributions of taxpayers it’s enraging.

The ABC will never reform unless it is under the threat of complete defunding. The time to start threatening that defunding is now.

SOURCE  






‘Inside’ the ABC’s climate group

Alas, the latest ABC staff-initiated brainchild is no more. As revealed on Monday through emails obtained by The Australian, senior journalists at Aunty had discussed establishing an “ABC-Staff climate crisis advisory group" to “report back to ABC management our ideas and strategies for responding to the climate crisis both internally and externally".

ABC producer and presenter Barbara Heggen had made the proposal, suggesting a “solutions journalism approach". ABC Melbourne journalist Karen Percy described it as “a fabulous idea," national rural and regional correspondent Dominique Schwartz said she was “keen". Senior journalist Linda Mottram said it was a “great idea", also speaking of the “need (for) constant reminders that we must report established science, the evidence, and not myth". Incidentally, Mottram’s ABC bio notes “Most recently she has taken a strong interest in editorial training at the ABC".

The Institute of Public Affairs director of policy Gideon Rozner summed it up best. “Because if there’s a gap in ABC coverage, it’s climate change," he quipped. As noted by The Australian’s media editor, Leo Shanahan, ABC policies require that “editorial decisions are not improperly influenced by political, sectional, commercial or personal interests".

Yesterday ABC chairwoman Ita Buttrose put the kybosh on these journalists come crisis activists, stating “it was one of those ideas that is not going to happen."

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





21 November 2019

An addled attack on the elderly

The comments below were front-paged on some News Corp sites on 20/11/19.  They are all the more disgraceful for coming from an economist, Jason Murphy, -- who should know better. They are just an attempt to stir up hatred of the elderly. One gathers Jason is a rather young economist.

His little trick is to refer to people in their 60s and 70s as "Baby Boomers".  But let's call a spade a spade and refer to them as elderly.

He says that the elderly are on a gravy train.  Lots of men die in their '60s. Is that a gravy train?  Their widows certainly don't think so. Those who do not die very often develop health problems.  Is bad health a gravy train?

He talks of franking credits as gravy but that is just a Leftist smear put about by socialist failure Bill Shorten.  Franking credits are a refund of overpaid tax, nothing more, nothing less. And the system was devised in 1987 by Paul Keating, no friend of the rich

And is superannuation gravy?  It reduces payments to pensioners.  Is that gravy?

And elderly people on holiday are apparently particularly reprehensible. But many of them are people who took very little in holidays so that they could save up to have one big holiday after retirement, when they would be relaxed enough and have time enough to enjoy it fully.  Is postponing your holidays gravy?

It is true that for many elderly the family home is rather empty after the children have moved out but the owners concerned spent many years paying off a mortgage to have that home.  Should they be denied what they sacrificed for? Should they be denied a bit of ease and comfort after many years of scrimping.  Is scrimping and saving gravy?

And the family home is often retained as a place of refuge if any of the children get into financial or other trouble. The home really is retained "for the children". It is an important fall-back option in times of trouble.  Is it gravy to provide that?  Or should it be only the taxpayer that provides for people in strife?

The writer also says we should have a resources tax.  Julia Gillard could tell you about that idea.


Australia’s Treasurer has been out and about this week justifying the need for a surplus by talking about the “economic time bomb" that is our ageing population.

Yesterday, Josh Frydenberg told young people they will have to pay for the retirement of the old as we have fewer and fewer working age Australians to support each old one.

It was an impassioned speech, but it ignored one key thing — Baby Boomers, aged 55-75, have a sweet ride on a gravy train consisting of franking credits and loopholes in superannuation and pension rules.

Australian households aged over 65 have 2.5 times as many assets and 16 per cent as many liabilities as those aged 25-34, according to official data.

Their average net worth is about $1.4 million.

But there’s no urgency whatsoever from the Treasurer to tax them more fairly. He’s let a hundred terrific opportunities go by to tighten the screws on Australia’s luxury generation, from franking credits, to the pension age, to superannuation.

The older generation is all over Facebook these days and they’re filling it up with holiday photos from yet another terrace overlooking the Pacific Ocean or the Adriatic coast.

As we glumly scroll past them, we have a right to feel aggrieved to hear the fiscal obligation of Australia is ours.

Younger Australians should utterly reject the false burden being placed on their shoulders by a Treasurer too gutless to tax the boomers fairly.

“If we don’t remain fiscally disciplined today, the next generation will have to pick up the bill tomorrow," he told the Business Council yesterday.

This is the line Mr Frydenberg is pushing as he seeks to justify his surplus. It seems so simple. Almost a truism.

But it disguises a set of entirely optional choices that helps one generation live in near empty multimillion-dollar homes and collect the pension, while many in the younger generations are locked out of the housing market and paying off enormous higher education debts.

Both parts of the seemingly benign statement involve pain falling on younger generations. Fiscal discipline falls principally on the young, while the boomer cohort romp merrily through a world of superannuation tax discounts and pensions that rise faster than inflation.

The Treasurer is talking about putting older Australians to work. But don’t assume this means bringing the current crop of older Australians out of retirement. He’s not talking about the current retired generation. He’s talking about making people work longer in future, i.e. just another way to make the burden of today’s generosity fall on a younger cohort.

Four times the Government has made choices that could have evened up the burden and saved the Budget.

For example, Australians of pension age face a “means test" that determines if they are eligible to collect the pension. It determines if they have “the means" to look after themselves — after all, it doesn’t make sense to give the pension to a retiree with $2 million in cash and shares. But the Government chose to leave the principal place of residence out of the means test. A retired couple living in a $2 million home can still collect their combined $1282 a fortnight. (You even hear rumours of people upsizing their home in order to reduce their cash holdings and qualify for the pension.)

The Government has begun a major review process of retirement incomes. But Finance Minister Matthias Corman neutered it before it even got going, promising in October it “will not lead to any change".

The Government scrapped existing plans to lift the pension age from 67 to 70.

Franking credits, mean if you own shares in a company and you pay no tax, you get a check refunding you for any company tax that company paid. That benefits retirees disproportionately. Labor wanted to change the rules on this at the last election and lost in part because of it.

The electoral mathematics behind these choices are apparent. Younger voters tend not to vote for the Coalition while older voters are more prone to. Polls at some points have shown a dramatic generational divide from 60-40 to Labor among the young (18-24), to 60-40 to Coalition at the other end of the age spectrum (65+).

Of course, while generational war wages, certain corporations are enjoying the fireworks. Boomers might get a nod and a wink from the Treasurer but resources companies get all that and more.

It didn’t have to be a battle between young and old. There are other entities you can tax. Norway socked away $US1 trillion in assets in its sovereign wealth fund by levying taxes on the exploitation of its enormous oil resources.

Australia, you will remember, proposed a resources super profit tax that would have taken the cream off the top of the profits of the massive mining and extraction companies when the price of coal and iron ore were high. Instead those extra profits from digging up Australias dirt resources went to the owners of those companies, many of which are based offshore.

So while the generations go to war, don’t forget that it didn’t have to be this way.

SOURCE  






Taxpayers fleeced, betrayed as unis ponder why Christ born a man

Australian universities are abandoning their role as custodians of Western civilisation in favour of a seemingly endless obsession with identity politics.

I wrote recently about the University of Sydney’s Resurgent Racism project, a flagship program that provides taxpayer funds to academics so they can berate Australians for supposedly being racist.

But it is the tip of the iceberg when it comes to taxpayer-funded identity politics research.

A new report by the Institute of Public Affairs has confirmed the extent to which our universities are fixated on class, race and gender — and just how much Australians are paying for it.

The Humanities in Crisis: An Audit of Taxpayer-funded ARC Grants found the Australian Research Council’s national competitive grants program has distributed $1.34bn in funding to humanities research since 2002.

These projects cover historical studies, linguistics, cultural studies, human geography, and communication and media studies.

According to the ARC, its purpose is “to grow knowledge and innovation for the benefit of the Australian community". It also claims “the outcomes of ARC-funded research deliver cultural, economic, social and environmental benefits to all Australians".

So, has the research of the past 17 years done that and helped ensure our success as a prosperous, peaceful and stable nation?

Not quite. What the audit reveals is academics spending millions on projects that are narrow, incomprehensible and reflect the obsession with identity politics, cultural studies, critical theory and radical feminism.

At Macquarie University academics received $391,000 for a historical studies project called Sexing Scholasticism: Gender in Medieval Thought, which explored “medieval theological debates about why it was necessary that Christ was born as a man".

Academics at the University of Sydney were awarded $735,000 for a cultural studies research project called Reconceiving the Queer Public Sphere: An Interdisciplinary Analysis of Same-Sex Couple Domesticity. By “critically analysing queer home life" the project would “transform current understandings of the relation between homosexuality, private life and the public sphere".

The ARC awarded the University of Melbourne $100,000 for a cultural studies project examining Female Stardom and Gay Subcultural Reception. And James Cook University was given a bumper $2.7m for a cultural studies proposal, How Gender Shapes the World: A Linguistic Perspective, the authors claimed would “enhance our nation’s capacity to interpret and manage gender roles in multicultural contexts".

The preoccupation with identity politics is especially notable in historical studies.

There have been 616 such research proposals to have received funding since 2002 — with the total cost amounting to $192m.

The most common theme is “identity politics", with 112 of the proposals focusing on the leitmotivs of class, race and gender.

The second most common theme is “indigenous history and studies", with 99 projects, while the third most common, “war and conflict" attracted 88 proposals. In contrast, there are only three research projects that talk about the rule of law and a solitary proposal examining free speech.

This shows our universities are not interested in the history or values of institutions that are essential to understanding Australia’s present and shaping its future.

As curators of Western civilisation, academics have a duty to look after some of society’s most valuable material. But two decades of ARC funding shows they are neglecting their duties.

Having bought into the postmodernist notion that Western civilisation is a white patriarchy, they have released themselves from the obligation to study the Western canon. Aristotle’s thoughts on the meaning of tragedy are apparently irrelevant, as are Shakespeare’s observations of human nature and John Stuart Mill’s views on democracy. There is a great deal that universities could pick up from Machiavelli when it comes to the problem of free speech on campus.

Today’s academics mostly believe there is nothing we can learn from the 2500 years of accumulated wisdom and knowledge passed down to us by those who have lived before us. This arrogance was articulated by academics at the University of Sydney when they rejected the Ramsay Centre for Western Civilisation’s proposed curriculum, which at the time was derided as “structurally, institutionally, morally and epistemically violent to other knowledges" and summarily dismissed as “white supremacy writ large".

By rejecting the Western canon, academics not only are depriving university students of their dues but they also are depriving us all of the intellectual and moral nourishment that only the humanities can provide. Academics are no longer interested in properly feeding the society that ultimately feeds them.

SOURCE  






Big blow to animal activists

CONTROVERSIAL animal activists Aussie Farms — which Prime Minister Scott Morrison labelled "grubs" for publishing an interactive map showing farms and abattoirs — have had their charity status revoked.

It comes after the Australian Charities and Not-for-Profits Commission was urged by the Federal Government to launch an investigation into the group last year. The Aussie Farms website sparked Outrage and calls for trespass laws to be strengthened when it provided the exact location of farming properties and encouraged vegans and activists to upload photos of what they believed was cruelty to animals.

In days of action earlier this year, activists stormed properties, sparking concerns there could be retaliation by land-holders at the end of their tether.

Assistant Minister for Finance, Charities and Electoral Matters Zed Seselja told The Courier-Mail that he welcomed the decision. "The Government recognises the special place that charities occupy in Australia, and it is important that charities recognise their privileged position and do not take advantage of it," Senator Seselja said.

Without charity status Aussie Farms loses its tax concessions endorsement, including income tax exemption, GST concessions and FBT concessions.

From the Courier Mail of 19/11/19





Religious freedom bill: Christian Porter expands bill to protect hospitals, aged care providers

Christian Porter will grant religious hospitals and aged-care providers the same protections as faith-based schools and organisations to employ staff according to their beliefs in his final religious discrimination bill.

Speaking at the National Press Club on Wednesday, the Attorney-General confirmed he will apply the same level of protections for religious health and aged-care companies, which were not included in the draft bill released on August 29.

Mr Porter, who has held two-hour consultation meetings with more than 90 stakeholder groups since releasing the draft legislation, said religious hospitals and aged care providers should have the “ability to take into account religion in staffing decisions".

He said religious hospitals and aged care operators had stressed the importance of retaining a “religious ethos and culture" within their organisations and had “reasonably sought an exception to the general prohibition on religious discrimination in employment that allows them to make staffing decisions in accordance with their faith".

“The religious hospitals and aged care providers themselves recognise that competing objectives of providing access to health services and maintaining a faith-based identity must be reconciled, and seek to maintain the balanced position they themselves have arrived at reflected in the bill," Mr Porter said.

“In the Bill that will be introduced, I can flag that one significant change from its first draft will be that religious hospitals and aged-care providers will be given protections equivalent to those given to other religious bodies, in relation to employment of staff."

Mr Porter said consultation with religious hospitals and aged care providers had made clear that they do not “make decisions about the admission of patients based on any given patient’s religion or absence of religion, and do not seek to do so".

“Likewise for aged care providers (with very few exceptions) they do not appear to consider religion or lack of religion before making a decision to accommodate a person," he said.

No deadline for final vote as Senate inquiry looms

Mr Porter, who will table his final bill in parliament before December 5, confirmed he had no deadline for a final vote in parliament to push through the religious discrimination bill.

The Australian understands the legislation is likely to be referred to a Senate inquiry, and drag well into next year.

Responding to criticism from the nation’s most powerful religious groups, Mr Porter said he was seeking a “stable result and better outcome than the circumstance we have at the moment".

“It would be a bad outcome if everyone felt that they got everything that they wanted out of this process. It is ultimately the most grinding process of balance and compromise."

Mr Porter said he didn’t expect all religious groups and stakeholders to be “deliriously happy" once the process was finalised.

“If you imagine a continuum of happiness that goes from very unhappy to deliriously happy somewhere on that continuum is endorsement. Where while the bill doesn’t do everything that everyone might like, people nevertheless think that it’s at a reasonable point that’s worth supporting."

Discretion ‘not viewed as discriminatory’

Mr Porter said a “particular challenge in the religious context is freedom of association".

“Where we seek to protect people from being excluded because of their religion, we equally recognise that for religion to exist at all; religious bodies must be able to maintain a chosen level of exclusivity to their premises or composition or services."

“For instance a religious school may admit students of many faiths or it may prefer students only of its own faith; but that discretion is not viewed by other faiths as discriminatory because they understand and accept its existential importance to all faiths."

Mr Porter, tasked by Scott Morrison to deliver the Coalition election pledge to deliver the religious discrimination bill, said the draft legislation had adopted a “broad approach" informed by the exception in section 82 of the Victorian legislation.

“The effect is to preserve the status quo whereby a defined religious body can, in dealing with the exclusivity of its premises or composition or services, apply its own determination of the best application of its own doctrines and beliefs; and does not discriminate by acting in good faith on that basis."

“So, for example, in Victoria it would not be discriminatory for an Islamic school to decline to employ catholic teachers (or vice versa). Or for the same school to decline to employ an irreligious person.

“For the avoidance of any doubt it cannot be stressed enough that this type of exception for religious bodies applies only in respect of decisions on matters of religious doctrine that pertain to people of different religious beliefs."

Mr Porter confirmed his bill did not “affect the current exemptions that exist for religious bodies within other Discrimination Acts, at either State or Commonwealth level", which has attracted criticism from religious and other groups in their submissions to the Attorney-General’s Department.

‘People will disagree’

He said religious groups had stressed to him during the consultation process that the “definition of religious body is important because of the reasonable autonomy it provides any organisation that falls inside its ambit".

“One thing is clear, people will disagree on which rights are more important than others and where to draw the lines between them. Consultations, while constructive, inevitably end at a point where it is factually obvious that freedoms collide."

“The unavoidable fact is that the colliding nature of rights means there is simply no way to exhaustively define their boundaries with each other in a way that sees them perfectly contour with neighbouring rights."

Mr Porter said freedoms to associate would need to be balanced “against the right for individuals to access places and institutions free from the arbitrary exclusion of others".

“In a structural sense the four existing Commonwealth Discrimination Acts dealing with race, sex, disability and age actually give expression to the most traditional conception of rights." “That laws should protect us from others infringing on our natural rights as far as is reasonable."

He said a balance needed to be struck “between anti-discrimination clauses of any type and other rights including rights to free expression and free association".

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here






20 November, 2019

Is God punishing Australia with drought and bushfires?

As an atheist, I cannot agree with that.  But in Australia you are allowed to say that, despite much condemnation. See Israel Folau's words below.  His beliefs are part of a resilient Christian tradition that sees God's hands in earthly events.  Many Christians do, for instance, see God's protective hand in their own lives.  And that is a great source of comfort and reassurance to them.

And seeing Bible passages as prophetic of world events is also common.  Jehovah's Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists have been doing so for well over hundred years -- and there is always some fervent Christian somewhere doing it. Seeing the book of Daniel as prophetic is particularly common.  So what Folau is saying is simply one part of the Christian tradition, a part that is evidence of a fervent Christian committment.

Even Jesus did it. His words in Matthew 24 are usually seen by Christians as prophetic of the Roman invasion of Jerusalem




Sacked Wallabies star Israel Folau’s claim the bushfires that have devastated Australia and left six dead are God’s punishment for legalising abortion and same-sex marriage has sparked a furious reaction.

Dumped by Rugby Australia after warning homosexuals and other sinners they will go to hell unless they repent, Folau has doubled down on the stance in a video sermon posted to the Truth of Jesus Christ Church Sydney.

During the 10-minute recording, the 30-year-old says the timing of the bushfire crisis is no coincidence but only a taste of God’s judgment should nothing change.

“I’ve been looking around at the events that’s been happening in Australia, this past couple of weeks, with all the natural disasters, the bushfires and the droughts," he says.

He then reads from the Book of Isaiah in the Bible: “The earth is defiled by its people; they have disobeyed the laws, violated the statutes and broken the everlasting covenant. Therefore a curse consumes the earth; its people must bear their guilt. Therefore earth’s inhabitants are burned up, and very few are left."

“The events that have happened here in Australia, in the last couple of years – God’s word says for a man and a woman to be together … they’ve come and changed this law," he says.

“Abortion, it’s OK now to murder, kill infants, unborn children."

Folau says he believes the scripture is talking to Australia. “Look how rapid these bushfires these droughts, all these things have come in a short period of time. Do you think it’s a coincidence or not?

“God is speaking to you guys. Australia you need to repent and take these laws and turn it back to what is right."

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has weighed in and quickly denounced the comments from Folau. “I thought these were appallingly insensitive comments," Morrison said.

“They were appalling comments and he is a free citizen, he can say whatever he likes. But that doesn’t mean he can’t have regard to the grievous offence this would have caused to people whose homes have been burnt down.

Folau says he is sharing the message “out of love" but he stirred up a hornet’s nest as his comments were picked up by news outlets across the world.

Anglican minister Peter Kurti said Folau was wrong. “If God really was going to punish us for changing the law on abortion (and) changing the law on marriage, it’s the Parliament House in Macquarie St and the Parliament House in Canberra that should have been the target of God’s wrath — not the mid-north coast and south Queendland," he told Sky News. “If God was angry, God’s aim was off.

“These are outrageous views and they are up there with the religious fanaticism of the Greens. But … we live in a free country and if this is what Israel Folau believes — and he’s not a politician, he’s not voting resources … he’s a preacher talking to his congregation — surely in Australia we want to defend his right to do so even though we can think the views he expresses are completely wrong and offensive."

SOURCE  





Blackouts risk to force states’ hand on coal

Blackouts particularly likely in "Green" Victoria

Energy Minister Angus Taylor will demand tougher energy ­reliability standards in a move that could trigger legal obligations on major retailers in some states, including Victoria, to source more power from coal, gas and hydro.

The intervention comes with the market regulator already warning of blackouts this summer in Victoria, which is under pressure to meet the current standard and will likely be forced to again seek emergency reserves during periods of high demand, with 1.3 million households forecast to be at risk of power outages.

Mr Taylor told The Australian that he would be asking for agreement on the tougher standards at a Council of Australian Governments meeting of his state and territory counterparts on Friday.

Victoria, which has placed a strong focus on renewables, has said it would agree to revised standards but wants to include a strategic reserve. The federal government claims this would risk pushing up prices.

Mr Taylor said the current reliability standard was too weak.

According to the Australian Energy Market Operator, under a revised standard Victoria would have a capacity shortfall of more than 435MW — the equivalent of a new gas-fired power plant — triggering a mechanism called the retail reliability obligation (RRO), which requires retail electricity companies to hold contracts or ­invest in generation to maintain reliability. South Australia is also likely to suffer supply issues this summer although it has moved to increase gas generation following statewide blackouts in 2017.

“As an energy minister with a strong focus on reliability and the price impacts of a shortage of ­reliable generation, I can tell you my tolerance is tested," Mr Taylor will say in a speech to an energy summit in Sydney on Tuesday.

“Over the last year, my view has hardened. My view is that we haven’t got the reliability standard right. The system inherently ­accepts too much risk and relies on too many contingencies.

“In addition, given shortages in supply in many states at crucial times, well-targeted supply should reduce prices. I think we need to strengthen the standards, and quite likely trigger the RRO in a number of jurisdictions. In a world of limited resources, it is clear that Victoria is a state that needs the most reliable investment.

“SA has obviously had challenges but is now on track to recovery, and we’re seeing that in their falling prices. It is also clear that NSW, if not managed properly, could have gone down the wrong path."

Mr Taylor repeated his claims that the problem was “starkest in Victoria" and said its shortfalls could have national flow-on effects.

He accused Victoria of seeking to blame others for its problems and said the Andrews Labor government had failed to replace ageing infrastructure and address price and reliability issues.

The AEMO had already warned that Victoria was not expected to meet reliability standard this summer. “Most announced new-generation projects are variable renewable energy generators, which often do not generate at full capacity during peak demand or may be positioned in a congested part of the network," it said. “While providing significant extra energy during many hours of the year, these projects are forecast to only make a limited contribution to meeting demand during peak hours."

SOURCE  






The campus fight over Beijing’s influence

Clashes between pro- and anti-Hong Kong demonstrators have renewed scrutiny over China’s role in western universities

Drew Pavlou is an unlikely threat to the Chinese Communist party. The 20-year-old arts student at Australia’s University of Queensland has never even been to the country. But his decision to organise a campus demonstration in support of Hong Kong pro-democracy protesters has sparked a diplomatic incident between Canberra and Beijing and put him on a collision course with the Chinese authorities.

The July 24 protest turned violent, with clashes between pro- and anti-Beijing students. The organisers were subsequently accused by China’s consul-general in Brisbane, Xu Jie, of being “separatists" and “anti-China activists".

Mr Pavlou has lodged a police complaint against Mr Xu alleging that the consul-general’s statement exposed the young student to death threats. It claims that the statement is evidence of efforts by Beijing and its network of foreign representatives to silence critics and limit freedom of speech on campuses.

The arts student is also urging the university to close its Confucius Institute, a Chinese language and cultural centre on campus funded by Beijing, and reverse its decision to appoint Mr Xu as an adjunct professor.

A separate legal action lodged by Mr Pavlou against Mr Xu will be heard on November 22 at Brisbane Magistrates Court. The student has asked the court to issue a form of restraining order against Mr Xu that would require him to stop any activity that threatens to cause harm to Mr Pavlou. But the senior Chinese official has not yet said whether he will attend court or defend the action.

The spillover of tensions generated by the Hong Kong protests at colleges in Australia, New Zealand, Canada, the US and elsewhere has intensified a global debate about Beijing’s influence at western universities where annual enrolment of Chinese students doubled to 869,000 in the decade to 2017, according to the Centre for Independent Studies, a Sydney-based think-tank. It is a concern that extends beyond Beijing’s monitoring of its own citizens on overseas campuses: bleeding into areas such as research and development and cyber security.

“Australian academic independence is being bought by the Chinese government," says Mr Pavlou. “Beijing exercises so much financial leverage over our universities that it can stifle all criticism of the Chinese government on campus."

The university strongly rejects Mr Pavlou’s criticisms, saying it is committed to free speech and insists its ties with Mr Xu and the Confucius Institute are entirely appropriate. But the violent scenes have alarmed Australia’s conservative government, which rebuked Mr Xu for his comments and has created a foreign interference task force staffed by security service personnel and academics to monitor the university sector.

It is expected to issue guidelines by the end of November on how to strengthen cyber security on campuses, reduce the risk of sensitive military and dual-use intellectual property being obtained by the Chinese government or military, and safeguard academic freedom at colleges.

Canberra’s focus on rooting out foreign influence, first in politics and now universities, has angered Beijing and alarmed some Australian academics, who warn it risks labelling all Chinese students as spies, promoting xenophobia and causing irreparable damage to bilateral relations, with two-way trade worth A$213bn last year. But critics counter that universities are turning a blind eye to Beijing’s alleged interference on campus because the sector has become dependent on Chinese money.

“This is a wake-up call for all of us, whether it be government, the university sector or business," says Dan Tehan, Australia’s education minister. “We need to understand the best way we can deal with the threat [of foreign interference]."

SOURCE  





Revealed: The jobs where graduates are earning six-figure salaries - and the university degrees you SHOULD be studying

Some graduates in Australia are earning six-figure salaries while most workers receive less than average pay rises, new figures show.

Recruitment company Hays's salary guide for 2019-20 has listed pay levels in 24 industries ranging from banking to health care and resources.

While Australia's median salary is stagnating at $55,400, those who have recently completed a university science or engineering bachelor's degree are earning double that.

This is especially so in the mining and oil and gas sectors.

The petroleum engineering and geosciences sector is particularly generous. In the Northern Territory, graduate engineers who specialise in petroleum reservoirs are earning $75,000 to $125,000 before tax.

The Top End of Australia is also paying handsomely to those working in the mining industry.

Graduate geologists specialising in metalliferous mining - the extract of minerals used to make metal - are being paid $85,000 to $100,000 in the NT. In Western Australia, they are earning $85,000 to $105,000.

The petroleum engineering sector is also well-remunerated with graduate geoscientists in the NT earning $70,000 to $110,000.

China's strong demand for iron ore, used to make steel, is also fuelling generous salaries in the mining industry.

Graduate mining engineers are earning $90,000 to $120,000 in WA and $70,000 to $100,000 in the NT.

WA's mineral processing segment of the mining industry is also well-paid, with graduate metallurgists getting $75,000 to $100,000.

By comparison, law graduates working for a small legal practice are receiving $51,000 to $55,000.

Graduate psychologists are getting $45,000 to $55,000 in New South Wales.

Equivalent graduate physiotherapists, occupational therapists and speech pathologists are receiving slightly more, $50,000 to $57,000 in the same state.

Graduate architects in Sydney, with at least two years' experience, are getting $60,000 to $80,000, which is still less than Australia's average, full-time salary of $82,000.

Australian workers are continuing to see weak pay increases, with average wage levels failing to rise above three per cent since 2013. 

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here




19 November 2019

Much news from Bettina Arndt (as of 16/11/2019)

Feminist flack misfires

I have been getting no end of flak from feminists over my little post last week, which I wrote after watching hours of media stories showing firefighters battling the blaze engulfing so much of our country.

This is what I said: “Our media is full of images of brave men fighting the ferocious fires. As always, it's usually men who do the really dangerous, difficult work protecting everyone else. Give thanks for the good in men."

As you can imagine, female commentators everywhere hated my comment. Predictably, The Guardian responded with photos of female firefighters, but somehow failed to mention how many of the 20,000 firefighters involved in the current fires are actually women. I have some firefighters who have written to me who are trying to track down the numbers. Looks like less than 20% of volunteers, and about 5% of professional firefighters. Overwhelmingly male, as expected. 

Hilariously, Moira Rayner, the former Victorian equal opportunity commissioner, retweeted my comment with the caption “That’s a woman firefighter," referring to the photo I used to accompany my tweet. It was “liked" over 600 times.

“I know my topic," Rayner told BuzzFeed. “Bettina didn’t and her tweet was presumptuous, disrespectful to the specialist and the countless numbers of local community volunteers, and a little bit foolish."

Well, then a reporter at BuzzFeed, Cameron Wilson, tracked down the firefighter in my photo, who turned out to be male - Dennis Wamsley, a volunteer with the Gloucester Rural Hearth Brigade.

What a hoot! Moira Rayner has been taking regular, very nasty potshots at me. This former “equal opportunity commissioner" has revealed her true colours, demonstrating why her former organization and others like it, have no interest in justice or fair treatment for men.


Family Court abuses

Exciting interview exposing the truth about our Family Court.

I have a rare interview for you today, with a brave, extraordinarily honest family lawyer from Sydney. I was delighted to discover Ezequiel Trumper, a very experienced lawyer who was willing to tell the truth about what’s going wrong with our Family Court.

In our interview Ezequiel doesn’t hold back. He exposes the way our court system is now weaponized to allow women to use false allegations to destroy men’s relationship with their children. He’s forced to explain to his male clients that they are absolutely up against it. They face a court which won’t enforce its own orders, where parental alienation is rewarded and perjury is rife.

This is a really important interview, particularly in the current climate where so much of mainstream media is pushing the feminist narrative decrying the need for a new inquiry and claiming women never lie.

Here’s the link to the new video -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpHzCNJxUvE

Please help me do everything possible to get people to see it.


Our mad feminists attract international attention

Robert Franklin from the US-based National Parents Organization has been writing an excellent series of blog posts about the way the Australian feminists are “howling like banshees" over the focus of this new inquiry:

“I’ve read article after article all aimed at the same thing – casting doubt on the latest Australian Governmental review of family law and courts in the Land Down Under. Those who oppose children having full, meaningful relationships with their fathers post-divorce don’t like the new review for the simple reason that they fear the truth may at last come out."

Franklin points out that the previous review, by the Australian Law Reform Commission, was much more to the feminists liking. He’s written very detailed blogs about what was wrong with that review - and why the women’s groups were so keen on it. Franklin’s forthcoming blog will expose misinformation and distortions included in a dreadful article by Griffith University law lecturer, Zoe Rathus, published recently in The Conversation. Rathus’ title says it all: “Parental alienation: the debunked theory that women lie about violence is still used in court."

Former WA Law Reform Commissioner, Augusto Zimmerman, has published an excellent Spectator Australia article: "How abuse of violence orders corrupts our family law system". Zimmermann points out there is an undeniable correlation between apprehended orders, false claims of domestic violence, and parental alienation. He mentions an analysis of NSW court files, which reveals that these domestic violence cases, on average, are dealt with in less than three minutes – a shocking statistic proving that absolutely no attempt is made to investigate whether such allegations have any validity. For the woman alleging violence the system is fool proof, with no risk at all that her lies will be exposed.


Comeuppance for Sarah Jane Parkinson’s corrupt boyfriend


Remember the corrupt policeman boyfriend of Sarah Jane Parkinson, who helped stitch up Dan Jones? (Here’s the video I made about Parkinson, who was imprisoned in January for false rape and violence allegations.)

NSW Snr Constable White, now the imprisoned Parkinson’s husband, will appear in the ACT Magistrates Court on Dec 18 on perjury and weapons offences. Let’s hope the sleazebag gets his comeuppance.

Meanwhile, the Jones family is awaiting news regarding Parkinson’s application for early release. The decision of the Sentence Administration Board has been adjourned for a second time as Parkinson tries to manipulate the system yet again.

The family is also no closer in their quest for compensation for the over $350k they spent defending Dan from the false allegations. They have another legal team working on that but face further legal fees. Generous folk might like to contribute to the gofundme fund-raiser.

Via email from Bettina Arndt: Bettina@bettinaarndt.com.au






Chemicals in plastic could be harming our health

Groan!  This old scare has so often been debunked in the past that it is a pain to see it still popping up. Briefly, the toxicity is in the dose and the dose people are getting of these two compounds is regularly shown as too low to be harmful

Plastic is everywhere. We use it to carry our food, eat with, we drink out of it, buy our cosmetics in it and even cook with it.

While Australians have embraced plastic and its many uses, there is growing concern about what it’s actually doing to our bodies.

News.com.au has launched its series What a Waste to coincide with Planet Ark’s National Recycling Week, highlighting the impact single-use plastics have on the environment and encouraging readers to reduce their personal waste.

In September, there was a warning about the use of plastic kitchen utensils.

The German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment, which advises the German Government on issues related to product, chemical and food safety, released an advisory that recommended people limit the exposure of their polyamide utensils when dealing with hot food.

It said components called oligomers from plastic cooking spoons, spatulas and whisks could migrate from into food and be eaten.

While these utensils have not been proven to have negative health impacts on humans, the organisation said at high doses the compounds could cause adverse effects in the liver and thyroid.

It recommended consumers keep their utensil’s contact with food as brief as possible, especially at high temperatures above 70C.

There is also growing evidence on the impact of compounds found in plastics on fertility.

Dr Mark Green is a lecturer in reproductive biology and is studying the impacts of certain chemicals on people’s fertility.

He told news.com.au that chemicals like Bisphenol A (BPA), which is used to make some types of plastics, is one of the most studied endocrine disrupting substances.

BPA can be found in takeaway containers, plastic bottles, the lining of takeaway coffee cups as well as polycarbonate (hard) plastics such as baby bottles.

It’s also used in the lining of cans to stop the food coming into contact with the metal, and is even found on the shiny coating of cash register receipts.

BPA is so common, about 95 per cent of people have detectable levels in their urine.

Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) has decided it does not pose a significant human health risk for any age group, despite finding BPA at very low concentrations in some foodstuffs.

Other countries have taken a different stance. France has banned it and the European Union has removed its use in baby bottles.

The Federal Government did announce a voluntary phase-out of baby bottles containing BPA in 2010.

Dr Green said scientists had so far found a “strong correlation" between BPA and obesity, and recent research also suggests it increases people’s risk of developing type 2 diabetes.

There’s also evidence in fertility clinics that it may affects the number of eggs a woman produces, and there’s an increasing link to miscarriage.

Compounds such as BPA are considered endocrine disrupters and can “mimic" oestrogen, which impacts people’s hormones.

“We have gained a lot of knowledge and data on the effects of BPA from animal studies" Dr Green said.

“But we are never going to run a human study in which we expose people to BPA, as we know how harmful it is, which is why it’s hard to show causality, hence we can only show association."

Phthalates are another class of chemicals for which there is a growing body of evidence to support detrimental effects on our health. These are used in soft plastic fishing lures, shower curtains, vinyl upholstery, adhesives, floor tiles, food containers and sex toys made of so-called jelly rubber.

It’s also an endocrine disrupter that may impact male fertility, including semen quality and the quantity of damaged DNA in sperm.

Dr Green said a chemical’s impact on the body might vary depending on how long people were exposed to it and how long it’s been in their system.

“It’s very hard to measure many of the chemicals that have effects on our endocrine systems," he said. “Generally these can be at low levels in the environment but these levels are often high enough to have an effect on our bodies."

Other factors such as exercise and poor diet could also influence people’s health.

“This area is quite hard to work in because we often study the effects of just one compound at a time, but we live in a soup of multiple environmental pollutants," he said.

This is one reason why studies in different areas sometimes produce different results, as different compounds could be working with or against each other.

“If there is a mixture of compounds, it could be about how they work together to have a particular effect on the body and people’s health."

Dr Green said these chemicals were so pervasive in our surroundings it was hard to avoid them, however he recommended people minimise their contact with plastic, especially if they were trying to conceive.

There are many simple ways people can easily reduce people’s exposure.

For example, people should avoid drinking or eating food out of soft plastic containers. This includes takeaway containers and especially plastic bottles, which he describes as “lethal if left to heat up in a car".

“You are basically drinking water and a sizeable dose of BPA," he said.

“Use glass or aluminium drink bottles; they are more sustainable.

“With a takeaway coffee cup, the lining is BPA, not to mention the plastic in the lid."

However, looking for plastic products that are “BPA free" may not be safer as some manufacturers have begun replacing BPA with other similar chemicals that could be just as bad for us.

Avoiding plastic when possible is safer, while also being better for the environment.

“There are a lot of common messages around recycling or sustainability, but there is also the added benefit that it’s better for your health," Dr Green said.

“It’s better for the environment and better for us, so why not do it?"

SOURCE  





Anti-Catholic bigotry from the Australian Human Rights Commission

Catholic schools have attacked the Australian Human Rights Commission for mischaracterising exemptions to anti-discrimination laws and suggesting religious communities were seeking to operate outside modern-day standards.

As debate ramps up around the federal government’s religious freedom bill, the National Catholic Education Commission has taken issue with “assertions" made by the commission in a ­recent policy document and its framing of exemptions as an “impediment" to human rights.

In a sharply worded letter to AHRC president Rosalind Croucher, Catholic commission executive director Jacinta ­Collins said the organisation ­rejected the AHRC’s characterisation of exemptions as “freezing in time community standards".

“The statement is … with ­respect, a misstatement and suggests a lack of appreciation about the purposes of exemptions in anti-discrimination laws," she writes. “We are concerned this language has the effect of ‘othering’ those with religious beliefs. It suggests that religious believers and communities which may rely on these exemptions sit apart from society and operate outside community standards."

Othering refers to singling out a minority on the basis that their culture and beliefs are fundamentally different and therefore a risk to the majority.

The Catholic Church and education sector, which includes almost 1800 schools across the country, have been lobbying to retain their religious rights, currently afforded via religious ­exemptions to anti-discrimination law. For schools, exemptions enable them to operate in ­accordance with their faith, including preferencing enrolment of baptised students and hiring staff who support their teachings.

As the Attorney-General seeks to introduce religious discrimination laws by the end of the year, the AHRC has run a concurrent inquiry into the status of human rights, examining religious freedom protections and the operation of exemptions to anti-discrimination law.

A discussion paper outlining the AHRC’s priorities for reform, released last month, argues that “permanent exemptions have the effect of ‘freezing in time’ community standards in relation to sex, age, disability, sexual orientation and gender identity".

“Accordingly, what was appropriately exempted from the operation of discrimination law 35 years ago … may not be appropriate today," it said.

“The commission considers that all permanent exemptions need to be considered in light of the overall purpose of discrimination law to promote equality and fair treatment."

Ms Collins’s letter points out that, in the absence of other legislation protecting religious freedom, the exemptions were effectively “balancing clauses … crucial to ensuring the freedom of all to act in accordance with religious beliefs and mission".

SOURCE  





Inherit the Wind

Tony Thomas

It’s good to know that wind turbine blades are a bird’s best friend, or something like that. I’m citing “fun facts" on the website of Synergy, Western Australia’s state-owned electricity generator. Synergy operations include half a dozen WA wind farms, mostly coastal. Synergy claims, correctly, that its fun facts “may blow your mind." Fun Fact No. 9 is illustrated with a pic of Sesame Street’s Big Bird, pop-eyed with delight about wind turbines’  blade-and-splatter prospects. The caption reads (author’s emphasis)

Wind technology is now much more bird-friendly. Earlier versions of wind farms, such as the ones first launched in the US, had thousands of small fast-spinning turbines. Not so good for birds. Now, wind farms have taller and slower-moving blades which are much nicer for our feathered friends.

I don’t know about those “slower moving blades". Tip speed of a 75m blade for a giant 6MW turbine can be 290km per hour. Despite my blown mind, I also managed to look up Greens Tasmanian stalwart Bob Brown and his objection last July to a company’s plan to put 120 wind towers, each 270m at tip height, on Robbins Island. He doesn’t agree with Synergy that turbines are “nice for our feathered friends". He wrote instead, “For which of these species will the wind farm be the thousandth cut?"[1]

This is by-the-way, just stuff I came across while looking into what happens to wind farms when they get to their use-by date. National Wind Farm Commissioner Andrew Dyer tells Quadrant Online, “Some farmers have not got the best legal advice before entering agreements. The industry is new and the decommissioning clauses will be tested in the coming years as older wind farms reach the end of their economic life. These clauses are incredibly important if you are a landowner." [2]

 Germany now has 29,000 wind towers. The nightmare of scrappage and decontamination has already started, with 250MW decommissioned last year. Close to 10,000 towers must be decommissioned by 2023. One tactic has been to ship the toxic parts and rubble to corrupt African states to deal with. As for the US, it will have more than 720,000 tons of blade material alone to dispose of by 2040, blades being a particularly enduring space-age construct.

Overall, the wind industry is blowing cold. Australian wind operators’ so-called Clean Energy Council bemoaned last September a “collapse" in renewables investment in the first half of 2019. Late last year investors had signed on for 4500MW of new renewables, but this surge “has since collapsed to less than 800MW in each of the first two quarters of 2019". The Council blamed “lack of federal energy policy certainty" (translated: ‘We want more subsidies!’), saying that “regulatory challenges" made investor confidence fragile. The Council made the useful point that if the states keep shutting down coal power while renewables stop growing, Australia is heading for insecurity and higher power prices. Conversely, one could add, more coal power and less “unreliables" would raise security and lower the bills to households. As federal resources minister Matt Canavan says, the country urgently needs an upgrade to Vales Point, NSW’s coal-powered generator, and a new one at Collinsville, Qld. Thousands of manufacturing jobs are at stake.

The Australian wind fiasco is the kid brother of the massive downturn in Europe, where 12 countries last year failed to install a single turbine, Germany’s onshore wind installations halved and Britain’s onshore expansion “collapsed".

To set the scene on decommissioning, Australia has about 95 wind farms, most with turbines of 1.5-3MW. They account for 7 per cent of electricity demand. Only one Australian wind farm has been decommissioned – Salmon Beach Wind Farm, near Esperance. Started in 1987 and scrapped in 2002, it was owned by bird-friendly Synergy. Its six turbines rated at 60KW each were toys by modern standards, where a single turbine generates 4-5MW (when the wind blows at optimum speed, which isn’t often). That’s the output of a dozen entire Salmon Beach wind farms. Dismantling the small Esperance towers was straightforward, and one nacelle and blades was even left in a park as a souvenir.

There’s some public-record material about decommissioning US wind farms, and it’s not re-assuring. In Minnesota, the 10-year-old Nobles Wind farm has 134 turbines of about 1.5MW and is operated by Xcel Energy. Xcel estimates a cost for scrapping each turbine at up to $US530,000 ($A770,000) or $US71 million total ($A103m). Each turbine has a tip height of 120 metres. Just to scrap one 40m blade involves crunching  composite material weighing more than 6 tonnes. The turbines themselves contain a smorgasbord of toxic plastics, oils, lubricants, metals and fibreglass.

As American Experiment points out, even $US71 million doesn’t finance a thorough clean-up. The contracts oblige Xcel to restore the land to a depth of only 4 feet, i.e. about one metre, whereas the foundations go down 5 metres. Moreover, underneath the 56 square miles (14,500ha) of this Minnesota wind farm is 140km of cabling and pipes. The documents don’t say if the cables would stay or go. But Palmer’s Creek, another wind farm in Minnesota with 18 turbines, will be allowed to leave cables in situ below four feet.

As to local terms, the Australian Clean Energy Council says,

"Decommissioning means that the wind turbines, site office and any other ancillary infrastructure is removed from the site, and roads and foundation pads are covered and revegetated, allowing land to be returned to its former use." Elsewhere the council says, “Typical landowner contracts require that the turbine is removed from its concrete foundation, and that the turbine site is covered in topsoil so that farming activities can continue." (Would government greenies allow a decommissioned mine a similar latitude?).

The Council also suggests that a lease include a simple decommissioning plan at start-up, to be reviewed in final years in order to flesh out the details and updates. I’d read that as “Trust us, we’re wind power providers". It continues,

"In the unlikely event that the wind farm company doesn’t commence substantial decommissioning and remediation works within 12 months of turbines no longer generating permanently, control of the decommissioning fund or other financial security should be given to the landowners or to an administrator as agreed between the parties to complete the decommissioning."

No Australian wind farm has defaulted to date, but keep your fingers crossed. SA law firm Johnston Withers advised farmers this year,

"What if the Operator goes into liquidation? This is perhaps one of the major potential risks of entering into any wind farm agreement. If the company that you enter into the agreement with (or its successor if they sell the rights) goes into liquidation, then there may be insufficient funds to de-commission the plant, and therefore the items could be left in place, potentially in a state of disrepair. If the equipment had value it would probably mean that it would be removed. There is a real risk however that useless equipment could be left on the property at the end of the Lease."

Others add that landowners have no title over abandoned wind farm material and can’t even sell it to defray their own clean-up costs.

As mentioned above, WA’s power and wind farm operator, Synergy, is state-owned. It has just reported a $657 million net loss for 2018-19 (you read that right), the biggest loss in history for a WA state body. Why? Because the WA Labor government won’t let Synergy put up its prices to households by a necessary 7 per cent. Instead the politicians mandate only a 1.75 per cent rise to save their political hides. “We’ve made it clear by our decisions that we’re not going to allow electricity prices to spiral out of control," said resources minister Bill Johnston, practising Labor pea-and-thimble economics.

He that troubleth his own house shall inherit the wind:
and the fool shall be servant to the wise of heart.
-Proverbs 11:29

Meanwhile a flood of intermittent wind and solar inputs continues to sabotage Synergy’s coal and gas-fired generators. It’s a dazzling example of “clean energy chaos" or maybe, “WA Clean Energy Inc." Non-state wind farm operators don’t have state treasuries to tap if stuff hits the fan

More HERE 

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





18 November, 2019

Jacquie Lambie and Pauline Hanson slam the sale of iconic Australian baby formula brand to the Chinese

I usually agree with Pauline.  I have always voted for her when I could.  But she is not thinking deeply about this one.

This is quite unlike Mr Trump's attempts to protect American firms.  In this case the jobs will stay in Australia and the raw product will come from Australian farms.  So what does it matter who runs the bottling plant? 

And this also opens up the chance of a bigger market for Australian milk.  The Chinese owner will be in a position to promote and sell it in China in a way that no Australian firm ever could.  It could be a big win for Australian dairy farmers


Senator Jacqui Lambie has slammed the sale of Australian baby formula company Bellamy's to the Chinese, calling the move an 'embarrassment to the country.'

On Friday, the Foreign Investment Review Board approved China Mengniu Dairy Company's $1.5billion bid to buy 100 per cent of the Tasmanian brand's shares.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg backed the approval but insisted that certain conditions were imposed.

The company will have to remain headquartered in Australia for a decade and run by a majority Australian board.

Shortly after the acquisition was approved, Ms Lambie took aim at the Morrison Government, saying the buying-up of Australian companies was 'concerning.'

'I think I'm like millions of Australians out there who are very concerned about the Communist Chinese takeover,' she told the Sydney Morning Herald on Friday.

'Every time they open a cheque book we roll over like a dog.' 

Prior to the sale, Ms Lambie, along with senators of the Centre Alliance, had called for an inquiry into Chinese influence and buy-outs around the country from the foreign affairs committee. 

Ms Lambie was joined by One Nation Senator Pauline Hanson as well as Barnaby Joyce who also voiced their frustrations over the acquisition.

Mr Joyce said he was 'disappointed' to see Australia lose yet another company to the Chinese and urged the government to make sure the conditions are properly met.

In a more scathing attack, Ms Hanson called on Mr Frydenberg to overturn the decision. 'Stop, just stop! Enough with the rampant sell off of Australia,' she said.

'These are money making entities, which are vital for our economy, they employ local people, and they contribute to our food production. Why compromise all that?

'Here we are allowing the Chinese to waltz in and snatch away one of the leading baby formula manufacturing businesses, with little consideration for what it means for our country's future; this takes another chunk out of Australia's ability to produce enough food for our own people.'

Ms Hanson, who accused the government of being 'frivolous' with Australian assets, said there needs to be 'more respect for what's ours.'

Bellamy's sale is expected to be finalised by the end of the year if shareholders approve the deal.

Mr Frydenberg has also required the Chinese buyer to invest at least $12million in infant milk formula processing facilities in Victoria. 

'The conditional approval demonstrates our foreign investment rules can facilitate such an acquisition while giving assurance to the community that decisions are being made in a way which ensures that Australia's national interest is protected,' Mr Frydenberg said in a statement on Friday.

Before the takeover bid, shares in Bellamy's plunged 62 per cent in 18 months.

There were allegations the Chinese state brought this about by not approving Bellamy's request to sell organic formula in Chinese stores, which is still pending.

Mengniu is 16 per cent owned by food processing company Cofco, which is co-owned by the Chinese state.

The board of the Tasmania-based company denied the takeover had anything to do with fast-tracking Chinese regulation to allow expansion in the country. 

Mengniu offered $12.65 per share and Bellamy's said it would pay a dividend of 60 cents per share, meaning shareholders get $13.25 per share.

That is a 59 per cent premium on the $8.32 price before the deal take-over bid was announced in September.

Mengniu is a huge dairy company listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange with a market capitalisation of $24.6billion. 

Bellamy's CEO Andrew Cohen described Mengniu as an 'ideal partner'. 'It offers a strong platform for distribution and success in China, and a foundation for growth in the organic dairy and food industry in Australia,' Mr Cohen said.

Mengniu chief executive officer Jeffrey Minfang Lu said taking over Bellamy's would give it critical access to the Australian market.

'Bellamy's is a leading Australian brand with a proud Tasmanian heritage and track record of supplying high quality organic products to Australian mums and dads,' he said.

'This leading organic brand position and Bellamy's local operation and supply-chain are critical to Mengniu.'

SOURCE  






Ludicrous new rule could see thousands of firefighters BANNED from battling deadly bushfires

Yet another case of toxic bureaucracy in firefighting

A 'ludicrous' new rule requiring volunteer firefighters to receive a work-with-children check could see thousands of them banned from battling blazes.

Queensland volunteers will be required to lodge a Blue Card application before December 1. or they will not be able to continue helping battle fires.

This new rule could see 15,000 volunteers banned from fighting fires from January 1 if they failed to apply for work-with-children checks.

Deadly fires have been burning throughout Queensland and New South Wales for more than a week resulting in four deaths.

Queensland Fire and Emergency Services Deputy Commissioner, John Bolger, recently broke the news to volunteers.

'Any QFES volunteer who is required to have a Blue Card, but refuses to apply for one, or is unable to hold a current Blue Card, will not be able to continue their role,' Mr Bolger said.

'As a member of the Rural Fire Service, you are likely to come into contact with children while performing your role, so are required to have a Blue Card. It is the law.'

Volunteers from NSW or Victoria do not need similar credentials. 

Rural Fire Brigades Association Queensland boss, Justin Choveaux, is concerned the new law will result in fewer people available to fight deadly fires.

'They defend the state for free and do dangerous things. Getting rid of 75 per cent of the membership of the truck brigades is not a good plan,' Mr Choveaux told The Courier Mail.

He also said many rural firefighters felt offended by the new law because they were being treated like potential paedophiles.

Veteran volunteer firefighter and grandfather, Ian Swadling, said he would refuse to comply with the new rule. 

'I think it would be very foolish to start dismissing trained firefighters in the worst fire season the state's seen in 60 or 70 years,' Mr Swadling said.

The volunteer from Villeneuve near Toowoomba said his only contact with children in the 30 years of firefighting was showing off the truck at the local show. 

In correspondence obtained by The Sunday Mail, acting Fire and Emergency Services Commissioner Mike Wassing said volunteers needed Blue Cards in case they came across students who had been evacuated or were on their way home.

He said these checks will be required because firefighters are classified as a health service. 

Mr Wassing also criticised volunteers who questioned the working-with-children check.

'Let me be clear that disrespectful conversations regarding the Blue Card process, including questioning the integrity of those people who are currently reluctant to apply, is not acceptable,' he said.

SOURCE  








Why Catholic teachers’ copycat cash grab is wrong

If the Premier wants to throw a $1250 stimulus payment at public servants, including teachers, the correct response is not for private enterprise to do the same. Reckless spending for the promise of votes should not encourage enterprise to abandon fiscal prudence. I get that Catholic school teachers would like more money, but stooping to stop-work action for a copycat cash grab is wrong.

More than 7000 teachers at almost 200 schools across Queensland have been refusing to perform certain tasks this week. Come Tuesday, they'll be walking out of classrooms at 9am in a dummy spit that kids - and their fee-paying parents - don't deserve.

All this for a one-off payment that is not a genuine pay rise. And, in the big scheme of things, it's not going to go very far. I appreciate that private school teachers have an understanding with their employers that they will not make less than their state counterparts, but let's be clear about something. Church schools are run like private companies. Bonuses have to be earned, not bestowed because some bright spark in another sector entirely decided it was a cracker idea to burn through taxpayer dollars.

In September, the Palaszczuk Government announced that an eye-watering quarter of a billion dollars would be doled out, in individual $1250 lots, to more than 200,000 public servants. The unprecedented move was explained as a bid to drive economic growth and coincided with a commitment to maintain future public service wage increases of up to 2.5 per cent, despite Brisbane's most recent inflation rate being a more modest 1.7 per cent.

You don't have to be an academic giant to see that the figures don't add up. Taxpayers have a right to be unhappy about what is yet another sign that our Government is out of touch with almost everyone except the unions.

As for the many Catholic school teachers taking industrial action, they too seem to have lost sight of the bigger picture. The Independent Education Union of Australia has convinced them that they deserve the random public service sweetener. No matter that it could cost employers up to $25 million collectively to deliver it.

 Queensland and Northern Territory branch secretary Terry Burke claims the payment is "fundamental" to maintain wage parity with state school teachers. Anything less spells the end of "professional respect". What about respect for employers?

Contrary to what some people think - particularly those who mistakenly consider Catholic schools as elite - these schools are generally not wealthy. They don't have buckets of cash lying around. My son was educated in the Catholic system and the fees I paid saved the Government money by not having him schooled by the state.

If Catholic schools are forced to splash $1250 on their teachers, it won't be the Government coughing up but parents, by way of fee hikes.

What the Independent Education Union of Australia also won't tell you is that this ill-founded industrial action is creating division within the schools themselves. Sensible teachers - who either don't belong to the union or who are members but disagree with the union's stance - are picking up the slack of their colleagues and they're not happy about it. Small schools with a stretched staff are struggling the most. It's all very unnecessary.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 16/11/2019






Heart surgeon allowed to operate after patients die

Protected by his mates?

One of the nation’s most prestigious heart surgery units has been rocked by allegations that hospital administrators endangered patient safety by allowing a doctor who had failed to meet ­surgical standards to continue to ­operate on patients unsupervised.

The cardiothoracic surgery ­department of Royal Prince Alfred Hospital in Sydney has been the subject of multiple probes during the past three years, with allegations of eight preventable patient deaths during or following heart surgery.

The surgeon at the centre of the investigations was allowed to ­return to surgery despite initial ­investigations — overturned by a later review — finding that his practice did not meet expected standards.

That prompted the resignation of two concerned surgeons who have escalated their complaints to the NSW Medical Council and the Health Minister.

The surgeons have claimed to the NSW government that their former colleague, cardiothoracic surgeon Michael Byrom, is “not fit to operate" and reported concerns about the Sydney Local Health District’s alleged “knowledge and concealment of the risks to ­patients and the failure of proper processes".

The health district says it has exhaustively reviewed the matters, and is relying on the results of a Health Care Complaints ­Commission investigation that found there were no grounds to ­restrict Dr Byrom’s practice.

“The Health Care Complaints Commission, as the relevant external investigative authority, has examined these issues and found the clinician is fit for practice and that there are no grounds for disciplinary action or suspension," a spokesman said. “The district accepts those findings."

The concerned surgeons have documented the deaths of eight of Dr Byrom’s patients and multiple allegedly adverse surgical outcomes over a three-year period, during which Dr Byrom repeatedly surrendered his admitting rights but was subsequently ­allowed to continue to operate.

A surgeon familiar with the events said: “I have never encountered circumstances previously where a surgeon is internally suspended or voluntarily stood down in a unit on multiple occasions and yet continues to operate."

The Weekend Australian is not suggesting Dr Byrom’s level of care is substandard, nor that he contributed to the deaths, only that there are reasonable grounds for investigating his level of care, and the hospital’s handling of the situation. Dr Byrom declined to respond to detailed questions from The Weekend Australian. “As Sydney Local Health District has provided a response to the ­allegations, I will not be providing further comment," he said.

In June, three surgeons lodged a mandatory report with the NSW Medical Council, detailing “serious concerns we have over Dr Byrom’s performance providing an ongoing threat to patient ­safety". The surgeons fear a ­backlash from within the medical fraternity if their identities are made public and The Weekend Australian has agreed not to name them.

The surgeons alleged in the ­report that Sydney Local Health District chief executive Teresa Anderson had failed to protect ­patient safety.

Dr Byrom was allowed to ­return to surgical practice shortly after an investigation report found, for the second time, that he “did not meet the standard reasonably expected of a cardiothoracic surgeon of an equivalent level of training or experience".

“We have serious concerns over the actions of the CEO, having suppressed and misrepresented critical senior medical advice and recommendations, exacerbating that threat (to patient safety) whilst enabling it to continue," the mandatory report said.

The NSW Medical Council’s performance division is monitoring Dr Byrom’s practice. In correspondence seen by The Weekend Australian, the council said it had “decided to work with Dr Byrom to protect the health and safety of the public".

Investigations into Dr Byrom’s practice have delivered contrasting findings over the past three years. Two reviews in 2016 and 2018 by independent senior interstate surgeons Julian Smith and Michael Gardner both concluded that Dr Byrom “did not meet the standard reasonably expected of a cardiothoracic surgeon of an equivalent level of training or ­experience".

The investigating surgeons heard an explosive allegation from one surgeon within the cardiothoracic unit that Dr Anderson had “expressly told the surgeons in the unit not to put in Incident Information Management System reports if they had clinical concerns". IIMS reports are the formal system of incident notification within hospitals. Dr Anderson declined to respond to the allegation.

The patient deaths

The first Smith-Gardner investigation followed the deaths of four patients within two months.

The review found multiple ­issues with Dr Byrom’s performance, including that he failed to seek help when complications occurred, that he experienced technical issues and difficulties in decision-making during operations, and that he had a lack of ­insight into his shortcomings.

Following the first review, Dr Byrom undertook a program of remediation, during which he ­operated under supervision and received extra training. He ­returned to unsupervised clinical practice in October 2017 but a ­series of adverse events occurred, including an incident that shocked senior clinicians at RPA.

On November 22, 2017, a ­patient who had undergone routine thoracic surgery at Concord Hospital in Sydney’s inner west sustained heavy bleeding during surgery. The patient was given large volumes of blood product post-operatively but continued to bleed in the ICU for a further 24 hours.

The following day, Dr Byrom handed the critically ill patient’s care over to another doctor and caught a plane overseas. The patient had to be transferred by helicopter to RPA, where another surgeon operated and stemmed the bleeding. By the time he stablised, the patient had lost 14 litres of blood.

The incident was one of several adverse outcomes that prompted a second investigation of Dr Byrom’s practice. The second review by Professor Smith and Dr Gardner again found, in August 2018, that Dr Byrom did not meet the standard reasonably expected of a cardiothoracic surgeon of an equivalent level of training or ­experience. The reviewing surgeons said further remediation of the surgeon’s performance was not recommended.

In the wake of the findings, RPA head of cardiothoracic surgery Paul Bannon announced Dr Byrom’s suspension from surgery.

Weeks later, Dr Byrom was back operating. Two weeks after that, another patient died.

“It’s seems inconceivable how a department head could reportedly announce that a surgeon is indefinitely suspended over investigated patient deaths and for the same surgeon to be back operating in the department a mere two weeks later," one surgeon said.

Sounding the alarm

NSW Health Minister Brad Hazzard was notified last year of concerns that Dr Byrom should not be operating on patients.

The mandatory report the three surgeons lodged with the Medical Council in June detailed “serious concerns we have over Dr Byrom’s performance providing an ongoing threat to patient ­safety". They said in their correspondence with regulators that a patient, Dimitrios Kyriazopoulos, 72, had died in concerning circumstances within weeks of Dr Byrom being reinstated.

When he returned to surgery, Dr Byrom did not have admitting rights, and was operating on ­patients who were admitted under the care of another surgeon.

In October 2018, Kyriazopoulos, who had lung cancer, underwent chest surgery performed by Dr Byrom and subsequently ­developed a post-operative infection. It is alleged that, over the course of two weeks, the infection was allowed to fester, until Kyriazopoulos developed sepsis. On November 5, he was listed for an operation to drain his infection, but the surgery was cancelled at the last minute.

That evening, Kyriazopoulos sustained an airway haemorrhage and hypoxic brain injury. He was taken off life support on November 11 and died. The death is now the subject of a coronial ­inquiry.

An investigation into the father of three’s death, known as a rootcause analysis, was conducted by the RPA, and found no correctable, system-based cause of the death.

One clinician involved in the care of the patient told The Weekend Australian they held serious concerns over the death.

“I was disappointed because I thought that this death was totally preventable," the doctor claimed.

NSW opposition health spokesman Ryan Park said there may be grounds for further investigation. “Some of the allegations raised indicate that there could be management and governance ­issues that need to be significantly improved," Mr Park said.

The Sydney Local Health District said it was disturbed that ­issues were continuing to be raised about Dr Byrom’s practice.

“While the district always strives for amicable outcomes, it considers the continued agitation regarding the practice of the clinician, in circumstances where these matters have been thoroughly reviewed by the bodies responsible for the regulation of the medical profession under the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law, to be highly disturbing," the district said in a statement.

More HERE 

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here




17 November, 2019

The Queensland government is to legislate every tenant's dream

And guess who will be most badly affected by that?  Tenants.  Like most do-gooder legislation, it will hurt most those it tries to help.

Why do landlords impose restrictions that tenants dislike?  They have to in order to remain in business.  I am a very experienced landlord (now ex) so let me give you a crystal clear example of why the present restrictions are in place

Pets:  Most landlords do not allow them.  Why?  Because pets shit and piss and even well behaved ones will occasionally do it on the landlord's carpet, which will then stink. 

So what happens when the pet owners move out?  The landlord has to try to re-let a place that stinks of pet excreta.  Very few people will move into such a place.  Smell-removing treatments achieve little so the ladlord has to rip up and replace the carpet -- costing thousand of dollars, far more than can ever be covered by a bond.  The landlord would have been better off never to let the pet owners into his place

And guess what?  The new legislation will tell landlords that they MUST allow pets

So what would every rational landlord do in that case?  Stop renting the property out. Sell it instead.  And the supply of rental accomodation will steadily dry up from that point on.

So the only way poor people will in future be able to get accomodation will be to move into accomodation that is priced to cover the risks -- at a much higher rent.  So people who once were able to afford their own house or apartment will have to share -- and thus experience a much more crowded and trying accomodation experience.

Well done, do-gooders!  An editorial from the "Courier Mail" below:


PROPOSED sweeping changes to tenancy laws in Queensland should be given close scrutiny to ensure the right balance is struck between the rights of renters and landlords. Under plans revealed in today's The Courier-Mail, tenants would get greater rights to keep pets and make changes to rental properties to make them safer or more homely.

In what are the most extensive changes to residential tenancies laws in four decades, renters would be able to improve the safety of their home — such as by installing grab rails in bathrooms, furniture anchors, child safety gates and dead locks — without seeking permission from the owner.

Tenants would also be able to make changes that make the accommodation more inviting or energy efficient such as by hanging pictures or using water-saving taps — after seeking approval from the owner. In a dramatic boost to the rights of tenants, this permission would be granted automatically if the owner does not respond within seven days.

As part of the changes, it would also be more difficult for owners to refuse a pet, but renters would also be forced to pay a pet bond to cover costs of potential damage.

These measures, to be announced today, will be introduced in two phases, the first of which will deal with safety measures, accessibility and rights for renters to break a lease to escape domestic violence.

It's encouraging that these wide-ranging reforms will be introduced in phases. But we urge close analysis of the changes to guard against unintended consequences. It may be laudable to improve the rights for tenants, who make up more than one-third of all Queensland households, but if these changes are rushed or not thought through properly, they could end up harming both owners and renters.

The State Government already concedes that rents could rise by between $5 to $18 a week as a result of the changes. The new laws will also require better communication between real estate agents, landlords and tenants.

Allowing tenants to alter the property if they make a request and do not get a response within seven days seems to be a short notice period, particularly if the owner is away or the property manager fails to pass on the message promptly.

And while safety improvements seem reasonable, is it fair to allow tenants to alter a property without at least consulting the owner? Housing Minister Mick de Brenni says the changes will bring in minimum standards inspired by Lyn and Ken Diefenbach, who lobbied for changes after their granddaughter Bella died in an accident involving a rotten floorboard in a rented property.

Its clear that landlords should ensure their property is safe. Tenants have a right to feel secure and comfortable in the homes they pay to rent. But some of these proposals appear to go much further than improving safety and verge on aesthetic and lifestyle changes, which should only be allowed with great care. What one tenant thinks is a positive change to a property may not be what the owner thinks.

If these changes go too far, they could damage the value of owners' investments, push up rents and even harm property prices just as the housing market appears to be improving.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 16/11/2019





Sacked Captain Creek fire brigade sits idle as state burns

Bureaucratic nastiness at work.  The brigade commander used his own initiative to fight a fire.  How Awful! The fact that the fire was defeated does not matter to the fire service top brass.  Their control was threatened and their own pathetic power is what really matters to them

While two states burn, most of the 49 volunteer firefighters of the rural brigade at Captain Creek, Queensland, twiddle their thumbs, seething that the well-performed unit was disbanded just when it was needed most.

As he tells the story, first officer John Massurit shakes his head: “Mate, you couldn’t make this up. We are ready, willing and able to go but they have taken away our vehicles, cancelled our membership and deregistered the brigade. It’s an absolute disgrace."

By rights Mr Massurit’s team should be out there with their weary colleagues, holding the line against the dozens of bushfires that continue to threaten life and property from the tip of Cape York Peninsula to the Shoal­haven region south of Sydney.

But the brigade’s celebrated ­effort a year ago to help save Agnes Water, on the central Queensland coast, led to a bitter dispute ­between the outspoken Mr Massurit, 53, and Rural Fire Service command. It came to a head when its headquarters at Captain Creek was padlocked on November 2.

Fourteen homes have gone up in the Cobraball blaze near Yeppoon, less than two hours away. How sorely the RFS could use the skills and experience languishing at Captain Creek.

Venting her frustration, veteran firefighter Gail Jacobsen, 58, said she was so disgusted she would never again serve in the RFS after more than 20 years as a volunteer: “We are not perfect but we are bloody good at what we do. I think their problem is that John is loud. He is very passionate. He says what he thinks and I don’t think they like it."

The brigade’s second officer, Jim Greer, 57, said the RFS had been so determined to drive out Mr Massurit it was prepared to sacrifice the rest of the unit.

“Why they would want to get rid of John Massurit, I have got no idea. He knows more about bushfires than those pencil-pushers ever will," he said.

The Queensland Fire and Emergency Services command overseeing the RFS is standing its ground, insisting on Friday that an audit of the brigade had ­revealed “poor behaviour, misuse of brigade equipment and poor ­financial management".

The unit was deregistered ­because it could no longer provide “an effective, safe and sustainable fire and emergency service ­response", QFES said.

The finding was rejected by Mr Massurit and his supporters at Captain Creek, a hamlet of 100.

At the height of the Agnes Water drama a bulldozer broke down, leaving its driver and a two-person repair crew stranded in the path of the flames. Mr Massurit damaged an RFS 4WD while getting to them. He then boarded a QFES chopper to direct waterbombing operations credited with halting the fire before it could break into Agnes Water.

Last December, Mr Massurit was advised by QFES that he faced a long list of misconduct ­allegations including causing unnecessary damage to an RFS ­vehicle, improperly commandeering a helicopter, lighting unauthorised fires for backburning, unnecessarily calling in “expensive" aerial tankers and historic misuse of the brigade’s finances.

He was disqualified from his leadership role as first officer. Eventually, most of the adverse claims were downgraded or dropped. After Mr Massurit challenged the fairness of the QFES process, independent workplace investigators reported in July that only three allegations had been sustained: the vehicle damage, that he “went up in an operational helicopter without appropriate authority" and that he failed to comply with a direction to leave a fire ground for fatigue management, namely his own property.

On November 2 a site meeting of the brigade’s angry members was told by a delegation of brass headed by QFES Acting Assistant Commissioner Tony Johnstone that they were being disbanded.

Police and other personnel were waiting around the corner to clear out the shed and drive away the two fire trucks. The gates were then locked.

Mr Massurit said he still had not received an explanation for the brigade’s axing at such a critical juncture, an issue taken up by Liberal National Party MP Stephen Bennett in state parliament and directly with Emergency Services Minister Craig Crawford and the QFES leadership.

Mr Crawford said he had been assured by QFES that neighbouring brigades had been reinforced to cover Captain Creek. A spokesman for the agency said former members could apply to join other units in the area.

SOURCE  






Climate alarmists are brazen opportunists preying on misery

Chris Kenny writes well below but omits what is probably the most important point:  Global warming CANNOT cause drought.  Global warming would induce more evaporation off the oceans  which would come down as MORE rain, not less. 

So the widespread claims that the fires are caused by  of global warming because global warming has induced drought are just another Greenie fraud. Drought is if anything a sign of cooling, not warming. It is true that drought does dry out the vegetation and thus encourages fires but what causes drought? 

Nobody knows exactly.  All we know is that Australia is very prone to it.  Australian farmers often go for years without seeing rain -- which is why there is a lot  of irrigation


Like a struck match in the bush, global warming is the spark that triggers a destructive firestorm in public debate. Heated on emotion, fanned by sensationalist media and fuelled by ideology, it burns through common sense, reason and decency, showing no respect for facts or rational thought.

Climate alarmists are using tragic deaths and community pain to push a political barrow. Aided by journalists and others who should know better, they are trying to turn a threat endured on this continent for millennia into a manifestation of their contemporary crusade.

It is opportunistic, transparent, grisly and plain dumb. Contributions this past week take lunacy to new levels in an ominous sign for public discourse. In this land of droughts and flooding rains — Dorothea Mackellar’s “flood, fire and famine" — we now confront an extra injury every time the weather tests us; silly and reckless posturing from climate alarmists trying to prove their point.

History doesn’t matter to them, nor the facts. Rather than consider reality they proffer an almost hallucinogenic alternative, pretending their political gestures will deliver cooler, damper summers unsinged by bushfires.

This repugnant rhetoric must be called out; facts and science must prevail. But engaging in this debate must never be interpreted as downplaying the severity of what has occurred — four deaths, hundreds of properties destroyed, lives changed and trauma ongoing. It is only to say this is the perennial horror of our sunburnt country that will bedevil this land long after all of us, our children and our children’s children are gone.

Australia’s natural history is impossible to interpret without reference to fire; plants evolved to survive bushfire and depend on it for propagation. Indigenous heritage demonstrates an understanding of fire in managing vegetation, protecting kin and hunting animals. Since European settlement our story is replete with the menacing scent of disaster and tragic episodes.

Victoria has suffered most, in 1851 with a dozen people killed, along with a million sheep and five million hectares burned. In 1926, 60 dead; in 1939 there were 71 dead and just five years later at least 15 died. In the 1960s dozens were killed in Victoria in numerous years and just 10 years ago on Black Saturday 173 lives were lost along with more than 2000 houses.

In South Australia and Tasmania there is a similar repetition of tragedy, often during the same heatwaves, only with smaller and sparser populations the casualties are lower. Still, the toll is horrific; 62 people died in the Tasmanian fires of 1967.

Wetter summers and drier winters make the NSW fire season earlier and less intense, with blazes common in late spring. Devastating blazes have been regular, taking multiple lives on multiple occasions in the 1940s, 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s.

Yet so much coverage and commentary in the past week would have it that the latest tragedy is a new phenomenon. Rare as it is for the rainforests of northern NSW and southern Queensland to burn, it happens.

Back in September, Joelle Gergis of the Australian Nationa University’s Climate Change Institute wrote in Guardian Australia about how “I never thought I’d see the Australian rainforest burning. What will it take for us to wake up to the climate crisis?"

The Climate Council member wrote: “As a scientist, what I find particularly disturbing about the current conditions is that world heritage rainforest areas such as the Lamington National Park in the Gold Coast hinterland are now burning."

But such fires predate climate change: “A bushfire in Lamington National Park today swept through a grove of 3000-year-old Macrozamia palms," The Cairns Post reported on October 25, 1951. “These trees were one of the features of the park … the fire has burnt out about 2000 acres of thick rainforest country." That is rainforest burning in Lamington National Park 70 years ago.

Journalists, often encouraged by authorities, have written about the “unprecedented" nature of the Queensland fires. Yet newspaper searches tell a different story. Toowoomba’s The Chronicle in 1946 reported winter fires in late Aug­ust: “From Bundaberg to the New South Wales border … hundreds of square miles of drought-stricken southeastern Queensland were aflame." Two years later in The Central Queensland Herald there were reports on September 30 of “An 800-mile chain of bushfires fed by dry grass stretched tonight along the Queensland coast from Cairns to Maryborough."

Earlier this year, former NSW fire commissioner, now ­climate activist, Greg Mullins told ABC radio: “There’s fires breaking out in places where they just shouldn’t burn, the west coast of Tasmania, the world heritage areas, wet rainforest, subtropical rainforest, it’s all burning — and look, this is driven by climate change, there’s no other explanation."

But The South Australian Chronicle of February 1915 reported lives lost and the “most devastating bushfires ever known in Tasmania sweeping over the northwest coast and other districts. The extent of the devastation cannot be over-estimated." And in 1982 The Canberra Times detailed a “huge forest fire" burning out 75,000ha of dense rainforest on Tasmania’s West Coast.

Terrible as our fires are — often the worst in a generation or more — they are not abnormal in our landscapes, in our climate. A sober discussion in the global warming context might argue that, across time, our endemic bushfire threat could increase marginally rather than diminish with extra rain.

But to suggest the threat is new or can be diminished by climate policy is to pile false hope and mind-numbing stupidity on top of alarmist politicking.

This week, journalists and politicians have wilfully misrepresented claims from NSW fire authorities that they had never confronted so many emergency-level fires at once. An unprecedented number of fires, especially when deliberately lit, has more to do with expanding population than climate.

There also has been much ­hyperbole about the fire rating of “catastrophic"; a new category added to the rating system after Victoria’s 2009 fires to ensure greater community responsiveness. CNN International went heavy on our fires, saying half of Queensland was facing bushfire emergency.

The US-based broadcaster ran a Nine Network report by Airlie Walsh declaring it was the “first time in history Sydney had been met with such catastrophic conditions". This was typical of the misleading reporting; it was merely the first time the “catastrophic" category had been invoked since it was introduced a decade ago.

Back in 2009, the ABC reported how the additional category was about raising awareness: “Victorian Premier John Brumby said in the last fire season, only five days would have been classified as code red. The new fire warnings system will provide the community with a better understanding of the level of bushfire threat on any given day based on the forecast weather conditions, he said in a statement."

CNN also used our fires as the basis for an interview with David Wallace-Wells, author of The ­Uninhabitable Earth. He was asked “how dangerous" it was that our Prime Minister “doesn’t actually want to tackle the problem". This, in the modern parlance, is fake news.

Wallace-Wells, without resort to science, asserted Australia was ­already “suffering intensely" from climate change which, according to him, was responsible for our current drought. He also wrongly claimed our government was not taking any “meaningful action" on climate.

As a national park staffer, and having studied and trained at bushfire management, I experienced one of the Ash Wednesday infernos in 1983. Temperatures well over 40C, tinder-dry bush in the steepest parts of the Adelaide Hills and winds gusting towards 100km/h; this was hell on earth, when fires become a storm and only survival counts.

I missed the worst of it but joined the mop-up — a miserable task amid burned homes, melted cars and the smell of death — ­before helping to extinguish blazes over following days. No one who was there will ever say they’ve seen worse.

People who have seen bushfires only on television can have no idea, and those who experience the horrors of a firestorm won’t get into silly comparisons. In her nonfiction account of Victoria’s Churchill fire on Black Saturday, Chloe Hooper relays first-person accounts.

“The flames were lying down because the wind was howling through." “It was basically hailing fire." “It was like a jet engine, I’ve never heard a noise like it and then the penny dropped — it was the fire coming." “Trees ignited from the ground up in one blast, like they were self-exploding."

All of this is so lethal, terrifying and devastating — and always has been. It insults all those who have been lost before to pretend it is worse now.

Heat, wind and fuel are what drive our fire threat, and the worst conditions will involve hot, dry conditions and gale force winds across a heavy fuel load. The only factor we can realistically control is fuel — hazard reduction is crucial but often resisted.

While drought can limit the fire threat in some areas by inhibiting grass and shrub growth, the big dry has turned the forests of northern NSW and southern Queensland into tinderboxes. This situation is directly linked to the drought, so the critical question is whether there is a connection between the drought and climate change.

The most authoritative assessment of this came in June from the director of the Centre for ­Climate Extremes, Andrew Pitman. (I have inserted an additional word, in brackets, that Pitman and his centre later said should have been included.)

“This may not be what you expect to hear but as far as the climate scientists know there is no (direct) link between climate change and drought.

“Now, that may not be what you read in the newspapers and sometimes hear commented but there is no reason a priori why climate change should make the landscape more arid.

“And if you look at the Bureau of Meteorology data over the whole of the last 100 years there’s no trend in data, there’s no drying trend, there’s been a drying trend in the last 20 years but there’s been no drying trend in the last 100 years and that’s an expression of how variable the Australian rainfall ­climate is."

Pitman is no climate sceptic. These are just the scientific facts. Yet his comments are fastidiously ignored by most media except to deliberately reinterpret them.

Mostly preferred are unfounded prognostications from people such as businessman cum green campaigner Geoffrey Cousins telling Radio National Breakfast “everyone in this country now understands the link between climate change and these fires".

Or Greens leader Richard Di Natale telling the Senate that global warming is “supercharging these megafires".

What a confluence: media eager to elevate a sense of crisis; political actors exaggerating to advance a cause; horrendous threats that require no embellishment; public fascinated by weather patterns; and information from official authorities feeding the frenzy (revised fire danger categ­ories; weather bureau rainfall records starting only from 1900, therefore eliminating the first five years of the Federation drought; historical temperature readings revised downwards so that this January a record capital city maximum was declared in Adelaide despite a maximum one full degree higher being recorded in January 1939).

When cold, hard analysis of facts is required, we see wild claims constantly made and ­seldom tested.

Di Natale and ­fellow Greens Adam Bandt and Jordon Steele-John stoop so low as to blame these fatal fires on the ­government, dubbing it “arsonists". Former fire chiefs gather to suggest, with straight faces, that some additional climate change action from government could have quelled these fires. It is as ­offensive as it is ­absurd, but it is seldom called out by a complicit media.

Even Chief Scientist Alan Finkel has conceded that if we were to eliminate all our nation’s greenhouse gases (about 1.3 per cent of global emissions) it would do “virtually nothing" to the ­climate.

The real situation is even more hopeless, of course, because ­global emissions continue to rise. So, the first crucial furphy perpetrated daily by the virtue signallers is that Australian action can control the climate.

It is too ridiculous to be ­repeated yet it is, seriously, and daily. We also constantly hear, as we did on CNN, claims Australia is doing nothing; this ignores our Paris commitments, energy upheaval and the latest report from ANU experts Andrew Blakers and Matt Stocks. They found the country is on track to meet its Paris emissions reduction targets, investing 11 times the global average in renewable energy.

This has not, and will not, cool our summers or quell our bushfires. Still, even if we magically could freeze the climate — setting it permanently at whatever it was in the 1950s, 1850s or 1750s — we know we would still face catastrophic fire conditions in many, if not most, fire seasons.

Many commentators this week have done what they often do when the green left over­reaches; they say the debate has gone too far at either end.

This is intellectually dishonest; one side of this argument urges getting on with the hard task of battling our brutal and ever-present bushfire threat, the other side is playing inane and opportunistic politics.

No one has cut through the nonsense and sanctimony better than The Weekend Australian’s cartoonist, Johannes Leak. He has given us the brattish little arsonist sitting on his mother’s lap being told, “Don’t blame yourself darling, that bushfire you lit was caused by climate change."

Then there was “Total Fire Bandt" who was fighting bushfires by installing solar panels while others confronted the flames. And Leak showed the Greens sacrificing the economy in a pointlessly pagan attempt to appease an ­ominous blaze.

The overwhelming majority of Australians, who comprehend the omnipresent bushfire threat, would agree with these points. But our debate is shaped by a media/political class far removed from practical realities, more afraid of the chill winds of the ­zeitgeist than a blistering hot northerly.

SOURCE  






Australia’s Looming Submarine Disaster

Alistair Pope

Over the years I have witnessed both good and bad decisions concerning the structure and equipment choices made for our defence forces.  Some of the bad ones were made for reasons of expediency, due to budgetary considerations or by political direction. Only this last category partially excuses the military hierarchy from accepting full accountability for placing the national survival of Australia at risk through the failure to determine the requirements and then provide a viable, survivable and credible defence capability.  Today we have former admirals seriously advocating climate change as our greatest threat.  Not an aggressive and expansionist China, not global jihad and terrorism, not a nuclear armed North Korea. Sadly, such is the prevailing mindset these days.

This delusional thinking by senior officers and politicians outside the war-fighting box has led to a whole spectrum of failures to provide our military with the best people and equipment available.  The F-35 Joint Strike ‘do-everything, but do nothing well’ first line of air defence was a very bad decision, one I thought could never be topped. But I was wrong. The French Shortfin Barracuda submarines we have on order leave that earlier acquisition in the shade.

That Sinking Feeling …

Submarines are no longer the Das Boot-style hunters of slow cargo ships, but are themselves the hunted, as dangerous to those who sail in them as to those they target. The anti-submarine warfare (ASW) capabilities of advanced nations are now so good that submarines are on virtual suicide missions, the best result likely to be one kill before their own crew’s next-of-kin are notified.  The statistics concerning their effectiveness on a risk-benefit analysis are not good.  There were ‘happy times’ for German U-boats in the early part of World War Two until ASW defences became well organised.  After that their effectiveness was limited.  Germany, with the largest, most technically advanced and aggressive submarine fleet found that none of those qualities was any protection. In the last 30 months of the war they lost a staggering 616 submarines!  From the beginning of 1943 until May 1945 an average of two boats went down every three days.  In four of those months they were losing more than one boat a day.

Australia currently has a fleet of five operational conventional submarines, though finding crews to sail them is proving challenging. How much harder will it be to find crews for twelve outdated diesel-electric boats that must regularly expose themselves while their batteries are being recharged?

Just for argument’s sake, let’s posit the nuclear-powered Barracuda as the best submarine in the world (please stop laughing;  we’re talking hypotheticals). But we aren’t going the nuclear route. What we are doing is asylum-quality crazy: ripping out the reactor and replacing it with an old fashioned diesel. Our alleged ‘state of the art’ submarines will have 80-year-old technology driving them at 35 per cent the underwater speed of a nuclear Barracuda. And that is but the start of the problems.

This will then require new space for fuel, plus a re-balancing of the whole vessel in order to maintain underwater trim, and all the plumbing required to achieve this. All this to be achieved in 14 years?  That whooshing sound you hear is the pigs flying by. Were this but another case of squandering billions of dollars on the wrong weapon, then that would be regrettable but understandable. We have seen such folly many times before. Unfortunately, at this point the situation deteriorates.

Underwater Horse Cavalry …

Long after cavalry had become ineffective, horsed regiments and horse-mounted cavalry continued to exist in armies.  The last charge by sabre-wielding cavalry is reputed to have been in 1939, when Polish cavalry took on German tanks.  It did not end well for the Poles. Bravery is no antidote to bullets.

Australia is staking $200 billion of its meagre defence budget on an unproven design that can only produce an outdated weapon, the first of which will not be available (if you believe in fairy tales) for 15 years.  Let’s assume the fleet of twelve all arrive by 2050, and that our enemies are sufficiently considerate to delay hostilities until then.  What are the chances our boats, led by HMAS Pyne Box, will deter our enemies?  These new boats will be quieter, able to dive deeper and will have new capabilities, but they will still not be able to function in tomorrow’s undersea battle space.  By 2035, there will be a range of rapidly evolving autonomous submarine weapon systems, such as the recently unveiled Chinese HSU drones pictured below, that are designed to find and sink them. And find and sink them they most certainly will.

More HERE

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here




15 November, 2019

ATMs are set to become a rarity on Australia’s streets

They haven't got the full story below.  What has happened is that the banks have made all their ATMs interoperable.  You can use any ATM to access any bank.  So they have ditched half their ATMs as no longer needed

It has been 50 years since Australia’s first ATM was launched in Sydney, but the once-revolutionary cash dispensers are rapidly becoming a rare breed.

Since peaking at the end of 2016, ATM numbers have been in free fall and now sit closer to 2010 numbers.

Usage has fallen significantly too, with data from the Reserve Bank showing the number of transactions declined 3 per cent in the year to January 2019.

In the past decade, transaction numbers have fallen more than 35 per cent.

Finder insights manager Graham Cooke even warned 2GB’s Chris Smith that ATMs could be phased out within a decade in a June radio show.

Speaking to The New Daily, Swinburne University professor and payments researcher Steve Worthington said the cost of operating an ATM network is become too much for many banks to bother.

“Banks are finding it more expensive to run ATM networks as people have less demand for taking cash out, so they’re withdrawing ATMs from the arena, so to speak," he said.

Adding to banks woes, more Australians are turning to ‘buy-now-pay-later’ (BNPL) services like Afterpay and Zip Money to make purchases.

These controversial services – which don’t fit the legal definition used by Australia’s National Credit Act but work similarly to some credit products – are becoming increasingly popular with young customers.

And their growing popularity – now used by 9.4 per cent of the population compared with 6.8 per cent last year – is making cash less attractive.

“Why bother using up your cash when you can spread it out over three or four instalments?" Professor Worthington said.

However, Professor Worthington says it’s unlikely Australia will ever be completely free of ATMs, as too many groups – including those living in rural areas, recent migrants, the elderly, and those with disabilities – still rely on cash.

Instead the ATM network will undergo some significant changes – and numbers will continue to fall.

“The banks are gradually moving towards what we call a ‘utility ATM network’, where the ATM is run not by each individual bank but by a third party that provides the cash-filling, repairs and technical support," Professor Worthington said.

“That would mean you could use any ATM through this utility system."

Westpac has already sold part of its ATM network to Spanish company Prosegur, and Professor Worthington says others will likely follow suit.

Credit cards also feeling squeezed
At the same time Australia’s appetite for cash has dissipated, our use of credit cards has plummeted.

In the past month alone, more than half a million credit cards were cancelled in Australia, which financial services comparison site RateCity noted is the largest monthly decline in recorded history.

That’s part of a broader trend in which usage dropped about 3 per cent in the past year, data by research house Roy Morgan has shown.

Over the past decade, Australia’s total real credit card debt has reduced from $8 billion in 2007 to around $7 billion today, the data found.

“This drop is unprecedented," RateCity research director Sally Tindall said.

While there are a number of likely reasons for the massive drop off – including savers cutting up their cards “to get their home loan application across the line" – Ms Tindall said the shift to BNPL services is likely the biggest driver.

SOURCE  






Greens are slammed over extraordinary claims firefighters battling Australia's devastating blazes will return home to BASH their partners

More proof that Greenies live in cloud cuckoo land (with apologies to Aristophanes)

A domestic violence advocate has been blasted over claims firefighters trying to bring Australia's bushfire crisis under control will return home to beat their partners.

Greens Senator Larissa Waters held a press conference on Wednesday where domestic violence advocate Sherele Moody made the extraordinary claim. 'After a cataclysmic event like this, domestic violence peaks,' Ms Moody said on Wednesday afternoon as Senator Waters watched on. 'Women become extremely unsafe when, generally, the men return home from the fires and subject them to domestic violence.'

Ms Moody, the head of the Red Heart Campaign against domestic violence, took to Facebook to double down on her claims. 'What happens when domestic violence perpetrators finish their work on the frontline of a major crisis? They abuse women in their lives - harder than they ever have,' she wrote. 'I am not saying every firefighter, emergency service responder or victim of this crisis is a perpetrator.'

The Greens are now distancing themselves from Ms Moody after widespread backlash.

'Such a shocking, shocking statement to make ... You have just insulted every firefighter in Australia, and that I could never forgive or forget, just unbelievable,' one woman wrote on Facebook.

'This is how radical greens party are and what they stand for, they have no shame insulting Australian heroes (firefighters) saving homes in NSW in last couple days and in QLD in coming days,' another said.

'I'm totally disgusted by this, the bulk of firefighters regardless of being paid or volunteer do so to serve their community which requires a very special mindset of care which is not comparable with this disturbing statement,' another wrote.

A statement from Senator Waters said the party 'does not support the statement made today by Sherele Moody that firefighters are responsible for an increase in domestic violence during times of disaster'. 'Ms Moody is not affiliated with the Greens and does not speak for us,' the statement read.

'Today's press conference with Senator Waters was held to receive a petition regarding the Family Law Inquiry.' 'Ms Moody chose to make comments regarding matters unrelated to the press conference without our prior knowledge.'

Ms Moody claimed evidence from the aftermath of the deadly Black Saturday bushfires in Victoria in 2009 suggested women 'experienced an increase in violence from their partners' after such disasters. She cited work from Dr Debra Parkinson, who spoke to women following the Black Saturday fires, and called for governments to respond to the 'heightened' risk.

But Dr Parkinson told Seven News that although she did find an increase in family violence in fire-affected communities, she did not say it was about firefighters.

When this was brought up to Senator Waters, she said: 'We note the research that violence increases during times of disasters.' 

SOURCE  





Foreign hack 'wake-up call' prompts overhaul to combat foreign interference at universities

Australian universities will adopt new guidelines to try and combat the threat from "unprecedented" levels of foreign interference.

Education Minister Dan Tehan described a sophisticated cyber attack on the Australian National University, which has not been attributed to any one country, as a "big wake-up call" for the sector.

He said the guidelines would strengthen cyber security and intelligence sharing between universities and the Government.

They also place more responsibility on universities to understand exactly who they are collaborating with and what their research is used for.

"It can be difficult but you can put intellectual property requirements around what that end use should be, and you can also make sure that if you've done the due diligence you understand what the links might be between that professor and certain other institutions in a country, which then might bring up red flags," Mr Tehan said.

"And that's when the collaboration and co-operation kicks in because then can raise those concerns with Government agencies and they might say look, we don't think that that is the type of research that you should be undertaking."

Inside a massive cyber attack on the Australian National University that risks compromising high-ranking officials across the globe.

The announcement follows concerns about the links between Australian universities and the development of mass surveillance and military technologies in China.

Some Government backbenchers have also warned that universities are not doing enough to combat China's influence on campuses.

The guidelines were developed in conjunction with the university sector.

Universities Australia chief executive Catriona Jackson said most of the guidelines were already being implemented.

"This is just a way of putting them all down in a list so that they can be handily and readily accessed by university staff so they can go through the whole list, just to question themselves," she said.

"Universities know very, very clearly that this this is an increasingly complex world and we need to deploy everything we have at our fingertips to make sure that universities and the research inside universities, the students and staff, are as safe as they can be."

Mr Tehan said the guidelines would be reviewed in the middle of next year.

SOURCE  






They're still after archbishop Hollingworth

It sealed his downfall when John Howard made him governor general.  His only fault was insisting on proper evidence rather than immediately believing a sex abuse complaint

A federal senator has proposed new laws that could strip former governor-general Peter Hollingworth of millions of dollars in public benefits over his mishandling of sex abuse complaints in the Anglican church.

West Australian Greens senator Rachel Siewert will today introduce a private member's bill that would allow a minister or parliament to axe vice-regal pensions over "serious misconduct" in or out of office.

Abuse survivor groups have long lobbied to end Commonwealth payments to Dr Hollingworth — who receives up to $600,000 a year — despite his stint as governor-general ending in disgrace after less than two years.

Dr Hollingworth was forced to quit in 2003 after controversy around his response to sex abuse claims while Archbishop of Brisbane, which included allowing a paedophile priest to work through to retirement.

A royal commission has since found when Dr Hollingworth was governor-general in 2002, he knowingly misled a church-sponsored inquiry about his knowledge of the extent of sexual abuse by a priest.

Beth Heinrich, whose account of a sexual relationship with an Anglican priest who sexually abused her from the age of 15, led in part to Dr Hollingworth's downfall, said the Government should end his "undeserved pension".

"I think it's long overdue — I've been waiting for it for years," she said. "It's a disgrace. He was forced to resign in disgrace, he was there as governor-general for less than two years.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





14 November, 2019

High Court rules in favour of Cardinal Pell on final appeal

This is already evidence that the case is an unusual one.  A conviction based on one uncorroborated allegation is very rare for a start

Australia’s final arbiter has granted disgraced cardinal George Pell special leave to appeal his five convictions for molesting two choirboys in Melbourne in 1996, and almost immediately the public defence of the 78-year-old has ramped up.

The High Court of Australia this morning ruled that it would hear Pell’s appeal after it was earlier rejected by the Victorian Court of Appeal. It is rare for the High Court to grant an appeal and the decision keeps Pell’s chances for an early release from prison alive. He has been in prison since March this year.

He is within his rights to apply for bail, but the chances of bail being granted are very slim.

Herald Sun columnist Andrew Bolt wasted no time in taking aim at Pell’s accusers and the judges who put him away and kept him there. He directly questioned the credibility of the two judges of the Court of Appeal — president Chris Maxwell and Chief Justice Anne Ferguson — who ruled against Pell in August. “Their credibility is now on the line," he wrote, before taking aim at Pell’s accusers.

“At the very least, the improbability (of the crime being committed the way Pell’s accusers said it was committed) is so very high that no-one should convict a man on that evidence just because his accuser seemed to be so nice or honest."

Bolt wrote that the third judge, Mark Weinberg, “seemed to accuse his fellow judges of putting too much faith in the demeanour of Pell’s sole accuser".

The most senior Catholic to be found guilty of child sex abuse crimes was not in the Canberra courtroom when the decision was handed down, nor did he appear via video link.

Instead, the news was relayed to him inside his cell at Melbourne Assessment Prison where he spends his days in protective custody.

A unanimous Victorian County Court jury in December found Pope Francis’ former finance minister guilty of molesting two 13-year-old choirboys in Melbourne’s St. Patrick’s Cathedral in the late 1990s shortly after Pell became archbishop of Australia’s second-largest city.

Pell’s lawyers argued in their 12-page application for a High Court appeal that two state appeals court judges made two errors in dismissing his appeal in August.

The judges made a mistake by requiring Pell to prove the offending was impossible rather than putting the onus of proof on prosecutors, the lawyers said.

They also said the two judges made a mistake in finding the jury’s guilty verdicts were reasonable. Pell’s lawyers argued there was reasonable doubt about whether opportunity existed for the crimes to have occurred.

Pell’s lawyers also argue that changes in law over the years since the crimes were alleged have increased the difficulty in testing sexual assault allegations.

They argue Pell should be acquitted of all charges for several reasons, including inconsistencies in the complainant’s version of events. But prosecutors argue there is no basis for the appeal, and the Victorian courts made no errors.

In their written submission to the High Court, prosecutors wrote Pell’s legal team was asking High Court judges to apply established principles to the facts of the case, which were already carefully and thoroughly explored by the state appeals court.

Pell was largely convicted on the testimony of one victim. The second victim died of an accidental heroin overdose in 2014 when he was 31 years old without complaining that he had been abused.

The surviving victim said after Pell lost his appeal in August, “I just hope that it’s all over now."

Pell must serve at least three years and eight months behind bars before he becomes eligible for parole.

As a convicted paedophile, he is provided with extra protection from other inmates and spends 23 hours a day in solitary confinement.

SOURCE  






Some of Australia’s most maligned addresses are set to become some of our most sought-after, thanks to a dramatic turnaround

A benefit of lockout laws

Australia’s ‘new Soho’ Kings Cross, Potts Point and surrounding suburbs set to boom

Kings Cross’ lockout laws are here to stay, which means one of the less-desired addresses in Australia is set to become one of the most sought after.

The former red light district’s reputation as one of Sydney’s seedier areas meant it was never top of the list of suburbs to live in or to move to.

But since the lockout laws were introduced in 2014, Kings Cross and surrounding areas have left their night life ways behind to embrace a more liveable and cosmopolitan feel.

That will only continue after a NSW parliamentary inquiry last month declared the controversial lock out laws will be retained in the Cross, putting an end to any chance of the area recapturing its crown as the heart of Sydney’s night life.

That ensures the area is set to become one of the most desirable districts in the Harbour City due to a number of factors — leading it to being dubbed Australia’s ‘new Soho’ – an area akin to its famous ‘namesakes’ in New York City or London.

Those areas have enjoyed a revitalisation through gentrification, and as a result, property values improved considerably.

Elizabeth Bay, which borders Kings Cross to the east, is one area already enjoying a dramatic surge in popularity.

Unit prices there have risen an incredible 24 per cent rise, year-on-year to the end of July, as much of the rest of the market continued to fall before the very recent upswing.

Nearby the more affordable Darlinghurst, where the median unit price is $932,500, compared to Elizabeth Bay’s $1.11 million, prices increased 6.9 per cent.

Over the same period the median home price in Sydney fell by 4.8 per cent, and this came before the future of the lockout laws were confirmed.

Jason Boon, a Director at Richardson and Wrench Elizabeth Bay/Potts Point has been selling real estate in the area for more than two decades and is ideally placed to talk about its future.

“To give you a correlation, Elizabeth Bay is like Bronte to Bondi, you’re not far from the action," Mr Boon said.

“It’s in the middle of the triangle, of the beach, the city and the airport. It’s right in the thick of it all. It’s close to the city but not in the city. People don’t want to get in their cars. “Around Kings Cross and Potts Point, they don’t have to do that and they can still have a view of the harbour, to the beaches and to The Heads."

“The face of the area is changing. It’s the New Soho of Australia. It’s always been eclectic and still is but it’s becoming more relevant," Mr Boon said.

“With the lockout laws it has become more relevant. (Sydney Lord Mayor) Clover Moore has helped to change the area.

Mayor Moore she has changed the parks, lit them up with smart poles like (former mayor Rudy) Giuliani did in New York.

“Now that Kings Cross has changed everyone wants to come here. You only have to look at the buildings that have been built here and are being planned.

“The part still to change is the Kings Cross strip. There are a lot of developments planned there. It will be the biggest change in property in Australia. It will be a whole different strip. It will be very cosmopolitan."

The area has already developed a well-known and well-respected food scene that continues to grow, and boutiques and galleries are also increasingly proliferate in the area.

Buyer’s agent Simon Cohen of Cohen Handler saw the potential in Kings Cross and its surrounds when he bought into the area three years ago. “It’s a great area," he said.

“It’s close to the city, full of cafes and restaurants. It’s a very desirable area. You can enjoy city living there with water views, so it is very unique. Ever since it started getting cleaned up it is a different place."

Mr Cohen’s clients have also identified the area as hot property.

“A lot of our clients want to be there and if they can afford it, we suggest they do. “It’s a great investment — you get great returns and great tenants — and it’s a great area to live.

“There is such great demand. People from all stages of life love it. It’s very sought after, there’s not a lot of stock so it can be hard to get into."

Penthouses in Potts Point are in considerably high demand. Mr Boon said they can sell for around $35-40,000 per square metre as opposed to the rest of Sydney which averages around $20,000 per square metre.

For those who aren’t in the market for a penthouse, or even super contemporary living, there are also a number of beautiful art deco buildings and Victorian terraces in the area. And even though the night life has calmed, it still exists.

First National Real Estate CEO Ray Ellis said he could also understand the lure the area. “Potts Point is a groovy area," he said. “It is tightly held, it’s expensive to buy into. But you can get good rental returns and a lot of people want to live there."

SOURCE  






Green bureaucracy blocking big natural gas developments

Two world-class liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects valued at $40 billion and owned by some of the world’s biggest oil companies, including Shell, BP and PetroChina, are at risk of being permanently marooned by a complex “economy v environment" dispute in Australia.

The Browse and Scarborough projects will only be developed if final government approvals can be obtained and that could mean satisfying the carbon emissions requirements of an international climate-change agreement.

Unfortunately for the companies behind the projects, which have taken more than 30 years to reach the point of a final investment decision, different layers of government in Australia can’t agree on whether local or international rules apply.

At a political level there is support for both Browse and Scarborough because of the economic and job creating benefits from investment.

But at an administrative level there are government officials who argue that approval is not possible for any big resource development, including oil and gas, unless the proponents can demonstrate how they will offset all emissions of carbon dioxide, one of the gases blamed for global warming and climate change.

Australia, like many other countries, is a signatory to the Paris Agreement on climate change which includes a set of recommendations designed to limit carbon dioxide pollution.

But, for a country which is heavily dependent on mining and oil production the Paris deal has become a logistical nightmare and, in the case of natural gas a two-edged sword because while it might be a fossil fuel it is far less polluting than the coal or oil it can replace.

Asian countries such as China, Japan and Korea are major buyers of minerals and energy products produced in Australia and are keen to see a continuation of a reliable LNG supply from a relatively risk-free supplier.

But, if the civil servants working in government departments, such as the Environmental Protection Authority of Western Australia (EPA), both Browse and Scarborough will be subjected to onerous emissions offset requirements which could jeopardize their development.

First hint of a standoff between elected and unelected government officials emerged earlier this year when the EPA said all new LNG projects could only proceed if they could demonstrate “zero net emissions" and needed to meet so-called Scope 3 emissions, or those emitted by countries which consume resources sourced from Australia.

The resources industry has rejected that position even if it does comply with the Paris agreement and Australia’s obligations, warning that all new resource projects face an insurmountable hurdle, especially when it came to Scope 3 because Australia cannot control what a foreign customer does with raw material even if it is sourced from Australia.

Elected government officials are slowing waking to the trap into which they have been led by not reading the fine print of the Paris agreement and by allowing civil servants, many with strong views on environmental protection, commit the country to a set of international rules which do not appear to be in Australia’s best interests.

An attempt to tone down the early EPA ruling has been made by the State Government of Western Australia but that position will soon be tested by the imminent development application for the Scarborough project led by Woodside Petroleum and BHP.

They plan to extract gas from the offshore Scarborough gasfields and pipe it to the onshore Pluto gas processing plant which is, in turn, being connected to the North West Shelf gas plant owned by Woodside, Shell, BP, Chevron, BHP, Mitsubishi and Mitsui.

The next stage in a process to create a major LNG “hub" is to develop the Browse gasfields owned by Woodside, Shell, BP, PetroChina, Mitsui and Mitsubishi.

Sorting out the ownership of the different stages of the projects has been likened to herding cats, a near-impossible task, but that process appears to have been settled, leaving the the challenge of dealing with government which is split between pro-and-anti development positions.

Last week, the Scarborough project took two big steps towards formal approval by its owners. The amount of gas in the fields was recalculated to deliver a 52% increase to now stand at 11.1 trillion cubic feet, just short of Browse with its 13.9tcf, and a contract was signed to build an inter-connecting pipeline between Pluto and the North West Shelf gas processing plants.

With design and ownership issues largely settled the LNG projects have moved to within sight of investment commitments, setting the stage for a showdown between elected and unelected officials over the question of Australia’s economic interest and its international climate-change obligations.

SOURCE  






Labor party lost in climate fog

Most of the fatal flaws exposed by the internal review of Labor’s ­emphatic electoral repudiation were so obvious that many of us had been pointing them out ­before, during and after the campaign. None of which detracts from the hilarity of watching the majority of players and commentators who argued Labor had a plausible agenda, campaigned well and would easily win the election now also say the findings are ­obvious.

Still, there is one glaring exception — a planet-sized blind spot — wilfully ignored by the review and much of the analysis. Yet even this hopeless oversight was predictable, simply because of who the ALP chose to conduct its review.

It was dubbed the climate election by many in Labor who were eager to accentuate the choice ­between targets and plans, yet the ALP chose as one of two reviewers Jay Weatherill — he was the premier of South Australia who pushed his state to a 50 per cent renewable energy share and allowed coal and gas-fired generators to close, delivering some of the world’s highest electricity prices but leading to the lights going out in the first statewide blackout.

When one of the most contentious policy choices in the campaign was about whether to embrace Labor’s plan to more than double the national renewable ­energy target (to the same level that created chaos in SA) and ­almost double the national emissions reduction goal, how could a renewables zealot such as Weatherill give an objective assessment? For him to call out the recklessness of Labor’s federal climate policy would be for him to admit his own costly legacy.

Labor has twice gone to a ­national election with radically more ambitious emissions reductions plans than the Coalition — in 2013 and this year — and the results speak for themselves. But Weatherill is deaf and blind to this reality; if he and others have their way, the next election will offer a similar choice.

On Thursday, delivering the review he conducted along with the pedestrian former trade minister Craig Emerson, Weatherill said it was clear Labor must continue to “stand for strong action on climate change" and that this was a “bedrock principle" for the party.

Yet elsewhere in the review there is clear evidence that its anti-coal rhetoric and climate evangelism contributed strongly to the party’s abysmal performance in Queensland, NSW’s Hunter ­Valley and elsewhere in regional Australia.

To be fair, sensible people might argue this nation had long been engaged in “strong action" on climate change, so Weatherill’s aim could easily be satisfied by ­offering bipartisan support for the Paris emissions reductions targets. But we know this is not what Weatherill and other members of Labor’s Socialist Left want.

The policy “bedrock" will be interpreted as something close to the extreme and uncosted policies Labor put to the people on May 18, which means one of the most obvious lessons from the election will be rejected by large elements of the party. Only Hunter Valley MP and Labor resources spokesman Joel Fitzgibbon seems willing to urge his colleagues to see sense.

Labor has made itself a victim to its own straw-man strategy. The review finds: “A modern Labor Party cannot deny or neglect human-induced climate change. To do so would be wrong, it would cause enormous internal instability and it would be a massive electoral liability." This is true but pointless because no major party argues this position.

By pretending its opponents proffer denial and inaction, Labor locks itself into reckless policies and indefensible arguments. It is conned by its own hyperbole, hemmed in by its own hype.

The review goes on to say that the way forward for Labor is to focus on jobs from renewable ­energy and on the “costs of inaction". But this is exactly what Bill Shorten and others did during the campaign, especially to avoid talking about the costs of their policies.

And the reality is that renewable energy jobs have not materialised to the extent promised anywhere, and voters are wise enough to understand the costs of climate inaction in Australia are approximately zero. No matter how dramatic Australia’s cuts, they cannot improve the global environment while global emissions continue to grow substantially — our costly policies will not stop a single storm, ease a drought or avoid a flood.

The only benefit they deliver is a down payment on international action. Obviously, then, there can be no financial or economic cost to inaction.

While the climate cannot be ­altered by anything we do alone, the only price to pay for inaction would be possible diplomatic repercussions for rejecting multilateral climate gestures. The “cost of inaction" argument is an exercise in stupidity and, as the election demonstrated yet again, mainstream voters tend to be smarter than that.

On climate, the ALP review is alarmingly myopic; it effectively recommends Labor sticks with the same extreme policies and inane arguments. It is unclear how it expects voters, who have repeatedly seen through this, to suddenly fall under its virtue-signalling spell.

Yet Anthony Albanese is sticking with this rhetoric; at the ­National Press Club on Friday the Opposition Leader continued with the pretence that additional climate action will create jobs rather than cost them. And he regurgitated Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young’s line from the day before about how the government’s drought response failed to mention climate change — does Labor argue a higher renewable energy target can end the drought? This is absurd stuff.

At Tony Abbott’s farewell dinner on Thursday there was some well-received triumphalism from conservative forces, especially from Peter Dutton, who was received as a hero for bringing on the move to take down Malcolm Turnbull. But ­Abbott made the most incisive point; he said that without Morrison’s victory this period of Coalition government would have gone down in history as an “embarrassing failure".

Abbott then pointed out that both he and Turnbull owed Morrison a debt of gratitude. Yes, the Morrison win means all three can bathe in some of the success of a tumultuous period that has restored border integrity, rescued the budget, axed onerous taxes, struck significant free-trade deals and ushered in same-sex marriage.

Climate is the issue that repeatedly has divided the Liberal Party and is always a chance to do so again. This is where the Prime Minister has been proven right and others, including me, got it wrong. The proposition that he should abandon Paris as a means of ­accentuating policy difference has been proven unnecessary. His pitch of “Paris and no more" has seen him pick the economic, environmental and political sweet spot where Australia is doing enough but not too much, in a cautious but prudent response.

Taking extreme action on climate is to impose certain economic harm for dubious or non-existent benefits. Best leave that to Weatherill and Labor.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here







13 November, 2019

Greens playing politics with fire, say Labor and Coalition

Senior Coalition and Labor MPs have launched a bitter attack on the Greens for suggesting climate change policies are responsible for the catastrophic bushfire threat confronting NSW and Queensland.

As firefighters braced for the arrival of high winds and low ­humidity that threaten some of the worst conditions seen since the Black Saturday bushfires a decade ago, Greens leader Richard Di ­Natale sparked fury from both major parties when he said the ­nation’s emissions policy had caused the fires that killed three people and injured 100.

Senior Nationals turned the ­attack back on the Greens, suggesting that environmental opposition to backburning, particularly in national parks, had exacerbated the bushfire threat.

NSW Deputy Premier John Barilaro criticised his state’s ­National Parks Service for contributing to the catastrophic threat facing the state by failing to carry out extensive backburning in the lead-up to bushfire season.

“We need to do more hazard ­reduction, (burning) in national parks to manage the fuel load,” Mr Barilaro told The Australian. “Everyone knows that this is a real issue and I’ve got the guts to say it.”

Senator Di Natale sparked the row on Monday when he said: “Every politician, lobbyist, pundit and journalist who has fought to block serious action on climate change bears responsibility for the increasing risk from a heating planet that is producing these deadly bushfires.”

Federal Labor agriculture spokesman Joel Fitzgibbon, who is facing fire threats in his NSW seat of Hunter, lashed the Greens for politicising the catastrophe.

Mr Fitzgibbon said it was ­“absolutely the wrong time to be looking for political opportunity and it’s also hypocritical given the Greens opposed the CPRS (the Rudd government’s carbon pollution reduction scheme)”.

“But if Scott Morrison wasn’t sitting back and allowing emissions to increase every year there would be less political tension in the necessary community conversation about the need to act and adapt to our changing weather patterns,” he added.

Deputy Prime Minister ­Michael McCormack criticised the Greens’ comments as the “disgraceful, disgusting” behaviour of “raving inner-city lunatics”.

The Nationals leader said Australia had experienced bushfires since “time began” and he found it “galling” that people linked the ­catastrophe with climate change. “What people need now is a little bit of sympathy, understanding and real assistance, they need help, they need shelter,” Mr McCormack said. “They don’t need the ravings of some pure, enlightened and woke capital-city greenies at this time when they’re trying to save their homes.”

However, Greens MP Adam Bandt said Mr McCormack was a “dangerous fool” who was putting lives at risk through the government’s inaction on climate change.

“Thoughts and prayers are not enough; we need science and ­action too,” Mr Bandt said. “They’ve done everything in their power to make these catastrophic fires more likely. When you cuddle coal in Canberra, the rest of the country burns.”

Former prime minister Kevin Rudd hit out at the Greens’ comments, pointing out it was the Greens who had blocked action on climate change when they ­opposed the CPRS in 2009.

“Seriously? If it weren’t for the Green party’s political opportunism in 2009-10, we would now be 10 years into an emissions trading scheme, a fully functioning carbon price, a long-term transition from coal and leading global action on climate,” Mr Rudd told The Australian.

“Instead, what did the Green party do? To try and score political points off my government, they hypocritically jumped into bed with the Liberals to defeat my legislation in the Senate. The rest is history.”

NSW Agriculture Minister Adam Marshall echoed Mr Barilaro’s sentiments, saying: “More needs to be done to clear fire trails, back burning operations and allow controlled stock grazing to keep fuel loads down. Better management would help enormously and lack of good quality local management has contributed.”

Mr Marshall told parliament three weeks ago that he had written to state Environment Minister Matt Kean “requesting a full and immediate review of fire management in the state’s national parks”.

“It is clear that landholders felt that there is a ‘lock it and leave it’ approach to management in ­national parks, which is not good enough,” Mr Marshall said at the time.

Nationals MP Barnaby Joyce said it was “infuriating” the Greens were attempting to score political points by saying the government’s “inaction” on climate change had contributed to fires that had killed three people.

Mr Joyce said climate change action in Australia would do nothing to reduce the bushfire risk ­unless there was also action taken by China, India and the US.

Australia produced 1.3 per cent of the planet’s emissions, compared with China’s 27.5 per cent and the 14.75 per cent that comes from the US.

Mr Joyce, a former deputy prime minister, said people were “once again talking about indigenous land management” because there were too many regulations around controlled burning ahead of bushfire season.

“We haven’t had the capacity to easily access (hazard) reduction burns because of all of the paperwork that is part of green policy,” Mr Joyce said.

Shine Energy chief executive Ash Dodd, an indigenous businessman trying to build a coal-fired power station in central Queensland, said traditional owners had undertaken hazard ­reduction to manage the fire risk “since time immemorial”.

“The responsibility of the build-up of surplus fuel must lay at the hands of state governments which do not allow seasonal burning based upon the traditions and customs of Australian traditional owners such as the Birri people,” Mr Dodd said.

Hazard-reduction burning has also been a contentious issue in Queensland.

A Queensland Audit Office ­report issued last year ­revealed the Queensland Fire and Emergency Services had missed key deadlines to improve the state’s bushfire readiness.

The report, itself a follow up to a highly critical audit of QFES in 2014, had “improved its visibility and oversight” of bushfire risk, ­including establishing the Office of Bushfire Mitigation and area fire management groups. However, the audit office said the authority had not fully implemented any of the original 2014 recommendations despite committing to do so by the following year.

SOURCE  






Feminists demonize male sexuality

Bettina Arndt

It’s rather timely that I planned this week to post a video of a talk I gave at the Chicago International Conference on Men’s Issues (ICMI 2019), speaking about the successful feminist campaign to rein in male sexuality.

The campus rape tribunals are the result of effective lobbying by these activists which has succeeded in making university campuses unsafe places for most young men, with any sign of healthy male lust leading to male students being targeted and sometimes thrown out of university.

But campus rape allegations are simply the tip of the iceberg. Men are in trouble for looking at women in the wrong way, for not keeping their trousers zipped, for viewing pornography, for showing normal male sexual curiosity and expecting sex to be part of a loving marital relationship.

Men today are not just chaste – they have been neutered. “Leaving sex to the feminists is like letting your dog vacation at the taxidermist,” said Camille Paglia. That’s right. Men are now totally stuffed.

Here’s the new video. I hope you enjoy it.

 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vrgqkKbKgHk

Via email from Tina: Bettina@bettinaarndt.com.au





Our choice is between insansity and survival

TERRY McCRANN

We now have a very simple choice. We can join the US — and effectively, also China — in walking away from the Fake Paris Climate Accord and begin the journey back to energy and indeed environmental and even more critical fundamental civilisational sanity.

Or we can join Professor Mickey Mouse and his 11,000 or so decidedly mixed assorted colleagues -7 curiously dubbed "scientists" by the media and run screaming into the streets, crying "the sky is falling" and the "seas are rising" and so "oh, woe is us, we are all going to be squashed between".

The lunacy of the world that we now live in was exactly captured by the gushingly hysterical — or should that be hysterically gushing? — coverage given right across the mainstream media to the fakest of fake news of the climate emergency proclaimed by this fakest of fake cohorts, and the almost zero coverage given to the formal commitment by the US to exit Paris.

I have to say I saw it both as incompetent and biased media as usual, while also being more than a tad surprised. Surprised, as it wasn't the springboard for another immediate eruption of the mass media hysteria, better known as Trump Derangement Syndrome. I waited in vain for the first default to Godwin's Law: indeed, not just comparing Trump to Hitler but how he was so much worse.

After all, Hitler "only" killed tens of millions; Trump has sentenced untold billions to death, if not Gaia herself. Yet there was clearly an apprehension that to even report what the US had done might give heart to those wicked climate unbelievers and indeed could even trigger copy-cats.

President Trump had avowed before his election he would take the US out of Paris. However, the Paris rules signed just days before his election in 2016 meant no country could exit for three years. On the very first day that the US could formally move to draw — last Monday — it will take effect on November 4 next year — the day after President Trump will almost certainly have been re-elected.

The two countries responsible for nearly 50 per cent of the entire world's emissions of the plant-food and planet-greening carbon dioxide will effectively be out of Paris. The US will be actually out and China, whose emissions are approaching double those of the US, will effectively be out.

It is specifically mandated under Paris to keep increasing its emissions to 2030 — by which time, according to noted climate scientists like Greta Thunberg and the aforementioned Prof Mouse, it will be too late. The great irony — and sheer, pathetic lunacy of this is that the US out of Paris has actually been the country which has cut its emissions by more than any other in absolute CO2 volumes.

As the withdrawal statement noted, the US cut its CO2 emissions by 13 per cent from 2005 through 2017. It has also cut its emissions of real air pollutants — like the dirty bits of grit that the climate liars try to pretend is CO2 by calling it "carbon pollution" — by a thumping 74 per cent since 1974. The reason is simple: prosperity, human health and better treatment of the environment are all based on the massively increased use over the centuries of coal, oil and gas.

The only thing that is going to stop China, while in Paris, increasing its emissions, or at the very most plateau them is the Chinese economy going back to a 1980s future.

Now various overexcited local climate loons they might even have been among the 11,000 with the renowned Prof Mouse —were hailing mid-week that for the first time ever, for all of 10 minutes, renewables provided more than 50 per cent of the power into the national grid. An amazing 24 per cent was coming from roof-top solar, some 16 per cent from wind, 9 per cent from large-scale solar and just enough from hydro, 2 per cent, to tip it over 50 per cent Hmm.

What would happen, what happens every day, when the sun goes down? One-third of the grid's power supply would -- correction, will evaporate. And if the wind also didn't blow? Another one-sixth would go missing in action. Suddenly that 51 per cent would become 2 per cent — at least, so long as there was water in the dams.

Oh right: I forgot batteries will be included, including Malcolm Turnbull's Snowy "big battery". Well, that's now going to cost $lObn; and that will get you all of perhaps 2 per cent of the power we need — until again, the water has all run down the hill and is waiting for the wind to blow to pump, it up again.

You are going to need an awful lot of big Tesla batteries to make up for the 33 per cent that was coming from solar, and need it every day. Also, solar doesn't just fall straight to zero at dusk, it falls away rapidly over the afternoon, assuming the sun has been shining in a cloudless sky. But rest assured, once all those Tesla batteries kick in, they'll probably be good enough to get us from, say, 7pm to 7.20pm. And then its lights—and everything else— out, North Korean (and California?) style.

We saw exactly this in the UK during the week. Wind there can produce more than 50 per cent of the power, when the wind is... Well it wasn't for much of Wednesday and so was producing around 3 per cent. The coal the UK supposedly got rid of had to kick in.

Along with so-called biomass, the burning of even more CO2-releasing wood, the two were producing as much as four times as wind for most of the day. Some 60 per cent or so was coming from CO2-emitting gas and 17 per cent from nuclear. That's some renewable future. Our choice: European style insanity or US and China-style reason and survival.

From "The Weekend Australian" of 9/11/19







Tax more at the top if you must, but it ends in tears

Does the top marginal rate of income tax matter? It’s an important policy question.

At this year’s federal election, Labor proposed that the top marginal tax rate should be increased by two percentage points until the budget had been repaired, with its precise duration unclear.

This followed on from the Coali­tion’s initiative of the temporary budget repair levy, introduced in 2014 but rescinded on July 1, 2017. Labor voted for that levy.

The issue flared after the election, with former prime minister Paul Keating arguing for a top marginal rate of about 39 per cent, recalling that he had pulled the top marginal rate down from 60 per cent to 47 per cent in the late 1980s.

Former ACTU secretary Bill Kelty agreed with Keating that the top marginal rate was too high: “If the marginal tax rate is too high, the consequence of that is that people seek to avoid paying that tax and get into other tax arrangements.

“(The) top marginal tax rate is absurdly too high compared to the company tax rate and compared to the capital gains tax. The wedge is simply too great.”

Are they right? Should we be aiming for a lower top marginal tax rate that is 47 per cent, including the 2 per cent Medicare levy? Are other features of the income tax schedule also important?

It’s useful to look at top marginal tax rates in other developed economies, although it’s also important to note the income levels at which these kick in.

Our top marginal rate applies from $180,000 a year, about twice the average wage.

In the US, the top marginal rate is just under 44 per cent but applies above 9.3 times the average wage. Canada and France have higher top marginal rates — 53.5 per cent and 55.2 per cent, respectively — but in Canada the top rate applies to income four times the average wage and in France it is 14 times.

New Zealand has a very distinct income tax schedule. There, the top marginal rate is only 33 per cent but it applies at just over 1.2 times the average wage.

Some left commentators maintain that raising the top marginal rate is desirable because this would reduce the degree of income inequality and would have little impact on people’s economic decision-making.

Economists Thomas Piketty and Peter Diamond maintain that the optimal top tax rate is between 70 per cent and 80 per cent, for instance.

In the US, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Democrat member of congress from New York, advocates a top marginal tax rate of 70 per cent, although it would apply only when annual income reaches $US10m ($14.5m).

The point is made that in the 1950s and 60s, similarly high marginal tax rates prevailed and the sky didn’t fall down. The reality is that very few American taxpayers ever paid the top marginal rate.

The key to the debate is whether high marginal rates affect people’s work efforts and their willingness to invest and take risks. A few natural experiments allow us to reach a conclusion.

In France in 2013, for instance, Francois Hollande, the president at the time, introduced a 75 per cent marginal income tax on annual incomes greater than €1m.

The tax resulted in significant emigration of high-income individuals, with estimates suggesting that at least 22,000 fled in the first two years.

The expected revenue from the higher tax rate also failed to materialise, with tax collections almost half those forecast. Corporate tax and consumption tax revenues also declined relative to expectations.

The tax change was rescinded in early 2015, but some of those who left France never returned.

A more micro-example has emerged recently in respect of doctors working for the National Health Service in Britain. With some poorly considered changes to pension tax arrangements, a number of doctors faced extremely high marginal tax rates if they worked longer hours or, indeed, continued to work at all. In some instances, they could go backwards.

There was a surge of resignations and early retirements, forcing even more resignations as the workload was transferred to other doctors.

Rather than working for the love of the job or to fulfil a public duty, many doctors reacted as most economists would predict — by significantly reducing their work effort. Britain has been forced to adjust these arrangements.

This debate feeds directly into the Australian case, with our relatively high top marginal tax rate cutting in at a relatively low income level.

And because our capital gains tax is levied at an individual’s marginal tax rate, albeit with the capital gain discounted by 50 per cent, it’s possible our tax arrangements deter risk-taking that could lead to substantial capital gains.

Having said this, it’s not only the top marginal tax rate that affects taxpayers’ behaviour. The complication of the low and middle-income tax offset also has an impact.

John Humphreys of the Centre for Independent Studies has shown the most recent tax changes have increased the marginal income tax rate for those earning between $90,000 and $126,000 a year — from 39 per cent to 42 per cent.

The broader point is that when assessing the impact on revenue of tax changes, it’s important to model behavioural changes in response to the new scales and arrangements rather than draw straight lines.

According to Humphreys, the later phases of the government’s tax package will reduce revenue by $145bn across a decade, almost 40 per cent lower than the Treasury’s estimate of the revenue forgone.

“When marginal tax rates are changed, at least some people will change some of their behaviour some of the time,” Humphreys says. “Treasury continues to rely on a static tax model that makes the absurd assumption of zero behaviour changes.”

As Labor reviews the complicated policy package it took to the electorate, one change that needs to be ditched is the increase to the top marginal tax rate, temporary or not.

Labor’s support for the government’s tax package being brought forward, however, has merit.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here







12 November, 2019

Greenies ‘directly responsible’: Firefighter

A rural firefighter has issued a heartbreaking plea on social media, telling the government “enough is enough”.

As catastrophic fires burn across Queensland and New South Wales — with experts warning that the worst is yet to come on Tuesday — rural firefighter Tyson Smith has issued a heartbreaking plea on Facebook.

The post, which has been shared more than 2600 times and liked by over 1600 people, asks how much more it will take before the government acknowledges current fires are the result of a larger issue.

Three people have died in NSW, and 200 homes and sheds lost to bushfires in both states over the weekend.

“How many more homes?” wrote Smith. “How many more acres of destroyed forest and bushland? How many more lives? How much more do we need to endure until you Muppets realise you f**ked up?”

Smith, who volunteers his time as a rural firefighter, said that every time there is a disaster like this, “thousands of people like myself drop what we are doing and go to work. We put ourselves in harm’s way so that another family can have a house to sleep in.”

The “authority figures that have stood for environmental protection” over the past five years are “directly responsible for this devastation”, Smith wrote.

“The fuel loading we are seeing out on the ground is ridiculous. We are looking at 5-10 years of growth, this fuel source is making these fires untouchable, we can’t even get near them to fight them.”

The heat generated from the fires burning in NSW and QLD “kills everything, right down to the microbes deep in the soil. It takes years for these areas to regenerate!” Smith wrote.

“The controlled reduction burns we do only skim the surface, they safely remove the fuel without destroying the place.”

Smith said the environmental authorities who have a put a stop to reduction burns — which include controlled burning, mechanical clearing like slashing undergrowth, or even reducing the ground fuel by hand — “need to be held personally accountable for the losses people have endured. People have lost their lives as a direct result of the decisions made by the environmental authorities!”

The firey ended the post, asking, “Tell me why these enviros shouldn’t be stood up in front of a judge and charged with manslaughter? Enough is enough!”

SOURCE  






Deputy PM unleashes on 'stupid, despicable' and 'little-minded' Greens MP from Melbourne who blamed NSW's deadly bushfires on coal and climate change

Greens MP Adam Bandt was savaged by the Deputy Prime Minister amid accusations he politicised the deadly bushfires raging in northern New South Wales.  

The Melbourne-based MP and Greens spokesman for climate change took to Twitter on Saturday afternoon as bushfires continued to ravage the state's mid north coast. 'I'm deeply saddened by the loss of life. Hearts go out to all affected & to brave firefighters. But words & concern are not enough,' he wrote. 'The PM does not have the climate emergency under control. Unless we lead a global effort to quit coal & cut pollution, more lives will be lost.' 

Deputy Prime Minister and Regional Development Minister Michael McCormack described his tweet as 'stupid and despicable', The Courier Mail reported.

'Comments coming from a little Melbourne apartment, from a little individual with a little mind should not be accepted or tolerated at this time,' he said.

'This is unfortunately the Australia that we all too often have seen in the past; fires are not unusual, not uncommon to Australia nor are droughts and nor are floods.'

Hundreds of people were quick to accuse Mr Bandt of politicising the fires - which have already killed three people and destroyed more than 150 homes. 'Great to see the Greens trying to push a political ideal when people are dying,' wrote one person

'Declaring a climate emergency will achieve NOTHING. It requires action, not a token gesture. How about trying to do something productive?'

Another added: 'But words are not enough... we must also use this push my political agenda and suggest that I, and not our PM, have the godly ability to control climate change.'

Despite the backlash, Mr Bandt doubled down and retweeted an SBS story in which Glen Innes Severn Council mayor Carol Sparks also cited climate change. 'We are so impacted by drought and the lack of rain,' she said. 'It's climate change, there's no doubt about it. The whole of the country is going to be affected. We need to take a serious look at our future.'

Meanwhile others took issue with Mr Bandt's assertion that coal mines were directly to blame for the recent bushfires.

'Why do you continue lying to people when you know yourself that coal is not to blame for bushfires which been occurring for countless years?' one wrote. 

One added: 'Oh my friend, please don't make a tragic loss of life into a political statement. For a moment, just mourn the loss and pay respect to their families.'

Another told Mr Bandt to go out and fight the fire before trying 'to earn the respect of middle Australia'.

However some were also quick to jump to Mr Bandt's defence.

'And stop exporting coal at the very least stop the approval of new coal mines,' one user wrote in support of Mr Bandt's coal comments.

'Thank you for not trotting out the trite ''thoughts and prayers'' line. It is refreshing to see a comment which doesn't follow the same jingoistic rubbish,' another added.

Mr Bandt said in a statement he was 'deeply saddened' by the loss of life. But he turned on Mr Morrison, saying he 'bears some responsibility' and must apologise to the communities impacted.

'Scott Morrison has not got the climate crisis under control,' he said. 'Let me be clear. I'm not saying the prime minister is directly responsible for the fires and the loss of life, but he has contributed to making it more likely that these kinds of tragedies will occur.' 

Mr Morrison on Saturday declined to respond to questions asking if the bushfires were linked to climate change.

In an earlier tweet, Mr Morrison described the bushfires as 'simply terrifying', while Labor Leader Anthony Albanese said their ferocity was 'unimaginable'.

'Our main thoughts and our prayers are with those who have been so directly and horribly impacted by these fires,' Mr Morrison told reporters on Saturday. 

SOURCE  





What Australians really think about religion

Australians firmly believe that religious people are subjected to discrimination in this country. But all the same, we'd rather the godly kept their views to themselves.

Seventy-one per cent of Australians told the ABC's Australia Talks National Survey that religious discrimination happens "occasionally" or "often" in this country.

Ironically, this is a point on which the devout and the heathen are in agreement.

Even among Australians with no religion, 68 per cent agreed that there is discrimination, as did 74 per cent of Catholics, 72 per cent of Protestants and 74 per cent of "other religions".

But a broad majority of Australians — 60 per cent — would prefer that people keep their religious views to themselves.

This was a view held most strongly, as you might imagine, by non-religious respondents, of whom 73 per cent wished not to hear the religious views of others.

But even a slim majority of Catholics — 53 per cent — agreed that it was better to keep religion a private affair.

Protestants were more inclined to support full disclosure; only 39 per cent of them felt religious views should be private.

And people from other faiths were divided on the question: just shy of a majority — 47 per cent — agreed religion should be a hush-hush affair.

If you're wondering why all religious respondents besides Catholics and Protestants are grouped together, it's because only those two faith groups provided a large enough sample to isolate in a statistically reliable fashion.

According to the 2016 Census, 2.6 per cent of Australians follow Islam, 2.4 per cent are Buddhist, 1.9 per cent are Hindu and 0.4 per cent are Jewish.

Catholicism is the leading single religious group, claiming 23 per cent of the population, while 13 per cent identify as Anglican and 16 per cent as "other Christian".

Australia is not a country in which religious belief is the dominant determinant of identity, social status or indeed even social activity.

When given a list of eight attributes and asked which was most central to the respondent's sense of self and identity, Australians placed religion stone-cold, motherless last.

Respondents were more likely to identify themselves through their political beliefs (this was the top-rating response, scoring 6.4 on a scale of one to ten), gender, ethnicity or sexual orientation than they were through their religious views, which rated 4.7 out of ten.

Intermingling between religious groups is commonplace in Australia; 84 per cent of respondents said they mixed socially with people of different beliefs to themselves.

But there are some subjects probably best avoided at such ecclesiastically-mixed gatherings.

Climate change, for one; while 80 per cent of atheists think climate is a problem for them personally, only 63 per cent of Protestants agree.

Gender roles, for another; 35 per cent of Protestants believe that Australia would be better off if more women stayed home to look after children, while only 14 per cent of the godless were also of this view.

Overall, Australians are not looking for more religion. Only 15 per cent of respondents thought the country would be better off if more people were religious.

And one of the survey's most striking findings is the poor esteem in which religious leaders are held.

When asked who they trusted, Australians opted for doctors and nurses (trusted by 97 per cent) and scientists (93 per cent) well ahead of their preachers.

Religious leaders were distrusted by a full 70 per cent of the population, with 35 per cent saying they did not trust them "at all".

Even within their own flocks, religious leaders were viewed with some suspicion.

Protestants were the most obedient among the faithful; 58 per cent of them trusted their religious leadership. But only 47 per cent of Catholics had the same level of faith, while other religions came in at 49 per cent.

It seems trust in religious leaders may be a thing of the past; nearly half (47 per cent) of those aged over 75 felt it, but only 23 per cent of those aged 25 to 29.

SOURCE  






The mice that roared

BERNARD SALT on the class element in Australia's recent federal election

From out of their darkened hidey-holes they came in their thousands towards the light, towards the truth, ever onwards in search of recognition and acknowledgment. They found their voice on election night, those who had always lived among us but who had been shunned and dismissed as a lesser Australian life-form.

These are the coal-mining, McMansion-dwelling, hi-vis-vest-wearing, ute-driving, Bali-holiday-aspiring Australians who generally cluster in traditional nuclear families and couldn’t give a (let’s say) toss about politics but simply want to get on with the business of providing for their families. May I suggest that the inner-city hipster elite and their corporate wannabe besties clutch their beards and pearls in readiness for the abject horror of my next sentence: Quiet Australians are the type of people who see nothing odd about drinking instant coffee from a paper cup.

I reckon this now mobilised band of Australians is a tolerant lot. They have never been particularly religious and are generally accepting of the range of identities that have found voice over recent years. Their ethos is very much “live and let live”, or at least this was the case until earlier this year, when a series of proposed policies challenged the livelihood of what was to become known as the Quiet Australians. They came into the light because they were being lectured to by the Loud Australians, who for some time had been lording it over the rest of the nation and telling them how life should be lived.

May 18, 2019 will go down in history as a day of quiet rebellion across the Australian continent and the reverberations were felt all the way from the Bowen Basin to Canberra to the cafes of Melbourne’s North Fitzroy. The very foundations of progressive thinking were rejected on that day of judgment. Quiet Australians had had enough of being berated by politicians whose careers prior to politics were constrained to the cosiness of the public sector and/or other tax-exempt entities.

Quiet Australians raise families, buy homes, manage teenagers, treat themselves to an annual holiday, run one or two cars, all while doing their best to stay united and solvent amid the turmoil of a working life. What’s more, they understand that their way of life depends upon the ability of the business in which they work to compete in a world where profit determines survival. As dirty and distasteful as this concept appears to the non-deplorables, this is in fact the real world.

Here’s the thing about Australian democracy: everyone gets a vote, including people whose views are at odds with your own. The truly odd thing is, this concept is bleedingly obvious. Why is it that inner-city elites believe that their thinking, their will, their agenda, can be – should be – imposed upon the lifestyles of others? One view is that this is blind arrogance, the belief that one position is morally superior to another and that all that is required is effective messaging: “The provinces and the suburbs will come on board once they see the munificence of the point we are making.”

This may explain the rise of the same phenomenon at the last US presidential election and the Brexit vote. But I think there is something else that underpins the disconnect between the progressive elite and the Quiet Australians: the big-city chauvinism that has long governed the way we think and act. Perhaps it’s time the inner-city elites acknowledged the concerns of the Quiet Australians.

SOURCE  





In defence of the HSC

Undoubtedly, the Higher School Certificate is hard. But final exams are not intended to be easy — to be some sort of rubber stamp for having sat in a classroom. They are intended to assess how much you have learned.

HSC exams finish on Monday for Year 12 students in NSW, and presumably so will the ‘student stress’ which we hear so much about at this time of the year all around Australia.

Yes, exams are stressful. ATAR scores (of which Year 12 exam results make up a significant part) are not everything and should be kept in perspective, though they do have consequences for student careers. Students gain access to greater opportunities if they perform well, and this inevitably creates some anxiety (if that sounds vaguely familiar, it’s probably because it’s otherwise known as ‘everyday life’ for most people).

Despite the clichés of ‘critical thinking’ and ‘problem solving’, doing the hard yards at school to acquire deep levels of content knowledge in the core academic subjects remains as valuable as ever.

And exams are a valuable — a crucial — step in the education process. Do you want someone who has never passed a biology exam performing a heart operation? Or someone who has never passed a maths exam designing bridges or flood mitigation systems?

Exams in school also help students prepare for further study and the normal pressures of the workplace. Shielding children from tests — while well-intentioned — does them a disservice.

The HSC is arguably the most rigorous Year 12 credential in Australia and the interim NSW curriculum review acknowledged that the HSC is widely described as “world-class.” Of course, it can be improved, but we should be careful of massive changes that aren’t evidence-based.

HSC results are currently derived half from examinations and half from school-based assessments.

A proposal from the interim NSW curriculum review is to have less emphasis on exams and mandate that each student does a major project. But the problem with take-home projects like this is the lack of accountability and equity — students from more advantaged backgrounds will have greater access to help from parents and tutors.

Another recent thought bubble is to replace the ATAR with a “learner profile” focussing on extra-curricular activities rather than academic achievement to get into university. This would be especially unfair for high-achieving disadvantaged students. Advantaged students tend to have more extra-curricular opportunities, so would gain an unfair benefit in competing for university places against disadvantaged students.

Exams may not be pleasant for students; however, they are the crucial equaliser in education.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here






11 November, 2019

How the world has reacted to the NSW, QLD bushfires

Brain-dead Lefty journalists who know nothing about Australia (or anything else much) say: "Climate change" did it.

Australia has always had big forest fires, with some of the biggest many years ago.  So there is no way you can tie the present fires to global warming.  It is just empty assertion by brainwashed dupes

Where the fires mainly are at the moment -- Southern Queensland and Northern NSW -- is normal for spring, which is where we now are




Media outlets around the world have been reacting to the fires burning across Australia’s east coast, saying climate change is to blame.

Three people have been confirmed dead, five are missing and 40 have been injured, with 150 homes already destroyed — and the worst is yet to come.

“We’re not even in summer yet,” NSW Rural Fire Service Commissioner Shane Fitzsimmons said.

“I’m quite concerned that … we’re going to see more fires as we close through the season.”

Mayor Carol Sparks told the Sydney Morning Heraldthat her community has been “devastated” and the entire country is at risk from dangerous climate change.

Sparks, a member of the Glen Innes Severn Council, has no doubt that global warming is increasing the number of fires and their intensity.

“We are so impacted by drought and the lack of rain,” she said.

“It’s climate change, there’s no doubt about it. The whole of the country is going to be affected. We need to take a serious look at our future.”

NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian told the Today Show that the discussion around climate policies being to blame is not one that will be had “for the next weeks.”

“We need to focus on saving lives,” the Premier said, and “the communities who are doing it tough.”

“Often, the first couple of days when I meet someone whose lost everything, they seem resilient.

“But you know that in the next few days when the shock wears off and they face reality, that’s when we really need to provide our support and I just asked everybody to put politics aside and just consider the human toll and what we can do as humans to support people in our state.”

Readers of the BBC’s coverage on the fires have shared Sparks’ concerns. While some shared “thoughts and prayers”, many others blamed climate change and the Australian government for the situation, with one reader writing, “Climate in peril as the world burns.

“Governments are to blame,” wrote Suzanne G Kelly on a BBC post.  “They have ignored climate change even though all of the experts including Risk Analysts have been talking and warning about this for over two decades. “It’s now gone beyond blame. Governments have to be held to account and have to act now. They have been warned for decades of this and have done very little. “It’s shameful and heartbreaking.”

It was a sentiment echoed by other readers, with another writing, “Climate change is truly the topic now. Government should take this seriously. But some take climate change as their advantage to win elections.”

The Guardian have also provided significant coverage on the fires — where readers have also pointed out there’s no denying climate change is the catalyst for the blaze.

UK’s The Times coverage included quotes from Adam Bandt of the Australia Greens party, who accused Prime Minister Scott Morrison of inaction in the face of the global climate crisis, saying that he hadn’t done enough to reduce carbon emissions.

“I’m not saying the Prime Minister is directly responsible for the fires and the loss of life but he has contributed to making it more likely that these kinds of tragedies will occur,” he said.

SOURCE  






Cancel that privilege before lecturing the rest of us about how bad we are

We need to talk about privilege. No, not about “white privilege” or “straight privilege” or “cis privilege” or any of the other made-up privileges that the woke lobby bangs on about endlessly. And I don’t mean we have to check our privilege, either.

Checking one’s privilege is one of the weirdest rituals in the cult of identity politics. It is essentially a form of self-flagellation, where supposedly privileged people — especially white men — must metaphorically whip themselves across the back for having allegedly enjoyed super-comfortable existences.

Identity politics is an extremely binary system. It sees only two kinds of human beings.

There are the oppressed, who are Good. These include Muslims, black women, brown women, some gay people (not white male gay people) and, of course, trans people.

And there are the privileged, who are Bad. These include white men, especially old white men, who are behind every ill on earth. White women are privileged, too. Remember the woke fury visited upon those sisterhood-destroying white women who had the temerity to vote for Donald Trump or Brexit in 2016.

Cis people are also privileged. Cis is short for cisgender, a word invented by people who have blue hair, degrees in queer studies and way too much time on their hands. It refers to people who remain the sex they were born. So, er, the vast majority of humankind.

No, we need to talk about the meaning of the word privilege. The real meaning, not the warped meaning dreamt up by woke warriors who are hellbent on organising humanity into lists of The Oppressed and The Privileged.

Because it strikes me that one of the most unfortunate consequences of identity politics has been its hollowing-out of the word privilege and the way this has made it impossible to have a serious debate about where power and authority really lie in 21st-century Western society.

This was brought home to me while watching Mona Eltahawy’s excruciating appearance on the ABC’s Q&A on Monday night. I cringed so hard as I watched Eltahawy, an Egyptian-American feminist and author, spout the F-word and boast about being uncivil. It was all so adolescent. I can’t believe someone over the age of 14 thinks it’s cool to say f..k.

But even more striking than that was how try-hard it felt. It came across as extraordinarily performative. It felt like an act.

Then it struck me. Eltahawy is playing at being oppressed. She’s donning the garb of the downtrodden to distract attention from the fact she has had a very nice, comfortable and, dare I say it, privileged life. Consider her Q&A comments on Barack Obama’s sensible criticisms of woke culture and the trend for “cancelling” people who hold different views to our own. Eltahawy slammed Obama. She said she often went online precisely to say “f..k off” — cringe! — to people who criticise her.

She said: “I do not have the luxury or the privilege to sit there and be civil with people who do not acknowledge my full humanity.”

In short, she’s a member of the non-privileged. And therefore she is good and you must listen to her.

There’s only one problem with this: it isn’t true.

Eltahawy has had a privileged life. And I’m using the word privilege in its true sense here. She grew up in a middle-class family in Egypt. Her parents had PhDs. They worked in medicine. They even got government grants to study and work overseas, including in Britain and Saudi Arabia.

A third of Egyptians live in extreme poverty. In contrast to them, Eltahawy grew up in great comfort. And that’s an inconvenient fact for someone who’s super keen to be a member of the woke, where being oppressed gives you moral power and social influence. So Woke Mona must pose as someone who lacks “luxury or privilege” and who cannot be expected to be polite to her detractors.

This is a woke form of blacking-up, where middle-class people self-identity (to use politically correct language) as oppressed to improve their social standing in PC circles and give themselves the right to lecture the rest of us, especially white men, about how dumb and prejudiced we are.

Indeed, Eltahawy insisted on Q&A that words such as civility and respectfulness were invented by white men for the benefit of other white men. Which white men? Rich, powerful white men such as Donald Trump? White men such as my father, an immigrant to Britain who worked on building sites his whole life? The white men who fix the plumbing in Eltahawy’s no doubt lovely apartment block in New York City?

The woke elite’s sweeping, dehumanising category of “white men” erases everything to do with class and wealth. It views all white men, whether dirt poor or filthy rich, as culturally problematic.

So Eltahawy, from her lovely, privileged background, is oppressed while white men, including the ones who have no money or power, are privileged. This is morally perverse and historically illiterate.

Woke Mona isn’t alone in using the language of oppression to disguise her privileged origins. The woke universe is full of plummy Guardianistas, feminists from wealthy backgrounds and Ivy League activists who all claim to lack privilege.

Identity politics increasingly looks like the revenge of the elites against the masses. It is the disguise well-off people wear as they lecture the throng, including working-class white men, about our moral defects.

That’s the great irony of wokeness: it poses as a revolt against old power structures but it is itself a new power structure, one of moral censorship and social control led by posh people pretending to be victims. And no matter how many times Eltahawy says f..k, she can’t hide this fact.

SOURCE  





Opposition realises they need conservative votes

It’s a brave Labor Party parliamentarian and self-declared “progressive” who admits to being “on the same side of an argument as Alan Jones” — on occasions at least. But that’s what Clare O’Neil, the Labor MP for Hotham in southeast Melbourne, told the John Curtin Research Centre on Thursday.

O’Neil has not embraced the fan club of the Macquarie Radio (2GB in Sydney, 4BC in Brisbane) and Sky News presenter. It’s just that, in the wake of the Bill ­Shorten-led Labor defeat last May, O’Neil has recognised that she and her colleagues “need to take people with us”.

It’s not that O’Neil has become a convert to political conservatism. Rather her concern turns on tone. She recognises that many Australians regard themselves as being talked down to by progressives. And they resent it.

She added: “Not everyone with a concern about the immigration rate is a bigot; not everyone with a concern about changing gender roles is sexist; not every social change is inarguably a good one.”

There is no reference to the ABC in O’Neil’s speech. But the tone to which she refers inhabits the conservative-free zone, progressive hangout that is the taxpayer-funded public broadcaster. On the other hand, unlike the ABC, Labor has to win the support of conservatives.

The recently retired Melbourne ABC radio presenter Jon Faine went from being a left-wing activist at Monash University to a left-wing activist lawyer and then to more than two decades as an ABC presenter, of the leftist bent. In his much-hyped final show on Melbourne Radio 774 on October 11, Faine described those who regar­d the ABC as out of touch as “hypocrites”.

Faine seemed unaware that, earlier in the week, Gaven Morris (the director of ABC News) told The Australian that the ABC could definitely improve its coverage of suburban Australia. Morris asked: “Are we tuned in to what people are interested in in Bankstown (in Sydney’s west), or Ipswich­ in Brisbane, Frankston in Melbourne, the Gold Coast and the Sunshine Coast?”

He could well have added such areas as northern Tasmania and northern Queensland.

From a political perspective, O’Neil has recognised the problem­ of being out of touch with those who live outside the inner cities or suburbs close to the CBD.

In her John Curtin Research Centre speech, she specifically looked at the seat of Capricornia in central Queensland. She ­described it as “a blue-collar, ­regional electorate of Australians Labor strives to represent”.

O’Neil then reminded her audience that the primary vote swing against the Labor Party in the May election in Capricornia (which includes the city of Rockhampton) “was a full third of the electorate”.

She was polite enough not to remind the comrades at John Curtin Research Centre that much coalmining takes place in Capricornia — and that the electorate’s town of Collinsville was the target of Bob Brown’s ill-fated and counter-productive Green Left convoy to northern Queensland of recent memory.

In her address, O’Neil did not specifically focus on belief. This issue was addressed by Labor frontbencher Michelle Rowland last September. She told Nine newspapers that Labor “didn’t get it right with religious voters”. Rowland added: “I don’t think it’s lost on anyone that there was clearly an issue with Labor and people of faith at the last election.”

Rowland is the popular ­member for Greenway, in western Sydney. It is home to many recent migrants of numerous faiths. Greenway was one of the electorates that had a majority vote “No” in the 2017 same-sex marriage postal survey. Rowland clearly underst­ands her electorate.

And then there is Joel Fitzgibbon’s speech from early October. He argued that the modern Labor Party needs to adapt to the reality that “Australians are inherently conservative”.

Fitzgibbon holds the seat of Hunter, north of Sydney, in which there are significant agricultural and mining industries. Fitzgibbon urged Labor to understand the interests of “coalminers and retired­ mine workers”.

In the past four decades, Labor has won a majority of seats in the elections of 1983, 1984, 1987 and 1990 (under Bob Hawke’s leadership), 1993 (under Paul Keating’s leadership) and 2007 (under Kevin Rudd’s leadership). All three leaders had an appeal to economic and social conservatives at the time of their victories.

The likes of O’Neil, Rowland and Fitzgibbon understand that, to win more elections than it loses, Labor needs to respect conservative views. Even if, like O’Neil, it calls itself progressive. The alternative position is offered by the left-wing faction operative senator Kim Carr. Carr told The Australian this week that Labor’s message at the May election was sound — but poorly communicated. That’s political denial.

The breakthrough in O’Neil’s speech is a recognition that, being identified with what are called “progressive” causes, Labor also identifies with those who call themselves progressives.

As she put it: “There is a culture developing in the progressive movement where membership is granted with a box of ideas. And if you don’t accept one of those ideas in the box, you do not merely have a different opinion, you are obviousl­y wrong, probably stupid and possibly subhuman.”

Many in the electorate resent the condescending tone of the self-proclaimed progressive voice. The sneering secularists who mock religious believers. The born-again eco-catastrophists who rant against mining, agricult­ure and industry while living off the products of such enterprises. And the inner-city types who live close to work and benefit from subsidised public transport while berating those who rely on cars and who love their four-wheel drives.

On the eve of the May election, the oh-so-progressive Faine warned Josh Frydenberg that Shorten and Greens leader Richard Di Natale would soon address a Friends of the ABC rally protesting at cuts to ABC funding. Faine seemed to believe that this collection of inner-city progressives would cause the Coalition problems at the forthcoming election. They didn’t.

Labor’s immediate task is not to appeal to progressives but to win back as many economic and social conservatives as possible — quite a few of whom follow Jones.

SOURCE  






Demerits to bust rogue union chiefs

Union officials who breach workplace laws would be banned from holding office under a new demerit-points system the government will adopt in a bid to get its union-busting "Ensuring Integrity Bill" through parliament as early as next week. The new system would involve a 180-penalty-unit threshold for law-breaking trade unionists, and could lead to Construction Forestry Maritime Mining and Energy Union officials being banned for just one breach of civil laws, while other officials would be exposed to ban applications for multiple, minor breaches.

Attorney-General Christian Porter told The Weekend Australian that proposed amendments, resulting from negotiations with Centre Alliance, meant penalty units would accumulate for breaches across three separate pieces of workplace legislation. Centre Affiance senator Rex Patrick said on Friday he was "close to an agreement" on the bill, which significantly expands the grounds for banning union officials and deregistering unions.

The government said on Friday the bill could be brought on for a Senate vote as early as next Wednesday.

One Nation is due to meet Mr Porter on Tuesday. A spokesman for senator Malcolm Roberts indicated on Friday that One Nation supported the demerit-points system in principle but had questions about how it would work in detail.

Senator Jacqui Lambie declined to comment but her office maintained she intended to vote for the bill if CFMEU Victorian leader John Setka continued to refuse to resign.

Senator Patrick confirmed the 180-penalty-unit threshold for union officials under the deal with the Coalition. He said officials could be subject to a ban application for "multiple, minor breaches". He said the proposed trigger for a deregistration application for a union was 900 penalty units but that figure was "ball-park" and yet to be agreed.

Under laws applying across the building and construction industry, conduct including coercion and unlawful industrial action and other offences attract 200 penalty units, meaning a CFMEU official would be exposed to a Federal Court ban application if found guilty of one civil breach.

"Many of the serious breaches that we see by members of the CFMEU — and which have prompted Federal Court judges to describe the union as one of the most recidivist offenders in Australia's industrial landscape — can now attract 200 penalty units per contravention and so, under the proposed approach would, if the CFMEU officials continue to reoffend, give rise to potential disqualification action," Mr Porter said. The points system would apply to breaches under the Fair Work Act

From "The Weekend Australian" of 9/11/19





"The Conversation" is a Leftist rag

On November 1 the Prime Minister addressed the Queensland Resources Council in Brisbane. Some media reports drew attention to Morrison’s presence in Queensland as a sign that he was intent on holding the seats of Herbert and Longman, which were won in the May election in a state heavily reliant on agriculture and mining along with gas production. That’s true.

But it’s also true that the Coalition would not be in a majority government without the two seats it won in northern Tasmania, Bass and Braddon. They happen to be areas that have some of the lowest incomes in Australia. In other words, the Coalition’s support for mining in this year’s election was an important factor in its victory. But not the only factor. Labor failed to connect with its traditional base in many parts of Australia.

Towards the end of his Brisbane speech, Morrison said the ­Coalition was “not interested in closing down the mining industry but building it up”. He spoke about mining as a hi-tech industry that created good, high-paying jobs. And he spoke about “a new breed of radical activism” that was “on the march … sneering at wealth-creating and job-creating industries” in the regions.

While acknowledging that “there should always be a place for peaceful protest”, he argued that this was not “an unlimited licence to disrupt people’s lives” and said there was “no place for economic sabotage dressed up as activism”.

Morrison went on to express concern about “the escalating trend towards a new form of secondary boycotts in this country”.

Currently, secondary boycotts are banned with respect to trade union activism. This was one of the few industrial relations reforms of Malcolm Fraser’s Coalition government four decades ago. When he was minister for business and consumer affairs in the early years of the Fraser government, John Howard introduced legislation banning secondary boycotts.

A secondary boycott applies with respect to a situation where Company A is in dispute with a trade union. The union takes industrial action against Company B, which trades with Company A, to put pressure on Company A to settle with the trade union. Secondary boycotts have been outlawed as a trade union leverage tactic for many years.

However, the legislation provides an exemption concerning environment and consumer groups. They can engage in secondary boycotts by putting pressure on Company B to act against the interests of ­Company A.

There is no logical reason a trade union should be prevented from engaging in a secondary boycott but an environmental activist group is free to do so. As the Prime Minister put it: “Environmental groups are targeting businesses and firms who provide goods and services to firms they don’t like, especially in the resources sector.” He added that businesses of all sizes are being targeted.

The Prime Minister acknowledged the difficulties of legislating to stop secondary boycotts initiated by environmental and/or consumer groups, but added that he was working with Attorney-General Christian Porter to “identify a ­series of mechanisms” to outlaw such practices.

Also, Morrison recognised that the Australian government “cannot force one Australian company to provide a service to another”.

All up, this was a considered speech that raised a real problem without offering a dogmatic immediate solution. Yet it has led to a storm of opposition.

Writing in The Conversation on Tuesday, University of Queensland law professor Graeme Orr criticised the Prime Minister’s speech and suggested that it might be mere “kite flying” in an appeal to small businesses.

This was a reasonable critique. The same cannot be said for the howl of outrage that appeared on The Conversation’s comments page.

There were references to “Fuhrer Morrison”. The Prime Minister also was referred to as a “cunning mongrel”. And then there was a sneering reference to Morrison as a “rancid creationist” and he was told “get your head out of your bum”.

Now if this were social media it would be par for the course. But The Conversation’s editor, Misha Ketchell, takes its comments section seriously, so much so that he has banned anyone he regards as a climate sceptic from taking part in the online journal’s discussions.

Yet The Conversation readily runs commentary on its website comparing Australia’s democratically elected Prime Minister with the one-time leader of the Nazi Party.

So debate in Australia has come to this. A journal funded by many Australian universities provides the opportunity for Morrison to be compared with Hitler.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here







10 November, 2019

Kapow! Take that, campus feminists!

By Bettina Arndt

Great news - Senator Amanda Stoker has fired another round. I reported last week on her blast at TEQSA, our university regulator, for failing to protect the legal rights of people, usually men, accused of sexual assault on campuses. Last night she was speaking to Peta Credlin on Sky News and brilliantly exposed many of the flaws in the appalling university regulations governing this issue.

Here’s the link to the Sky program - https://www.facebook.com/SkyNewsAustralia/videos/986580348360639/

Please help me circulate this, particularly to people working in higher education and those who can spread the word about what’s happening here.

Amanda Stoker is a former barrister and criminal prosecutor and was able to spell out the lack of procedural fairness in current regulations, explaining that the basic rights of the accused person are being “completely squashed” under the current system which offers none of the normal protections available in criminal law courts.

Stoker listed those missing protections, namely that the accused had no access to evidence against them, there was no effort to ensure the reliability of that evidence, no power to call evidence in their own defence, no legal representation, no presumption of innocence, no right of appeal.

A secretive, unsupervised committee would determine guilt on the balance of probabilities with power to impose serious penalties including expulsion from the university. As Stoker pointed out this means students thus punished have wasted money and time invested in their degrees and are likely to be excluded from chosen professions – all penalties not found in the criminal justice code.

We should be really troubled by this, said Stoker explaining that universities established these unjust rules in an effort to make sure women feel safe. But the resulting one-sided procedures are resulting in gross injustice, she said.

She added an extra serve for TEQSA which is supposed to be responsible for making sure universities are well governed. “They have entered the fray ..gone out on a limb to endorse a set of processes that are really unbalanced.” And they have done this “in circumstances where it is their job to ensure they are delivering balance and fairness as the corollary of public funding and public support that goes to our universities.”

TEQSA is supposed to provide the checks and balances but instead “they are jumping on one side of the argument to the unfairness of others. That’s just not right.”

Wow, those squirming bureaucrats must be still smarting from Stoker’s treatment last week and now she piles on this lot.

Well, as you can imagine I am absolutely delighted to have Stoker out there fighting the good fight on the issue I have spent the last year trying to get onto the public agenda. My campus tour was aimed at drawing public attention to this feminist tilting of sexual assault regulations to favor the victim and ensure more rape convictions.

My only concern is Stoker is offering to help TEQSA “work through the principles of natural justice….and deliver fairness.”  But how will we ever know whether these unsupervised, secretive committees of untrained people are offering fairness to the accused?

It’s far better that we persuade universities to get out of the rape adjudication business and leave that to the criminal courts. No doubt this former criminal prosecutor is capable of getting the higher educator sector to see reason and vacate the territory.

Via email from Tina: Bettina@bettinaarndt.com.au






'She only heard praise' Woman whose patchwork quilt of 24 Golliwogs won top prize at a country show has no idea she's been slammed as a racist



The woman whose patchwork quilt of 24 Golliwogs won top prize at a country show has no idea she's been slammed as a racist, because she's off making more quilts.

The design by quilter Helen, which depicted golliwogs from 24 countries around the world, won first place in the Whittlesea Show's quilt category in northern Melbourne last weekend, and was widely criticised.

Helen's design was called 'offensive' by the chairman of the Anti-Defamation Commission Dr Dvir Abramovich, but Helen's husband said she received 'only comments of praise of the work' at the show.

Helen's husband Michael appeared on Melbourne's 3AW radio on Friday afternoon to tell the story of how the golliwog quilt came about.

'A very elderly lady had that quilt and she had that in her house for such a long time and she was visually impaired and suffered from arthritis, she asked Helen to put it together for her, which she obliged,' Michael said.

'Her quilting friend suggested she enter it into the show because it was such fine work and we're very sorry that people are offended by it.'

Some of the dressed up golliwogs on the quilt include a a Spanish matador, an English Beefeater, a golliwog doing the haka and an Egyptian pharaoh. 

Dr Abramovich suggested the quilt was celebrating racist images, but Michael said that wasn't the intention of the artist.

Michael said that Helen was over the moon to have won the top prize at the show, but hadn't been able to speak with his wife about the criticism of her work because she was busy with another piece. I haven't spoken to her 'cause she's quilting!' Michael said.

The golliwog was originally a character in an 1895 children's book but has since been associated with the racial stereotyping of black people. The word 'golliwog' has also increasingly been seen as racist due to the term 'wog' being used as a racial slur for foreigners.

The design follows the Royal Adelaide Show being forced to remove three dolls from a display last year which were accused of being caricatures of African-Americans.

SOURCE  






Muslim trouble again

They're so full of themselves

Sarah Aslan, 23, her new husband Muhammed and 20 of their wedding guests were booted off flight JQ36 from Bali to Melbourne on Monday night.

They claim they were unfairly targeted by 'racist' crew because of their 'beards and headscarves'.

But Jetstar says some members of their group were being abusive and were kicked off for safety reasons because they refused to take their seats while the plane was taxiing.

The disruption started when one wedding guest complained to staff that his entertainment screen was not working.

The argument became heated and resulted in members of the wedding party refusing to follow crew instructions to take their seats and put on their seatbelts, a witness told Daily Mail Australia.

At one stage in the argument, some members of the wedding party 'played the race card,' the witness said. 'Is it the beard? It feels like it might be,' one man asked a flight attendant, according to mobile phone footage.

A Muslim flight attendant then told the group she was not being racist and she was of the same faith. According to multiple witnesses, one member of the party called her a 'bad Muslim'.

'The flight attendant was encouraging them to comply with safety procedures but she was racially vilified,' a witness said.

A passenger told Daily Mail Australia the attendant was shocked by the comment. 'She was denigrated for being a "bad Muslim". She moved to the front of the plane and was quite visibly upset,' the passenger said.

'The party members were arrogant and entitled and disrespected staff simply doing their job,' the passenger added.

The group, including a four-month-old baby, was escorted off the plane by security guards to the cheers of other passengers who were eager to get home.

They were put on another Jetstar flight to Melbourne via Sydney at no extra cost the next day.

Mobile phone footage shows some members of the group arguing with staff in the airport lobby after they were kicked off.

'I didn't do anything. I don't need you to speak to me like this, do you understand?,' Mrs Aslan can be heard saying in video.  Possibly referring to the flight attendant who was allegedly called a 'bad Muslim', she said: 'Where's the lady that started this s*** before?  'This is very racist,' she added before a staff member said: 'She's crying'.

Speaking to 9News, Mrs Aslan claimed members of her group were mistreated because of their religion.  'Personally, it did feel like we were being attacked for looking ethnic and being Muslim,' Mrs Aslan said.

Selim Tutunca, one of the 22 passengers escorted off the plane, claimed the group was unfairly targeted. 'We were racially, verbally and physically assaulted by both Jetstar crew members and Bali airport officials. We have footage of all of this,' he wrote on the Jetstar Australia Facebook page. 'We were kicked off the flight even though we hadn't even spoke a single word to the crew members.'

Mr Tutunca said he and his young family, including a seven and a three-year-old, were stranded in the terminal and that his children 'were put through hell'.

A Jetstar spokesman told Daily Mail Australia: 'Whilst taxiing to the runway a number of customers became disruptive and failed to follow crew instructions. 'The safety of our customers and crew is our number one priority and we do not tolerate any kind of disruptive or abusive behavior.

'We take these allegations extremely seriously and are investigating the matter, however our crew dispute the claims made by these passengers.' 

SOURCE  





Time frame set for ban of exported recyclable waste from Australia

Recycling is costly and is about to become more so.  For a time a useful cost minimization strategy was to pay poor Asians to recycle the stuff. But they have recently become embarrassed by that role so are now refusing to take the waste


The bulk of recyclable waste is sent from Australia to other countries for processing at a huge cost, but not for much longer.

Australia will ban the export of recyclable waste from its shores, with a phase-out of the expensive and controversial practice beginning in July next year.

A meeting of federal, state and territory environment ministers today has devised a timeline to cease sending plastic, paper, glass and tyres internationally.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison flagged the ban after the last Council of Australian Governments (COAG) meeting in August, and today’s agreement has set in stone a staggered process to allow jurisdictions time to adjust.

“Ministers will further test the timetable with industry and local government, while also developing response strategies and undertaking independent market analysis,” the agreement states.

At present, when households and businesses put rubbish into recycling bins, just 12 per cent of that material is processed in Australia.

The remainder has been shipped to other countries – until recently most of it has wound up in China and Indonesia – at a hefty cost.

Last year, China banned imports of Australian waste and Indonesia has sent back shipments that were contaminated with non-recyclable waste, including soiled nappies and food.

From July 2020, glass waste will be banned for export, followed by mixed waste plastics the following year and all while tyres in December 2021.

All remaining waste products, including mixed paper and cardboard, will be banned no later than June 30, 2022.

“This timetable reflects the unique challenges of each jurisdiction, and the preparedness of some jurisdictions to complete the phase-out ahead of schedule,” the agreement states.

“All jurisdictions acknowledged resourcing, from Commonwealth, states and territories, and ndustry will be required to effectively implement the ban.”

Today’s agreement also committed to an ambitious waste reduction target under a new National Waste Action plan.

It aims to make Australia a world leader in waste management and recycling and includes an 80 per cent recovery rate of material across all waste streams. “All ministers have committed to identifying any significant procurement opportunities over oming months such as major road projects that could use significant amounts of recycled material,” the agreement states.

“The Commonwealth agreed to take a leading role. This reflects a wider commitment from the Commonwealth and states to drive procurement strategies for recycled material.

“The Commonwealth Government will prioritise work with states and territories and relevant industry and standards bodies to develop engineering specifications and standards to support

the use of recycled materials in building, construction and infrastructure development, for use across all jurisdictions.”

SOURCE  






Andrew Cooper on the absurd bureaucracy threatening to prosecute him

As of midnight on Tuesday, I am subject to referral to the Australian Federal Police, who may charge me with criminal offences that attract up to six months’ jail. My crime? Well, I haven’t committed one. The best way I can ­explain it is that I’m in some cruel trap — one that’s been legislated into law, utilised by bureaucrats and sprung upon me out of nowhere with seemingly no chance of escape.

Trouble started on the morning of October 22, more than two months after my not-for-profit think tank LibertyWorks hosted the successful Conservative Political Action Conference in Sydney — CPAC as it is known. A strange email landed in my inbox that day. It was titled “Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme” and included a s45(2) notice. No, I hadn’t heard of it either. I often dismiss emails like this — they can be spam — but one line raised my eyebrow: “Criminal penalties apply for a failure to comply.”

Inside was coercive language and just 14 days to comply with extraordinary demands: “I write to require … LibertyWorks to give ­information and make and produce copies of documents to ­satisfy me as to whether LibertyWorks is liable to register under the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme.” To satisfy me!

The documents requested relate to a perceived arrangement between LibertyWorks and our co-hosts, the American Conser­vative Union, a prominent Washington think tank that handles the famous US version of CPAC.

The letter does not ask “is there an ­arrangement” but demands all documents, emails and understandings between ourselves and the ACU, ourselves and speakers and delegates at CPAC and, perversely, between the ACU and speakers and delegates at CPAC.

When I first read this, I couldn’t comprehend it. They want us to obtain, reproduce and send them copies of ACU’s correspondence to all speakers? That would include ACU’s correspondence to CPAC speaker Nigel Farage, leader of the Brexit Party in the UK. It also would include correspondence with US congressman and CPAC speaker Mark Meadows.

This is why I am in a trap with no means of escape. I cannot ­obtain communications between the American ACU and a US congressman — the ACU would not produce that material for fear of breaking US laws.

And so the trap is sprung. They have sent me a demand for documents, they have threatened me with imprisonment if I do not provide them and they have given me 14 days to do so.

There is no natural justice in their requirements — if this is the law, then the law is an ass.

At midnight, the clock expired and I am now liable for referral to the AFP for arrest and criminal prosecution. As a happy coincidence, I am flying to the US as the deadline passes and I would be lying if I said there was not some small relief in that.

I want this to go away. I don’t want the stress, the prospect of legal fees, of a criminal conviction or of going to jail. But I feel a certain burden of responsibility to draw a line in the sand for all of us, to protect the next citizen in the sights of the unelected modern-day Stasi.

Tony Abbott, when rejecting an invitation to register under the scheme, said: “We have got ­ourselves into all sorts of predicaments over the years because reasonable people have been too accommodating to unreasonable people.”

I’m a single father who has tried to explain this predicament to my girls aged 15 and 12, but struggled to find the right words. So I simply asked them what they would think if their father had to choose between a difficult and risky path that was in keeping with his values and principles, or an easy path that sold out on those. Their response was swift and heartwarming: “Stick to your principles, Dad.” So that’s that.

I am now in breach of the s45(2) notice and if the AFP await me upon my return in a couple of weeks then so be it. I will take my day in court and will find a way to test the validity of this great illiberal leap into authoritarianism. I have been asked to kowtow in front of bureaucrats who no longer see themselves as servants of the people but controllers of the people. I now await their wrath.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here






8 November, 2019

Another big Queensland Health cost blunder

Amazing. This appears to be a re-run of the time when the premature rollout of a new Queensland Health payroll system was so badly bungled that it took over a billion to fix it.  Has nothing been learned?

Queensland's Auditor-General has been asked to investigate the performance of the state's troubled hospital ordering system. The Opposition has written to Brendan Worrall with its concerns around financial waste and mismanagement of the $135 million project known as S/4HANA following rolling issues exposed by The Courier-Mail.

Opposition Health spokeswoman Ros Bates wrote this week asking Mr Worrall to consider a performance audit that would make recommendations on how to fix shortcomings and ensure suppliers are being paid on time.

The Courier-Mail has exposed multiple occasions in which medical suppliers have put a hold on hospitals' credit line over unpaid bills. Their complaints forced Queensland Health to set up a special phone line to help them get paid that was receiving 100 calls a day.

Surplus money had also been used outside the project's $135 million budget to pay for extra staff to handle the troubled bailout, including 30 temporary staff to support accounts payable and the call centre. Additional shifts have also been put on at the state's distribution centres.

"The LNP is gravely concerned about the cost blowouts and rollout of this project," Ms Bates' letter reads. The new system, S/4HANA, was launched on August 1 and crashed two hours after its launch in what was dubbed a "critical incident". That launch had been previously delayed so that staff could be properly trained.

Health Minister Steven Miles and Queensland Health have repeatedly said the project was "working within expected parameters", despite complaints from hospital staff.

Specialist staff support is continuing past the contracted "rollout phase", which was meant to end on October 31. The system is used to order everything from cleaning sup-plies to medical goods, food and drugs.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 6/11/19





BOQ blunder in closing account: Tattoo artist "treated like a criminal"



For generations, Australians have split their savings between several banks. This is one example of why

A GOLD Coast tattoo artist says she has been treated like a criminal after Bank of Queensland froze her accounts without notice, leaving her unable to pay suppliers or run the business.

Inkspired Tattoo & Beauty owner Bianka Roggensack was left shocked this week when her BoQ business accounts were suddenly frozen. Ms Roggensack, who has been a BoQ customer for seven years, said the bank had given her until November 11 to remove thousands of dollars from her accounts before they were dosed under its policy of not providing services to tattooists.

The Coolangatta business owner said she had no trouble with the law or blemish on her banking record, and declared there was no reason for BoQ to shut the accounts. "It makes you feel discriminated against like I'm some sort of criminal," she said. "I'm a small business owner who's an active part of the community but my money's not good enough for Bank of Queensland."

It is understood the bank's policy of not providing services to tattooists is currently under review. A BoQ spokeswoman apologised for the "error" and said all services were reinstalled. "Unfortunately the customer's accounts were incorrectly frozen due to a failure in our processes," she said.

Four tattoo artists and three apprentices are employed at Ms Roggensack's tattoo studio, which lists hundreds of clients on its books.

The 31-year-old business owner is considering whether she will start the arduous task of switching banks. "All my accounting software, my direct debits, rent and insurances are locked in with BoQ," she said. Ms Roggensack was disappointed BoQ's decision came six years after the Newman State Government introduced a crackdown of the sector to combat organised crime.

"I am a licensed operator-of a studio, a recognised business and there was no reason to close down my accounts." she said.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 6/11/19





Cup day a good bet to release damning report of politicians over-riding official advice

TAXPAYER cash was splashed out on a project that was found to be ineligible for 'funding under a grants program meant to create jobs in regional areas. A damning independent assessment of the Regional Jobs and Investment Packages program found one in every five [bureaucratic] financing decisions — worth more than $150 million — were overturned by a ministerial panel.

The report which was released by the Federal Government during  the Melbourne race, found there was political interference, little accountability and almost no conflict of interest management in the grants program.

The highest number of discrepancies in the national program were in the Bowen Basin and Wide Bay/Burnett regions, covering five electorates, all held by the LNP.

Little reason was given for overturning departmental advice, other than that the assessment was wrong, the Australian National Audit Office found. Despite the criticism, the ANAO. did not identify which projects had funding approved or rejected against advice, only saying "there was no bias clearly evident in the decision making". 

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 6/11/19






Calls for elite school old guard to resign

Hiley's trangressions were minor but the PMSA board went way too far in exonerating him and forcing a whistleblower out.  Previous post on this matter on May 9th.. Christian humility would have avoided all the heartburn

CHURCH elders who were at the helm during an elite school scandal face fresh pressure to resign over an alleged fraud linked to the peak body of four of the state's most prestigious private schools.

Parents and alumni are demanding the axing of the "old guard" of the strife-torn Presbyterian and Methodist Schools Association board after its hand-picked former executive manager last week faced court charged with fraud.


Hiley

Ex-PMSA executive Rick Hiley, who was given a six-figure payout, appeared in court on a fraud charge after a two year-long investigation by police into alleged data theft from Somerville House Foundation.

It comes after The Courier-Mail exclusively revealed an alleged cover-up by the besieged PMSA board which refused to release a secret internal investigative report into the scandal and publicly exonerated Mr Hiley in 2017.

Lewd texts about a nude Korean [Many Koreans are Presbyterian] bathhouse between Mr Hiley and Police Inspector Rob McCall, then PMSA chair, also revealed a job offer and secret merger plans of the four schools.

Somerville House school principal Flo Kearney was sacked by the PMSA when she questioned their handling of the embarrassing saga but has since won a public apology and an undisclosed payout from the PMSA. Yesterday it emerged the heads of senior, middle and junior schools will also be exiting the historic all-girls private school at South Brisbane.

"Beyond PMSA", which represents 4000 supporters, said the PMSA "old guard" who presided over the debacle including chair Greg Adsett, Anne Bennett, Helen Murray, Greg Skelton and Jim Demack, should resign effective immediately.

The PMSA owns Somerville House, Brisbane Boys College, Clayfield College and Sunshine Coast Grammar School.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 6/11/19




Australia Flicks Switch on First New Power Station in 7 Years

Fascinating that the Greenies have not opposed this.  The dire blackouts that South Australia suffered when they demolished all their coal-fired generators must have focused a few minds

AGL Energy Ltd.’s Barker Inlet gas-fired power plant began operations Monday, Australia’s first major new power station since 2012, with its quick-start capability designed to back-up fast-growing wind and solar generation.

The A$295 million ($204 million) facility in South Australia has 210 megawatts of capacity and will help supplement renewables, which regularly meet more than 50% of the state’s power demand, the company said in a statement. The plant is capable of reaching full capacity within 5 minutes, AGL said.

“This is important, because it will allow us to provide a rapid response to changes in renewable generation supply and demand -- particularly wind generation here in South Australia,” Chief Executive Officer Brett Redman said in the statement. Barker Inlet is part of AGL’s A$2 billion pipeline of infrastructure projects aimed at bolstering the grid.

Australia will likely need around A$400 billion in new utility-scale generation assets over the next 30 years as aging coal-fired power plants retire, the Grattan Institute, a think tank, said in a study last month. However, the industry has complained that the lack of policy certainty at a national level is hampering investment.

The government has short-listed 12 projects under a program to underwrite investment in new generation, and is also giving financial backing to the A$5 billion-plus Snowy 2.0 pumped-hydro project that will provide large-scale energy storage to back-up renewables.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here






7 November, 2019

A POLITICAL CORRECTNESS ROUNDUP

Five current articles from Australia below

Medivac laws: Asylum-seeker refusal of care shows system ‘being gamed’

Five people who refused to accept medical treatment after being transferred to Australia under contentious refugee medivac laws were diagnosed via teleconference with conditions including dermatitis, abdominal pain and dental pain.

In two cases, specialist care was recommended for men who claimed dental problems with one saying he had been prevented from eating solid foods although both individuals did not seek further assistance after their transfer.

While five transferees have refused any treatment, about 40 have turned down relevant pathology tests and X-rays, triggering new warnings from government MPs on Tuesday that the legislation was being “gamed”.

The number of asylum-­seekers and refugees seeking transfers under the medivac legislation has steadily increased and spiked in October, with 120 ­submitting applications that month. Two weeks ago, 562 ­remained in Papua New Guinea and Nauru.

Scott Morrison needs the support of Senate crossbencher Jacqui Lambie to repeal the medivac laws, which were passed prior to the May 18 election by Labor and independent MPs in defiance of his then minority government.

Since the legislation came into force in March, 136 people have been brought from PNG and Nauru to Australia to receive medical assistance.

Of these, about 45 have ­partially or completely refused to accept the medical treatment on offer.

The five individuals who have refused all treatment are men aged from 29-37 and were initially assessed by teleconference or video.

They included a man suffering from stomach inflammation and abdominal pain; another experiencing bowel inflammation and dermatitis as well as the man who claimed an ongoing dental con­dition had prevented him from ­eating.

The other two cases involved a man suffering from a urological condition who refused medical and diagnostic scans while the fifth man also claimed he had gum and dental infections that had negatively affected his appearance.

Former immigration minister Kevin Andrews told The Australian: “The level of rejection and partial rejection of treatments clearly indicates that the scheme is being gamed.”

The government needs four crossbench votes to pass its planned medivac repeal, but will not win over the Centre Alliance, which holds two upper house seats.

Centre Alliance senator Stirling Griff told The Australian he was not convinced the numbers of transferees who were partially or completely rejecting medical treatment under the legislation was a compelling reason to repeal the new law.

“You can have the same situation in a suburb of Canberra,” he said. “They need treatment and they opt not to take it. It’s ­really no different.”

“If they came here in the first instance, they were assessed by doctors.”

Under the medivac legislation, an Independent Health Advice Panel has the final say on who can be transferred to Australia on medical grounds.

The panel is made up of representatives from the Australian Medical Association, the Royal Australian and New Zealand ­College of Psychiatrists and the Royal Australasian College of Physicians.

A Senate estimates hearing was informed last month that fewer than one in 10 refugees and ­asylum-seekers transferred to Australia under the medivac laws had required hospital treatment.

The Australian understands the number of refugees and ­asylum-seekers in hospital — after being transferred — has fluctuated from zero to one a day.

SOURCE  






Australia Day celebrations could soon be SCRAPPED in parts of Sydney because mayor claims January 26 'marks the onset of colonisation and cultural destruction'

More tiresome virtue signalling

Australia Day celebrations in parts of Sydney could be scrapped in favour of an  Aboriginal festival.

Sydney's Inner West Council is expected to vote on a motion next week that would move Australia Day events from January 26.

The proposal comes after Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton ordered that any council that refuses to hold citizenship ceremonies on Australia Day will not be allowed to hold them at all.

Labor Mayor Darcy Byrne told the Sydney Morning Herald the council plans to move its annual Enmore Park celebrations to a different date, but would continue to hold citizenship ceremonies.

'We're seeking to take a more respectful approach to January 26 and acknowledge that for Aboriginal people it marks the onset of colonisation, dispossession, the removal of children and the deliberate destruction of language and culture,' Mr Byrne said.

'There's a growing number of local communities and people across Australia that think the 26th of January should be a commemoration not a celebration and the ongoing hurt that Aboriginal people feel shouldn't be exacerbated through fireworks and festivals.'

This would also stop it from interfering with the Aboriginal festival Yabun, which celebrates Aboriginal and Torrest Strait Islander culture.

Yabun involves musical performances, stalls, community gatherings and is held in nearby Camperdown on the same day.

The proposal is set to go to a vote on Tuesday and is expected to pass with the support of Labor councillors and the Greens.

But independent Victor Macri claimed the community had not been properly consulted regarding the plan.

'We're the party capital of Sydney and now we want to scrap Australia Day?' Mr Macri said.

Mr Macri claims the community will be disappointed if the Australia Day celebration is moved, as it is always a big day for families.

The Inner West Council first debated scrapping the celebrations last year following a Greens-led campaign to change the date.

The debate over changing the date has raged for years, with the phrase 'Happy Australia Day' coming under fire earlier this year.

Kado Muir, an Aboriginal culture, heritage and awareness advocate, said the phrase 'Happy Australia Day' was an 'ignorant gesture'.

He called on Australians to rise above the 'base destructive emotions' in the debate and instead shift focus onto the aspects that unite the country.

Critics have argued that this day marked the beginning of great suffering and torment for indigenous people and should not be celebrated.

Other indigenous Australians, who trace their lineage on the continent back 50,000 years, refer to January 26 as 'Invasion Day', the start of Britain's colonisation of Aboriginal lands.

In April, journalist Stan Grant said that moving Australia Day would be pointless because some of his fellow indigenous people are 'wedded to grievance'.

Grant, an award-winning journalist of Aboriginal heritage, addressed the issue in a piece published in an edition of The Weekend Australian magazine.

He argued that changing the date of Australia Day might leave January 26 as a day honoured by white chauvinists and risked making the national day more divisive.

Grant added that some Aboriginal people would not be satisfied with the date change either because resentment was part of their 'identities'.

In November last year, Mr Dutton threatened that any council that refused to hold citizenship ceremonies on Australia Day would not be allowed to hold them at all.

'I don't care whether people are seeking to move it in an obvious way or playing games - the intent is very clear,' he told 2GB Radio at the time.

'The rules are pretty clear. If they're not going to abide by it, then they'll find themselves without the ability to conduct the ceremony.' 

An overwhelming majority of Australians reject calls for the country's national day to be moved from January 26, according to poll findings earlier this year.

Polling commissioned by the Institute of Public Affairs, a conservative think-tank, showed just 10 per cent of 1,000 people surveyed want to change the date of Australia Day.

Young Australians were even less welcoming to the idea of moving the date from January 26, which many indigenous Australians view as Invasion Day.   

'Only eight per cent of young people between the ages of 18 and 24 say Australia Day should not be celebrated on 26 January,' the IPA's Dr Bella d'Abrera said.

'[It] proves that despite the media and political left narrative, young people are not drawn to the divisive argument of opposing our national day.'

A separate poll of 1,659 people, conducted by conservative lobby group Advance Australia, found 78 per cent of those surveyed were proud to celebrate Australia Day on January 26.

'The results are in - January 26 is not a day for division and protest, but rather a day for all Australians to celebrate,' the group's National Director, Gerard Benedet, said.

Many indigenous people find it offensive the date their ancestors lost their sovereignty to British colonialists is celebrated with a public holiday.

SOURCE  






Militant vegans launch protest against a defiant butcher who called demonstrators 'maggots' while refusing to stop selling horse meat

A butcher is set to be hit with a wave of protests from vegans because he refuses to stop selling horse meat.  

Members of animal rights group Direct Action Everywhere will demonstrate outside Mr Garreffa's Mondo Butchers in Inglewood in Perth this Saturday.

'Mondo Butchers sells the bodies of murdered victims, yet the owner Vince preaches respect and courtesy toward other beings,' the group posted on Facebook.

'In his hypocrisy his actions toward the innocent are vile.'

They said that despite the ABC's report on racehorses being slaughtered on an 'industrial scale', Mr Mondo 'still decides to promote the demand for the slaughter of innocent horses and other animals'. 

'It's about time normalised violence, especially of this nature is acknowledged and contested. 'Come join us in pressuring society out of the dark ages and eradicating the businesses that uphold pre-evolved this mentality.'

But the butcher said that police and his lawyer will be notified before the militant vegans' planned rallies at his store this weekend.

'Through them doing this... it lifts the support of the community to us. They are just maggots. We'll see what eventuates,' he told the West Australian.

Direct Action Everywhere group leader James Warden and Mr Garreffa already came to blows in October on current affairs program Flashpoint.

During the debate, Mr Garreffa blasted Mr Warden and other vegan militants as 'malicious' for trespassing on farmers' properties.

'Those poor families that you've singled out, they're hurting more than ever when you've had a little win,' he said on the Channel 7 program.

The well-known butcher has been selling horse meat for human consumption for nearly a decade.

'It [horse meat] is available all over the world, in 20 different countries. We are butchers, we have what ever is legally available to the public. 'People take great pride in my shop.'

Saturday's proposed protest won't be the first time vegan militants will storm a butcher in Perth.

Last month protesters lined up outside Tenderwest Meats in Perth's Belmont Forum and shouted at passing customers with a megaphone.

'They never wanted to die for you,' the group's leader yelled while his followers held up signs showing animals in slaughterhouses.

Last month, the explosive two-year investigation by the ABC's 7.30 revealed that an alarming number of retired thoroughbreds are being killed for meat for human consumption.

Racing Australia's official data claims about 34 racehorses every year end up at slaughterhouses, a figure amounting to less than one per cent of retiring horses.

But Elio Celotto from the Coalition for the Protection of Racehorses told the ABC that about 4,000 racehorses had been killed in one abattoir alone.

That abattoir - located in Queensland's south-east - has been the focus of the broadcaster's investigation and was infiltrated with hidden cameras. The cameras showed that in just 22 days, more than 300 racehorses, who won $5million in prize money combined, were killed.

SOURCE  






Wrong to go fishing?

Where will it end?

A furious woman has gone on an extraordinary rant and unleashed on a pair of fisherman while she was feeding ducks popcorn.

The fishermen had just dropped a line into Ascot Waters, a marina in Perth, on Saturday when the woman turned on the men.

She was seen on video lecturing the pair and telling them that fishing in the marina was 'stupid'.

Yahoo News reported that the woman had claimed the men were potentially killing the local bird life and dumping fish hooks in the water.

'This is stupid, what you're doing is stupid because it's a bird sanctuary,' the unidentified woman said.

The woman sat next to one of the fishermen who continued to stay quiet and stare ahead, visibly uncomfortable by her actions.

The fisherman argued that he cleaned up after himself, which caused the women to become even more frustrated.

'You lie. About looking after the environment and [yet] you're standing there with a fishing rod in your hand,' she said.

One of the men questioned whether the woman had any experience in marine biology, which infuriated her further.

'I've got three degrees which is something you haven't got and been teaching for 45 years. Shut up,' she said in the man's face.

When he continued to question why she believed he didn't have the same experience, the woman said he was too young 'and too stupid'.

The woman continued to complain and said she works tirelessly to clean up the area, before she stormed off.

SOURCE  





Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi ‘embarrassing’ on horses, trainer says

Choosing a Pakistani to comment on a great Australian tradition begets the ignorance you would expect

The trainer of Prince of Arran has lashed out a Greens senator who said she was “horrified” at the treatment of thoroughbred who placed second at the Melbourne Cup.

British trainer Charlie Fellowes told Senator Mehreen Faruqi on Twitter she was “embarrassing” and invited her to visit the thoroughbred in the western Melbourne suburb of Werribee.

“(Your) lack of knowledge on horse racing is embarrassing,” he said on Twitter. “Come to Werribee tomorrow and I will personally introduce you to Prince of Arran. “You will quickly realise that he is not abused, in pain, or suffering. “Like every horse in my stable he is loved more than any household pet.”

Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi, who is the party’s spokeswoman for animal welfare, is calling for a royal commission into animal cruelty in the horse racing industry.

“When animals and gambling mix, animals always suffer,” she declared in a statement released on Tuesday night after jockey Michael Walker was fined $10,000 and received a seven-meeting ban for excessively whipping Prince Arran and Rostropovich suffered a fractured pelvis.

Racing Victoria said Rostropovich is expected to recover from the stress fracture and the gelding is receiving care at the Werribee Equine Clinic.

“The David and Ben Hayes and Tom Dabernig-trained gelding is in a stable condition, comfortable and receiving the best veterinary care,” Racing Victoria said in a statement.

Dozens of anti-racing activists protested outside the Melbourne Cup outside Flemington Racecourse on Tuesday.

The protesters held pictures of dead horses emblazoned with “Is the party worth it?” and yelled “Nup to the Cup” at punters as they entered.

The Coalition for the Protection of Racehorses organised a ‘human horse race’ that ran at the same time as official Melbourne Cup day races, including the main event at 3pm, at the nearby Kensington Reserve.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





6 November, 2019

Another grim week leaves private health insurance in Australia on life support (?)

The Leftist moan below has a point but there is no threat to the continued availability of private health insurance.  The increasing costs of medical procedures are probably unfixable so the cost of private insurance must increase. No government fiddling will alter that. And, yes, that will freeze out some people.  But those who can continue to afford it will do so.  The opportunity to avoid government medicine is compelling.

Government medicine is good enough and sometimes excellent but getting access to it is the problem. You can die on a waiting list and nobody even says "Sorry".  And government hospitals face a double whammy.  They too have to fund the increasing costs of procedures and on top of that they will face an influx of former private patients driven into their arms by those same costs.

So the future for private hospital insurance will remain strong but it will service fewer people.  It will be confined to a mostly affluent clientele, which it is not now.  Middle income people can and do afford it at the moment.

There is no doubt that the situation is politically unpalatable so what is likely to happen?  Restrictions.  Government hospitals will simply refuse some care to some people.  An early candidate for that would be to offer very limited service to people with self-inflicted illnesses -- principally smokers and the obese.  That already happens informally but will almost certainly increase -- no hip jobs for the obese and no lung resections for smokers, for instance.

I can speak from personal experience about one of those strategies.  A high-tech procedure of relatively recent origins is the PET scan. It is the best way of detecting cancer in you.  I gather that there is some access to them in public hospitals but it is very limited so you mostly have to go to a private laboratory to get one.  I did. I had it very promptly and it cost me $700 with NO Medicare rebate.  You can see why there is no rebate.  If there were it would be widely prescribed. And what would 100,000 prescriptions at $700 each cost?  It would break the bank.  So restricting availability of the procedure is both necessary and opens it up only to the well-off

So two-tiered medical care is inevitable. It already exists and will get worse.  Government medicine aims to prevent that but it cannot.  Medical innovations will continue and will continue to be ever-more costly


In April this year, the health minister, Greg Hunt, introduced reforms the government said would make private health insurance easier to understand and more affordable.

The changes, described by the federal government as the most significant reforms to the private health insurance system in a decade, included classifying the some 70,000 private health insurance policies available into gold, silver, bronze and basic categories, and discounts for young people.

A review from the consumer advocacy group Choice published on Wednesday found the opposite. More than 215 “silver” and “silver plus” policies cost more than “gold” policies, the report found, leaving consumers as confused by their options as ever. An Australian Medical Association report published one day later warned private health policies remained unaffordable and non-transparent.

The other cornerstone of the reforms – lower premiums for people under 30 – has failed to stop the exodus of young people from the system, Australian Prudential Regulation Authority [Apra] data shows. The financial authority in May issued a directive to the private health industry to take responsibility for the decline in affordability and uptake of insurance rather than rely on government reforms.

The situation has several health economists and policy experts questioning whether the private health insurance industry, far from being salvageable through reform, is worth saving at all.

Apra executive board member Geoff Summerhayes said it was “frustrating to see little evidence that insurers are taking actions that reflect their own assessment of the heightened risks in this challenging environment”.

“Apra recognises the industry has been under duress for some time, and the main factors, such as rising demand for health services and the soaring cost of treatments, are beyond insurers’ direct control,” he said. “But that’s not an excuse for doing nothing and hoping the government will fix everything.”

According to the Consumers Health Forum and the Australian Healthcare and Hospitals Association [AHHA] the only way forward is for the federal government to order an independent Productivity Commission review of the whole healthcare system, both public and private components. Unlike previous examinations of the private health insurance industry, this review should not be ordered from the starting point that the private health insurance must be saved, rather would question whether it should be.

AHHA acting chief executive Dr Linc Thurecht said the review should also investigate the public policy objectives that are being served by government support or private health insurance through publicly-funded subsidies.

“While there is a cost associated with holding such a review, this must be seen in the context of the latest data we have showing that Australia spent $185bn a year on healthcare,” he told Guardian Australia.

“AHHA would not say that the death of private health insurance is inevitable. But we need to hold all levels of government to account in reforming our healthcare system to better coordinate the delivery of healthcare, to take a longer-term view of individual’s healthcare journey, to remove low value care, to stop some healthcare providers charging exorbitant fees, to remove inequities in access to healthcare and health outcomes, and to improve transparency on outcomes and costs that matter to people.

“Private health insurance is seen by virtually all as being too expensive, too complicated and opaque, and not offering value for money.”

Grattan Institute health economist Dr Stephen Duckett said the death of the private health industry was inevitable. But he said while it was in a “death spiral, it’s a slow death spiral”.

“So do we arrest the death spiral and are there ways to do it without costing more money?” Duckett said. “The private health insurance industry says the answer is to give them another billion dollars. The answer from the industry always seems to be around forcing more people into private health insurance or undermining Medicare.

“The industry should be told enough is enough. That even if we keep the rebate for taking out private health cover, you must stand on your own two feet. It is crazy that people are forced into private health cover through rebates.

“Can you imagine any other product where we say ‘you don’t want to buy it, we think you should though, so you’re forced into it? It’s the most amazing policy for an economy where we value choice.”

At a presentation to the Actuaries Institute conference in Melbourne in October, the Private Healthcare Australia chairman, John Hill, said insurers would find it challenging not to pass on the rising costs of medical devices through premium increases come April.

“Inflated prices for established medical technologies must come down in line with the rest of the world,” Hill said. “One of the most commonly used implants, cardiac stents, are five times the price in Australia as they are in New Zealand.” It was a claim the chief executive of the Medical Technology Association of Australia, Ian Burgess, rejected as “absurd”. He accused the private health insurance industry of “an increasingly desperate attempt” to rein in costs and maintain profitability “by pointing the finger at everyone else”.

The chair of the Australian Healthcare Reform Alliance, Jennifer Doggett, said all of the reforms implemented to salvage private health insurance to date had been cosmetic. She said while reviews of the system had been done before, the benefit of a productivity commission review would be its scope.

“We haven’t had a review yet that includes the premise that we might not need private health insurance at all,” she said. “The reviews we’ve had so far have not examined what is best for Australia. We need a review that looks at consumer needs, not the needs of the private health insurance sector or doctors who want to keep their fees high, or the private sector, or some other interest group.”

SOURCE  





Greenie destruction of lots of power generators is wiping out Australia's aluminium producers

Mining giant Rio Tinto says its Australian Aluminium smelters, which employ more than 2,600 workers, are not sustainable at current power prices.

The company runs three smelters in Australia, which are under financial pressure due to the high price of electricity, which makes up about a third of their costs, and the low price of aluminium due to a flood of cheap supply coming from Asian competitors.

The resources minister, Matt Canavan, has recently championed the industry, saying Australia was “one of the best aluminium producers in the world” and claiming it needed a continued supply of “cheap baseload” electricity from coal.

“If we turn our back on coal, you turn out the lights on aluminium, it’s as simple as that,” he told ABC Radio last week.

However, speaking in London on Thursday night, the chief executive of Rio Tinto’s aluminium division, Alf Barrios, issued a blunt warning that current prices from coal-fired power were too high.

He said this was despite “fantastic work” done by the team at the Australian smelter division, Pacific, to improve the performance of the plants.

“However power accounts for about a third of the global cost of the smelters and the smelters at Pacific do lack internationally competitive energy prices, which undermines the viability of these assets,” he said.

“We are working very closely with the power suppliers and the governments to find a solution to this challenge. “I’m not going to speculate on the outcome but clearly the current situation is not sustainable.”

The warning comes after Rio Tinto boss Jean-Sebastian Jacques warned in August that Australian smelters were “on thin ice” and follows the company flagging last week that it might close its New Zealand smelter.

Barrios was speaking to reporters ahead of a quarterly update to investors that listed “low-carbon technology” as a priority for its aluminium business.

The company’s head of economics, Vivek Tulpule, said the profitability of aluminium was “challenged by the quick and cheap expansion of supply to meet growth in demand”.

“This underlines the value of our position in Canada with operating costs in the bottom decile of the cost curve supported by hydro power which will become increasingly important in a carbon-constrained world,” he said.

SOURCE  







Feminist poison on the ABC

Since they endorse violence in pursuit of their aims, perhaps I can respond in kind by saying that I would be happy to see the lot of then burn at the stake

The ABC has come under fire after Q&A panellists called for rapists to be killed, labelled Scott Morrison a 'white supremacist' and said police forces should be abolished in an extraordinary programme on Monday night.

The show, featuring a panel of five women and host Fran Kelly, provoked outrage on social media, with hundreds of viewers calling for the ABC to have its funding cut.

The controversy began when a member of the audience asked if aggression and violence were the best ways for feminists to achieve equality.

Outspoken Egyptian-American writer Mona Eltahawy, who dominated the show, replied by endorsing violence and saying that women should kill rapists.

She said: 'I want patriarchy to fear feminism… how long must we wait for men and boys to stop murdering us, to stop beating us and to stop raping us? How many rapists must we kill until men stop raping us?'

Host Fran Kelly then referenced a tweet by Spectator Australia which asked: 'Why is the ABC justifying violence?'

She said: 'So Mona... Spectator Australia is already saying Mona's promoting violence. Is that what you're doing?'

Ms Eltawahy replied: 'What I'm doing is saying that that violence has been owned by the state… exactly how long do I have to wait to be safe?'

The person who asked the question challenged the panel by suggesting that violence was not the best approach, saying: 'Bullying begets bullying and violence begets violence'.

Journalist and author Jess Hill then chimed in to support Ms Eltawahy's argument that violence is necessary.

She said: 'If anyone's shocked by what Mona's suggesting, you just have to look back to history, and a certain faction of the suffragettes… they used violence. They thought what they were fighting was a civil war between the sexes.'

Indigenous writer and activist Nayuka Gorrie also appeared to advocate violence, saying: 'When you say violence begets violence, it's almost sounding like it's a level playing field which it's not.'

'It's absolutely not… I wonder what our kind of tipping point in Australia's going to be when people will start burning stuff? I look forward to it.'

Commenting on Australia's colonial history, she added: 'We've tried for 230-plus years to appeal to the colonisers' morality, which just doesn't seem to exist.

'I think violence is OK because if someone is trying to kill you, there's no amount of, "But I'm really clever. I'm really articulate". No amount of that is going to save you. Let's burn stuff.'

The comments immediately sparked fury on social media as hundreds of viewers were left shocked by such brazen support for violence.

One viewer wrote: 'Violence is never an option and if the ABC insists on pushing violent rhetoric, I will have to insist Scott Morrison pulls funding from the ABC and rescind's their broadcasting licence.'

Another added: 'The ABC is promoting violence? It wouldn’t be first time.'

In another shocking section of the show, Ms Eltawahy called the Prime Minister a white supremacist. 'Your Prime Minister here is a mini version of Donald Trump - because we're talking about white supremacists capitalists,' she said. 'Your Prime Minister is a white evangelical Christian like Mike Pence in the US so you're on a parallel path here.'

Ms Eltawahy then attacked the government over Mr Morrison's proposal to outlaw environmental boycott campaigns.

'When you start talking about banning boycotts, you have to ask what is happening to your so-called democracy,' she said.

Another controversial moment came when the panel discussed Tanya Day, an aboriginal woman who was arrested for being drunk in public and died in a police cell in 2017.

Responding to a question about how institutions can be better held to account for racism, Ms Gorrie said the police service should be shut down. 'Its very formation was to serve the interest of white sovereignty in this country,' she said.

'When we're talking about accountability, I'm not sure how far we can go in keeping an organisation like the police to account because it is there to be violent'. 'It's patriarchal, it's overwhelmingly white. I think it shouldn't exist.'

The show also came under fire for repeated use of foul language, which prompted Kelly to say: 'We are trying to keep the language under control. If you're offended by the profanity, maybe leave now.'

Shortly afterwards, in the section about police racism, Ms Eltawahy made no effort to moderate her words, saying: 'You're asking the person here who travels the world to say f*** the patriarchy.'

SOURCE  





Australia to 'fast-track' permanent residency for highly-skilled tech migrants

A change from useless refugees

Seven "future-focused fields" targeted under new visa scheme.
A newly established permanent migration scheme for highly-skilled technologists will target seven “future-focused fields”, including cyber security, fintech and quantum computing, in a bid to maintain Australia’s competitiveness.

The ‘Global Talent Independent Program’ (GTIP), which was first flagged in June to attract the best talent from around the world, was launched by Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs David Coleman on Monday.

The program aims to lure up to 5000 high-income earners working “at the top of their field” to Australia between July 2019 and June 2020 with the offer of a “fasttracked process to permanent residency”.

It sits separately to the ‘global talent – employer sponsored program’ (GTES), which was made permanent in August after a 12-month pilot.

Only migrants working in one of seven “future-focused fields”, who are likely to earn more than $149,000 per year in Australia, are eligible to for permanent residency under GTIP.

The fields are AgTech, space and advanced manufacturing, fintech, energy and mining technology, medtech, cyber security, and quantum information/advanced digital/data science and ICT.

Normal character, security and integrity checks undertaken for any migration will also apply.

However, instead of waiting for migrants to apply, GTIP intends to actively seek out talent using ‘Global Talent Officers’ from the Department of Home Affairs.

These officers – which have already been deployed in Berlin, Washington DC, Singapore, Shanghai, Santiago, Dubai and New Delhi, and will work across countries in their regions – will guide applicants through the application process.

The Australian Financial Review has reported Coleman as saying this fast-tracked process would take "weeks, not months".

Migrants will also be able to access the program with a referral from “an organisation or an individual with a national reputation in the same field as the candidate”, according to Home Affairs.

Coleman said the GTIP was deliberately targeting the “world’s most highly-skilled migrants” in order to best position Australia for competiveness.

“We want to position Australia at the forefront of major growth trends in the world economy. By enabling local businesses to access the world’s best talent, we will help to grow high growth industries in Australia,” he said.

“Over time, the Global Talent program has the potential to have a transformative impact on the Australian economy.”

While the program is focused on bringing in external talent, Home Affairs expects the scheme will also, by extension, create “opportunities for Australians by transferring skills, promoting innovation and creating job opportunities”.

Minister for Industry, Science and Technology Karen Andrews said local job creation, in addition to the 5000 GTIP placements, would “drive growth in the Australian technology industry”.

 “For our domestic tech industry to grow, businesses need to be able to hire skilled Australian workers as well as access the capabilities of specialists from across the world,” she said.

“We can create high-paying local jobs by making Australia a global technology hub and the global talent program is a signal to tech companies that we’re open for business.”

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here








5 November, 2019

Queensland tourist industry calls for non-lethal shark control measures

This is a disgrace.  The tourism industry wants to have its cake and eat it too.  The unmentioned fact below is that shark diving is a significant tourist activity.  Going down in cages to observe sharks is a big thrill. So the tourism operators want to keep the sharks alive.  But what about the swimmers?

Swimmers have been kept safe in tourist areas for many years by catching the sharks on hooked lines and killing them. But that has now been forbidden in some areas.  So swimmers are already getting bitten. And that is VERY bad for tourism.

The way the tour operaters propose to square the circle is by using airy-fairy catch and release strategies that offer a very low level of protection to swimmers.  But that is OK to the operators.  They would rather have live sharks and a few dead tourists

I was alerted to the fact that there was something fishy going on (forgive the pun) when I saw that the Greenies were praising the tourism operators


Queensland tourism operators are demanding urgent government action to control sharks in the Great Barrier Reef amid fears foreign tourists are being scared off.

The call comes after bickering by state and federal governments over the best way to control sharks around the popular Whitsunday Islands and other destinations. The two governments have been at loggerheads, with Queensland calling on Canberra to pass laws allowing it to kill sharks in the reef.

In a joint statement, tourist operators have called for aerial shark spotters, netted swimming areas, particularly around Stradbroke Island, and SMART drum lines.

The Queensland Tourism Industry Council, Tourism Whitsundays and Tourism Tropical North Queensland are concerned without such measures to protect swimmers, tourists will be turned off the region.

There are also demands for an investigation in increased shark attacks in the wake of last week's incident involving two British backpackers in the Whitsundays. Alistair Raddon, 28, and Danny Maggs, 22, were attacked in the waters of Hook Passage on Tuesday, leaving Mr Raddon without a foot and Mr Maggs with a lacerated calf.

They had been on a ZigZag Whitsundays boat tour and were in the water when the shark bit one man before circling and returning to bite the other. They are now planning to tell their story to British media and there is concern the fallout may deter overseas tourists.

Shark attacks in Queensland have recently become a political football between state and federal governments. The stoush began after Queensland lost a federal court battle to be allowed to use baited hooks to catch and kill sharks in the reef, requiring state fisheries staff to now catch and release sharks.

It has called on the government to introduce laws to circumvent this decision, but the federal government has told them to use SMART drum lines, despite state fisheries authorities saying they didn't work

SOURCE  





Greenies were big donors in the last Federal election

Zali Steggall given $1.1m donations in successful bid to topple Tony Abbott. Steggall given most among independents at election, and largest donor to independents was Climate 2020 lobby group

Climate 2020, the Simon Holmes à Court and Mike Cannon-Brookes-backed environmental lobby group, donated a total of $354,500 to independent candidates, making it their largest source of funding at the 2019 election.

According to disclosures released by the Australian Electoral Commission on Monday, Zali Steggall received a total of $1.1m of donations in her successful bid to topple Tony Abbott in Warringah, the highest of any independent.

Steggall was followed by Helen Haines, who raked in $421,000 in her successful bid to succeed Cathy McGowan in Indi; Oliver Yates, who received $363,000; and the former independent MP for Wentworth Kerryn Phelps, who received $219,000.

The disclosures reveal only donations from a single source above the $13,800 threshold received by individual candidates, independent Senate groups and their respective donors. Party declarations will be released in February.

The other independents who raised more than $100,000 were candidate for Farrer Kevin Mack, Queensland Senate candidate Hetty Johnston, ex-Liberal MP Julia Banks, former independent MP Rob Oakeshott, and disgruntled Liberal turned challenger in Gilmore, Grant Schultz.

Steggall also topped the list for the most number of donors (1,378), followed by Helen Haines (1,002) and Oakeshott (350).

Climate 2020 gave $145,000 to Oliver Yates, who failed in his bid to dislodge the treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, in Kooyong; $50,000 to the ACT independent Senate candidate Anthony Pesec; $47,500 to Phelps; $40,000 to Banks; $37,000 to Oakeshott; and $35,000 to Haines. Pesec also received $20,000 from Malcolm Turnbull’s son, Alex Turnbull.

Climate 2020 Pty Ltd is an initiative of energy consultant Holmes à Court that has also received funding from Atlassian co-founder Cannon-Brookes, who describes it as a “non-partisan, non-profit project set up to assist political candidates with a clear commitment to a science-based response to the climate emergency and to restoring integrity to politics”.

SOURCE  





Drought Australia: NSW rainfall soaks parched farms

A rare deluge over swathes of drought-plagued western NSW has caused farmers and residents to revel in their freshly soaked red earth.

Rain and thunderstorms across NSW on Sunday resulted in a water gush through towns including Bourke, which recorded the highest rainfall in the state with about 66 millimetres, according to the Bureau of Meteorology.

Girilambone, in NSW’s mid-north, recorded 42.4mm, while in the Riverina Griffith recorded 30.8mm. Mirrool Creek, in the Riverina, is running for the first time in two years.

Nationals leader Michael McCormack warned the drought crippling Australia would take “years to recover from”, despite the heavy weekend rainfall.

“This is great. But one downpour doesn’t end the drought, it doesn’t solve the problem in the drought-stricken communities,” Mr McCormack said.

Prime minister Scott Morrison said this morning In Bangkok where he is attending the east Asia summit: “Australia at present has got some challenges in the agricultural sector, but I was very pleased to hear the reports of rain overnight.”

“It’s very encouraging. “We know that rain of itself is not drought-breaking, but I would say that it has been a tremendous encouragement to those western districts of NSW in particular, who have been looking forward to that.

“But our agricultural sector, despite the fact that we face droughts and floods, remains strong like all sectors of the Australian economy.”

While many of the towns to enjoy the falls had gone months without significant falls, the BOM told The Australian that drought-affected areas had missed out on downpours.

SOURCE  






Scott Morrison threatens crackdown on protesters who would 'deny liberty'

PM signals action on secondary boycotts of resources companies and says progressives want to tell Australians ‘what you can say, what you can think’

Scott Morrison has branded environmental protesters “anarchists” and threatened a radical crackdown on the right to protest in a speech claiming progressives are seeking to “deny the liberties of Australians”.

In a speech to the Queensland Resources Council on Friday, the prime minister said a threat to the future of mining was coming from a “new breed of radical activism” and signalled the government would seek to apply penalties to those targeting businesses who provide services to the resources industry.

Morrison told Australian corporations to listen to the “quiet shareholders” and not environmental protesters, who he suggested could shift targets from coal companies to all carbon-intensive industries including power generation, gas projects, abattoirs and airlines.

In a speech proposing limits on free speech advocating boycotts against polluting companies, Morrison said progressives wanted to tell Australians “what you can say, what you can think and tax you more for the privilege of all of those instructions”.

He claimed that “progressivism” – which he labelled a “new-speak type term”, invoking George Orwell – intends “to get in under the radar, but at its heart would deny the liberties of Australians”.

“Apocalyptic in tone, it brooks no compromise,” Morrison said. “It’s all or nothing. Alternative views are not permitted.”

He pointed to the “worrying development” of environmental groups targeting businesses or firms involved in the mining sector with “secondary boycotts”, such as businesses refusing to provide banking, insurance or consultancy services.

“They are targeting businesses of all sizes, including small businesses, like contracting businesses in regional Queensland.”

“Let me assure you this is not something my government intends to allow to go unchecked.

“Together with the attorney general, we are working to identify mechanisms that can successfully outlaw these indulgent and selfish practices that threaten the livelihoods of fellow Australians.”

But Morrison admitted the government “can’t force one Australian company to provide a service to another”.

The Competition and Consumer Act already contains civil penalties for secondary boycotts, which target one business in order to prevent provision of goods or services to another, including if they cause “substantial loss or damage” or substantially lessen competition.

However, secondary boycotts for the “dominant purpose” of environmental protection or consumer protection are permitted.

In 2014 the Abbott government considered applying penalties to environmental boycotts. In 2015 the Harper competition review said in the absence of “compelling evidence” on the point it saw no need for change although the exception should be reassessed “if such evidence arises from future boycott activity”.

Earlier on Friday Morrison told 3AW Radio that there is “of course the right to protest in this country” but claimed recent environmental protests in Melbourne were “well beyond the pale” because protesters had allegedly spat at people in business shirts.

“If it’s not OK to have secondary boycotts being run by unions … it’s not OK for environmental, well, they’re anarchist groups … to be able to disrupt people’s jobs, their livelihoods, to harass people as we saw down in Melbourne,” he said.

SOURCE  






Protect Small Business From Union Bullies. Pass The Ensuring Integrity Laws

The latest case of the CFMMEU bullying a small business shows why the Parliament must pass the Ensuring Integrity laws.

The Federal Circuit Court found that the CFMMEU and one of its officials in Queensland abused an employee of a sub-contractor calling him “you f…ing, dog, c..t” while flouting right of entry laws in order to subject the small business employee to and “offensive” and “unprovoked” tirade of abuse.

 The court found the CFMMEU official’s actions were “unprovoked and aggressive”, a “gross abuse of the entitlements” given by his right of entry permit and that the union’s conduct was yet another example of its “unending recidivism”.

“It’s bullying pure and simple. It’s not tolerated in the community and it shouldn’t be tolerated on construction sites,” Denita Wawn, CEO of Master Builders Australia said.

“This is far from an isolated case, it’s just the latest evidence that the CFMMEU deliberately targets small business people and their employees with bullying, aggression and intimidation. The Parliament must act to protect small business people in our industry and pass the Ensuring Integrity laws,” she said.

““I urge Senators, when they come to vote on the Ensuring Integrity Bill, to consider how they would feel if it was them or their staff on the receiving end of such abuse from a CFMMEU bully,” Denita Wawn said.

“The Ensuring Integrity laws are not an attack on unions or their ability to defend the rights of their members on building sites or anywhere else. Only those unions and officials that insist on continuing to break the law will be affected,” Denita Wawn said.

Via email. For more information contact: Ben Carter, National Director, Media & Public Affairs, 0447 775 507

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here






4 November, 2019

Insane Leftist bureaucracy determined to pervert foreign influence legislation.  Australia's "swamp" in action

They are probably trying to kill the legislation by public ridicule

Tony Abbott has been asked to register as an agent of foreign influence under controversial national security laws, for addressing the Conservative Political Action Conference in August

In the first action of its kind under the foreign-influence laws, the event's Australian organiser, Andrew Cooper, whose small not-for-profit organisation Libety-Works co-hosted CPAC in Sydney with the American Conservative Union (ACU), was ordered to hand over documents and threatened with jail time.

The revelations challenge the integrity of the Coalition's foreign influence registry, which came into effect last December. Attorney-General Christian Porter conceded the actions taken by his department did not represent an effective enforcement of the legislation.

The Weekend Australian can reveal that Mr Abbott was asked to register as an agent of foreign influence one day before he addressed CPAC. The conference was held in Australia for the first time in August and included prominent international speakers including Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage and British political activist Raheem Kassam.

The former prime minister refused the request, labelling it "absurd" and saying "senior officials of the Commonwealth have better things to do with their time". Mr Cooper received an October 21 letter from the Attorney-General's Department demanding the production of documents under the government's Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme.

Like Mr Abbott, he has refused to comply and challenged the department about why it was not focused on more pressing "stories of Chinese Communist Party agents influencing university campuses or bankrolling political candidates"..

The decision by the department to target Mr Abbott and Mr Cooper comes amid a national debate over Chinese influence at Australian universities and research organisations. It coincided with a damning ICAC inquiry that has heard allegations the NSW ALP received a $100,000 donation in an Aldi shopping bag from a banned donor, billionaire property developer Huang Xiangmo.

The government's crackdown on foreign influence has been attacked by legal experts including Sydney University's Anne Twomey, who warned it could force thousands of people, including authors, academics and publishers, to register as agents of other countries.

The letter to Mr Cooper, sent by Sarah Chidgey, the deputy secretary of the Integrity and International Group, advised him to provide all documents "detailing any understanding or arrangement between LibertyWorks and the ACU". She asked for invitations to the event, correspondence with speakers as well as the transcripts and recordings of the addresses. It noted that failure to comply with the order within 14 days carried a maximum penalty of six months' jail.

In his reply, Mr Cooper said the department "appears less like the defender of freedom and more like that of the old East German Stasi". "You hold a gun to our head and demand information that we do not have," he wrote.

He told The Weekend Australian: "I will not be complying with this notice despite the threat of criminal prosecution and jail time. I established LibertyWorks to argue against this type of government control over speech and citizens. "I will not sell out our speakers and delegates by kowtowing to government overlords."

CPAC was aimed at developing ideas for the centre-right of politics and included addresses from conservatives and libertarians. It was heavily attacked by Labor's home affairs spokeswoman, Kristina Keneally, who warned of an "alt-right" takeover and rising white supremacism in Australia.

The first CPAC was held in the US in 1974 with then California governor and future president Ronald Reagan the first headline speaker.

Speakers at the August event included Mr Abbott, former deputy prime minister John Anderson, Liberal senator Amanda Stoker, Liberal MP Craig Kelly, former Labor leader Mark Latham and US Republican congressman Mark Meadows. Mr Cooper said he "just wanted to run a conference".

The department has sent about 500 letters to a range of individuals asking them to consider whether they need to register under the foreign influence transparency scheme. Mr Abbott was informed that, as a former cabinet minister, he had "a lifetime obligation to register any activity you undertake on behalf of a foreign principal".

In a follow-up email, sent by the department last month, Mr Abbott's CPAC address and a September speech to a summit in Budapest, Hungary, were identified as potentially problematic.

In a sharply worded response, sent on Wednesday and obtained by The Weekend Australian, Mr Abbott said: "Neither speech of mine was given 'on behalf' of a foreign principal. I spoke for myself. Any suggestion that I was speaking on behalf of a foreign entity is absurd ... I decline to register and suggest that you rethink the making of such misplaced and impertinent requests in the future. "Surely senior officials of the commonwealth have better things to do with their time"

The department's handling of the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme angered Mr Porter. "I have made it clear to my department that I expect it to demonstrate a focus on the most serious instances of noncompliance," the Attorney-General said. "I'm not persuaded this focus has been perfectly demonstrated to date."

Mr Abbott said it was easy for the bureaucracy to turn "well-intentioned government policy into something which turns out to be radically different to what their ministers and staff intended".

The letter to Mr Cooper was the first and only order for the production of documents issued under section 45(2) of the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme, which was introduced by Malcolm Turnbull to help counter the "serious threat posed to Australia and our interests by covert interference and espionage".

Mr Cooper told the department on Friday that Liberty-Works "cannot, and will not, comply with this notice". He informed the department that it was impossible to produce the thousands of documents requested within the 14-day timeline. "The breadth and scope of the requirements in your notice betray a lack of specific concerns and you do not 'reasonably suspect' we are required to register with the scheme," he wrote.

The department sent the letter to Mr Cooper, asking him to passage the request by the close of business on Friday, August 9.

"So they threaten me with jail, and then expect me to be their agent so they can go after someone else?" Mr Cooper told The Weekend Australian. "They can go and get stuffed."

The department also wrote to former Liberal politician Ross Cameron in August for speaking at CPAC, asking him to consider registering as an agent of foreign influence.

From the "Weekend Australian" of 2 Nov., 2019






Don't demean, ignore or dismiss dads' daily devotion

Chris Kenny

My daddy blog could be a major hit, generating millions of hits and thousands of dollars as fathers flock to read think pieces on the hardships of being a dad, swap tips on coping with the work/family balance, and share a whinge about how their wives don't understand.

Or perhaps not generally speaking, blokes just aren't into this. Eavesdrop on a walk around the park or at the cafe and you'll know women discuss these life and relationship issues endlessly, swapping ideas and supporting each other.

Blokes tend not to; we are wired differently. Sure, some might be outraged that I've made such a generalisation, and yes, there will be exceptions to prove the rule, but we all recognise the essential truth here. This is not a value judgment, it is
just reflecting reality.

The reason I mention this is because I think fathers get a bad rap. Fatherhood seems undervalued. It is constantly measured against motherhood — if only mothers could have wives, if only fathers did what mothers do — and fatherhood always comes up short.

There seems to be an underlying resentment that motherhood can be different to fatherhood, that fathers seem to get it easy, and so fatherhood can be diminished. Yet fathers have never done more, nor been more flexible and involved in parenting arrangements.

Fathers do brilliant work every day, something that should be celebrated, nurtured and encouraged rather than dismissed or derided. Motherhood and fatherhood, are different, obviously, equal but different

Thanks to technology and changing social norms there is now a high level of flexibility around shared responsibilities. Sure, as a father of four, I have a dog in this fight. But believe me this is not a competition. There is not a father alive who is not in awe of mothers and motherhood. Most mothers work miracles daily, their physical and emotional energy and endurance make the world go around and their juggling of parental responsibilities and careers is extraordinary.

We hear a lot about this in books, on websites, in newspapers and magazines and on television and radio, where mothers are supported, celebrated and encouraged. This is all to the good — I am not averse to dipping into this genre to enlighten myself.

But this column is about dads. In our age of priestly pedophile scandals, predatory criminals and gender quotas, we should not forget that to improve options for women and protect children we need to leverage the good works of fathers, not diminish them in campaigns against toxic masculinity or outdated gender stereotypes.

Where biology once determined a divide in duties between mothers and fathers, it plays a much smaller role now, with couples able to swap or share almost all tasks. Yet, surely, just as we shouldn't be slaves to traditional roles, we don't need to be prescriptive about the future. Let us have our options and choose.

If, even in the most prosperous and enlightened of societies, most families opted for traditional roles, who would be so arrogant or ideological as to condemn their life choices?

In my household, both parents are busy with careers and the daily rush between drop-offs, pick-ups, cricket, footy, music, nippers and incidentals is as demanding as it is chaotic. As the dad, could I pay more attention to the logistics and perhaps do a little more of the cooking? Sure.

But fatherhood is not some blissful dream of unburdened genetic distribution. Halfway through drafting this column, on top of the usual pick-ups, meal preparations and bath duties, I discovered new-found skills in amateur make-up artistry and costume arrangements for Halloween hijinx.

Fatherhood is the school of lifelong learning. In her recent essay Men at Work, Annabel Crabb interrogated the differing expectations we have of fathers and mothers. She asked why we were so interested in how New Zealand's Jacinda Ardern would cope as a prime ministerial mum, yet were not fussed by how Scott Morrison would get his girls off to school in the mornings.

Quite obviously, our Prime Minister was not gestating, delivering and nursing a child, so there are biological imperatives that are unavoidable in this case. But Crabb makes a telling point when she asks:

"What I want to know is: why do we expect so little of fathers? Why do we fret so extensively about the impact on children of not seeing their mothers enough, but care so little about what happens when it's Dad who's always away? Do we think dads are just for weekends? 'Or are we simply so roundly prepared — based on what we see — for their absence that we neither mourn it nor remark on it?"

This is where we need that daddy blog. Families expect an enormous amount from dads, and dads expect everything from themselves. The daily strain is all about parenting, providing, presence and prioritising; surely most mothers see fathers in this daily juggling act. There are bad fathers, just as there are bad mothers, but my daily brushing of shoulders with dads over more than 30 years as a parent only fills me with optimism and admiration for what they do with and for their families.

Crabb used Morrison and Josh Frydenberg as the laboratory rats in her analysis. Their vocational demands and enforced absences make them extreme examples. Over the years, I have had private discussions with each of them about the joy and devotion of their parenthood. The absences of politics make family life difficult and most politicians know they won't do it forever. They work through shared responsibilities with husbands, wives and wider families, to cope as best they can.

For all that, they are no orphans. Many families across the country deal with one parent or another on night shift, flying in and out on a 10-day turnaround, or deployed overseas with defence forces. Most often it is dad who is away, but certainly not always.

This is what families do. We make choices and share burdens for the benefit of our family, not to fit the expectations of some progressive social experiment. Families do not exist to fulfil some idyllic Brave New World of non-gendered roles and cookie-cutter parenting. Families are dynamic organisms and, like snowflakes, all have different designs. Whether it is socially ingrained or deeply embedded in our DNA, like a mother's nurturing instincts, fathers feel a deep-seated responsibility to provide for their family. Most fathers would sooner endure any absence than stay home and feel they are failing their family.

"I'd always been quietly enraged by the interviews with female CEOs that start with the question of how they manage their families along with their jobs," wrote Crabb.

This intrigued me. As a dad, I have always wondered why on earth we don't get asked. It has never seemed patronising for women to be asked this question; how could it be belittling to be asked about something so vital to us?

Rather, it has always seemed insulting that men are spared the questions. Just because we don't blog about fatherhood, are we assumed to be uninterested? Like most fathers, I suspect, I think of myself first and foremost as a father. It is that role that defines me, to myself and to all those I love.

Fatherhood is the greatest privilege and heaviest responsibility; a daily journey of success and failure, overwhelming joy and deepest hurt, duty and indulgence, pride and anxiety, constant learning and endless aspiration. We fathers know this; we seldom discuss it openly in the way mothers might share their trials and tribulations, but we check in on each other, and we watch and learn and emulate.

I have been privileged to grow up surrounded by superb male role models. Men who are strong and gentle, brave and kind, wise and loving. Men like my father, who I always knew valued fatherhood above all else, and his brothers, the eldest of whom was buried this week, surrounded by children, grandchildren and great-grand-children, amid stories of his patience, wit, devotion and kindness.

I had uncles on my mother's side scarred by Changi or being orphaned young, but who grew to impart tenderness through calloused hands.

At kids' weekend sport there is masculinity aplenty without a hint of toxicity, as boys and girls learn to take risks, succeed and fail. There is a nonchalant benevolence in all this, lighting a path for our children.

We risk missing one of the most valuable influences in our community life if we somehow demean, ignore or dismiss this daily devotion of dads. Crabb, maybe, reaches a similar realisation. "Now," she writes, "I don't get mad when female leaders are asked that question. It's a bloody sensible question. Now I just get mad when male leaders aren't asked it. Not asking is actually, in itself, quite a powerful message. It says, 'No one expects you to care about this'."

Yes, not asking about families insults men. Don't blame the dads. Ask them sometime, they might never shut up. Being a dad, like being a mum, is to surrender yourself to a life that supersedes your own — a crushing and enlivening realisation that your own interests will never again be pre-eminent, there is another life for whom you would, in the twinkling of an eye, surrender your own. Life that depends on you, a weight that is somehow uplifting, ever-present and inspiring. Dads know it and live it every day.

From the "Weekend Australian" of 2 Nov., 2019





 
Home Affairs minister Peter Dutton wants the states to charge protesters the cost of police responding to demonstrations

Mr Dutton, who has previously called for protesters to be publicly shamed and stripped of their welfare payments, called on the states to act after a week of anti-mining demonstrations in Melbourne.

"We don't have 150 police just sitting around in Melbourne or Brisbane or Sydney waiting to respond to these people who spontaneously pull these stunts together," he told the Nine Network on Friday.

"These police are being diverted away from other activities and there should be a price to pay for that."

The prime minister is set to announce a plan to crack down on "indulgent, selfish and apocalyptic" environmental activists.

Mr Dutton, a former Queensland cop, has enthusiastically backed the idea.

"For many of them they don't even believe in democracy," he said. "This is not about free speech, it's not about the ability to protest. These people are completely against our way of life.

"These people can protest peacefully, as many people do, but the disruption that they seek to cause, the disharmony that they seek to sow within our society is unacceptable."

Mr Dutton also took aim at magistrates courts for being too lenient on law-breaking activists. "If you're going to the courts eight times and getting a slap on the wrist, why wouldn't you do it a ninth time?"

SOURCE  





Catfish and shrimp take precedence over drought-hit farmers

Environmental madness

Twenty-two billion litres of precious water have been flushed into a swamp in one of Australia's most drought-stricken regions.

The New South Wales state government started releasing 22 gigalitres of water from Wyangala Dam from the middle of last month.

The move was intended to help increase flow to the heavily parched Lachlan River and its tributaries.

But the decision has been criticised because the water has been used without consulting farmers.

The dam has seen its water level fall by 20 per cent as a result and the state's water minister has questioned the timing of the release.

'I would like to see evidence this was the best time to release water for the environment when the Bureau of Meteorology is indicating little to no inflows over the next 12 months,' NSW Water Minister Melinda Pavey said.

The water released from the dam could have sustained 30,000 people living in nearby towns including Cowra and Forbes for over a year.

Instead it will make its journey west down the river to the Great Cumbung Swamp where the Lachlan River ends.

The government agency which operates the state's rivers said in a statement the water release was critical to the survival of the rivers flowing out of the dam.

The Commonwealth Environment Water Holder said the water was vital to improving the health of the river system along the length of the Lachlan River.

A senior green agency source also told The Daily Telegraph the increased supply to the river system would benefit the resident catfish and freshwater shrimp.

But Ms Pavey said 'during times of extreme drought we need flexibility, not blind recklessness'.

The partial opening of the dam has dropped its capacity to about 18 per cent, compared to 23 per cent at the beginning of last month.

The dam is already subject to a proposal to raise its walls by 10 metres at a cost of $650million.

The river stretches almost 1,500km across New South Wales' south and is part of the Murray-Darling Basin which has faced brutal drought conditions in recent years.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here






3 November, 2019

Taking on Gillette and the Family Court

Bettina Arndt

First, a great new video. I had a long talk to Ilan Srulovicz, the brave CEO of the Egard Watch company, who took on Gillette. Ilan was inspired by the dreadful toxic masculinity message of the notorious Gillette ad to make his own hugely successful video promoting what’s good about men. It was a courageous move to put his company on the line like that but it paid off, attracting overwhelming support for his video. I was so pleased to discover this interesting young man is heavily involved in men’s issues and determined to keep making his voice heard.

Here’s the link to the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1LIg8XKRAbg


Help make sure the Family Law Inquiry exposes the real issues

Last week I reported on my recent trip to meet parliamentarians in Canberra – showing you the wonderful video of Senator Amada Stoker grilling the TEQSA bureaucrats about their dismal handling of campus rape adjudication.

The other issue which was top of my agenda on this trip was the upcoming Family Court Inquiry. I’ve been posting a bunch of news stories on my social media about the strenuous efforts of feminists to try to close down this inquiry. It just shows how desperate they are to hide the truth which hopefully will emerge, particularly during public hearings, about the rampant use of false violence and sexual abuse allegations and related perjury issues, as well as the failure of the Court to enforce contact orders – which are the issues that interest me the most.

I had very helpful meetings with many of the key players involved in the inquiry and have promised to do everything I can to try to make sure good people are making submissions and appearing before the committee.

Via email from Tina: Bettina@bettinaarndt.com.au






Mandatory maths won’t STEM decline

Even with 400 hours of secondary school mathematics under their belts, it seems that Year 10 students in New South Wales remain underprepared for the 21st century. One proposed remedy is to make mathematics compulsory from Kindergarten through to Year 12.

Prioritising mathematics was announced as part of the NSW Government’s promise to ‘take the curriculum back to the basics’ — apparently in response to the interim findings of the recent NSW Curriculum Review.

Unfortunately, with the Review’s author conceding that the main question is whether the proposed reforms are even heading in the right direction, the report epitomises the lack of clarity, vision and strategy in Australian education.

Weirdly, while chewing up a lot of taxpayer dollars, the NSW Review is being undertaken well before a planned review of the Australian Curriculum in 2020. So policy decisions will be made for students and teachers in one state that may turn out to be even less aligned to practices applying to students across the country than they are now.

Rather than starting with a post-mortem of how we got into the current mess, the NSW effort echoes other misguided reviews, showing a fixation on globalisation and technological threats and promoting yet more educational experiments.

Technology specialist and CEO of global marketing company Freelancer, Matt Barrie, recently referred to Australian education as a “basket case” that produces “avocado toast” graduates whose poor skills – especially in computer science and engineering – explain the national slump in productivity.

Any curriculum can set forward priorities. The NSW Government seems intent on bringing mathematics to the fore, but does this make STEM the holy grail?

Education systems that regularly outperform Australia do not expect their school leavers only to master STEM subjects. In Finland and Singapore, for example, there is also an intensive, sustained focus on languages and humanities subjects. Producing well-educated citizens who can contribute to the national good is a sophisticated undertaking.

Improvements do not come from the ad hoc compilation of ideas or from intermittently bolting subjects on to the curriculum.

A more constructive approach would be to identify policy mistakes that have let down many young Australians, but which have been cleverly avoided by high-performing school systems elsewhere.

This should include an honest analysis of what has worked, what has gone wrong and why, and what can be done – without fear or favour – to change things for the better for future generations.

SOURCE  





'I save $200 per week': Student, 21, on a $33k salary reveals how she manages to put away $10,000 a YEAR

I did this sort of thing in my teens and 20s -- as I documented on October 13 and earlier -- so it is good to read that it is still possible

A 21-year-old student and administration officer on a $33,000 salary has revealed how she manages to put away $10,000 a year in savings.

The woman - who gets paid $1,090 every fortnight after tax as well as $4,000 a year from her Centrelink Student Supplement - said she is diligent with her pay cheque.

As soon as she gets paid every two weeks, she transfers $720 for rent, before popping somewhere between $200 and $400 into her savings account, where she currently boasts $7,000.

'I like to save at least $200 per week,' the student told the publication.

The woman's other monthly expenses include an $80 phone bill, $90 on public transport, $50 on her gym membership and $20 on her internet.

She still has her HECS Debt to pay off, but isn't sure of the figure because she is still studying.

'I put an extra $20 per week away so when electricity bills come I don't notice,' the woman said. She also avoids having to pay for Netflix by using her family's logon.

In order to cut down on some expenses, the woman said she meal preps meals and salads at home with her boyfriend, which she brings to work and university. 'We usually meal prep together on a Sunday and take half [the food] each. I spend $30 altogether,' she said.

Typical items on the menu include a healthy spaghetti bolognese with plenty of vegetables and tuna salads.

She makes these last throughout the week by making bulk portions.

What are the woman's top saving tricks?

* Meal prepping lunches for the week with her boyfriend.

* Bulk cooking and making a massive spaghetti bolognese last several days.

* Using her family's Netflix logon.

* Putting away $20 a week, so she doesn't notice when she gets a utility bill.

* Avoiding cafe and restaurant-bought foods as much as possible.

* Buying half price clothes.

The woman said she often takes home leftovers from her boyfriend's parents' home, and tries to avoid buying cafe or restaurant-bought foods.

She also scours for bargains when it comes to clothes, and recently managed to pick up a $50 half price dress for a wedding.

'I think for a university student I'm quite lucky with money,' the woman said. 'I have a good job that allows me to save and even get a student supplement.'

She said that once she is working full time and not studying, she hopes to be able to save even more - but added that the good habits she's established now will hopefully stand her in good stead in the future. 

SOURCE  





'No one listened and then someone died': Fisherman explains why he NEVER lets his family swim in the ocean as the number of hungry, killer sharks increases

Greenie protection of sharks responsible

Fishermen have warned more people will be killed following an explosion in Queensland's shark population and a string of attacks in the water.

Two British backpackers have this week been mauled near Airlie Beach as they snorkelled in the Whitsundays.

Alistair Raddon, 28, had his right foot bitten off as his friend Danny Maggs, 22, copped a leg bite on Tuesday morning.

The shark attacks occurred only a month after Queensland's Labor government removed more than 160 drumlines from 27 beaches.

This followed a Federal Court ruling which ordered the end of shark culling in the Great Barrier Reef.

Nathan Rynn, a Townsville-based commercial net fisherman who operates between Cardwell and Bowen, near Airlie Beach, said surging shark numbers would cause more fatal attacks in the water.

'We've got a catastrophe waiting to happen,' he told Daily Mail Australia on Friday. 'If the government doesn't place some more protection over tourists, swimmers and recreational users, there's going to be more and more of these deaths every year because their numbers are exploding and they're getting hungry.'

Mr Rynn is so worried about predatory sharks in the murky waters of north Queensland he advises his own children to stay out of the water in Townsville.
'Once upon a time, I would have taken them to the local beaches here,' he said.

'If I see mothers or fathers with their kids running down into the water, and they're a fair distance off the beach, I go and tell them, "If I was you, I'd get your kids out".'

David Swindells, a commercial fisherman based at Yeppoon in central Queensland, said he advised swimmers to avoid deep water.

'Put it this way: I'd advise them to stay in shallow water,' he told Daily Mail Australia. 'Only go up around your knees.' 

In November 2018, Melbourne medical researcher Daniel Christidis, 33, died after being attacked at Cid Harbour at Whitsunday Island during a trip with friends and colleagues.

That tragedy followed two separate attacks – also at Cid harbour – on Tasmanian woman Justine Barwick and 12-year-old Melbourne girl Hannah Papps within 24 hours in September.

Well before those spate of attacks, Mr Rynn said he and other fishermen had warned Queensland's Department of Agriculture and Fisheries about the danger of the surging shark population.

'I warned the department about two to three years ago about the increase in shark numbers - it wasn't just myself - there were other guys that were giving them information on shark predation in our fishing nets,' he said.

'Before last year's attack at Cid Harbour, I said that there's only a matter of time there's someone going to be killed. Bang. We had someone unfortunately killed.'

Mr Swindells said shark numbers had exploded after fishermen were banned from culling them. 'Since they've stopped us culling them, there's been a massive explosion in the shark population,' he said.

'There had not been as many shark attacks as there are now so why would they remove the drumlines to put the general public at risk?'

Mr Swindells, a director of the Queensland Seafood Industry Association, said the state Labor government appeared to be removing shark drumlines in a bid to chase Greens preferences in Brisbane electorates.

The drumlines were removed in September, however, after animal rights group Humane Society International challenged the policy in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

The Federal Court in September upheld the AAT's April decision, despite a challenge from the state government.

In 2015, former Queensland fisheries minister Bill Byrne, then the Labor member for Rockhampton, told Parliament there had only been one death at a shark control beach in the 53 years since drumlines had been introduced.

'For decades, Queensland's Shark Control Program has made it safe to swim in our surf,' he said.

'Since the program began in 1962, there has been only one shark fatality at a shark control beach in Queensland.'

Put another way, sharks have killed as many swimmers near Queensland beaches during the past year as the previous 56.

SOURCE  





Life Was Better in the 1950s and '60s

Malcolm Smith

Life is good. I was born in 1949, and my parents had to scrimp and slave to make ends meet. Now I am an affluent retiree. I've seen the world, and the world is at my fingertips by virtue of the machine with which you are reading this. When I get sick, as I eventually will, there will be medical treatment available which was undreamed of when I was young. Nevertheless, I shall go out on a limb and state that life was better in the 1950s and '60s - not materially, but in the things which really matter. Compared to today, it was particularly good for those growing up. I quail at the thought of the challenges the grandchildren will have to face.

     Now, of course, old farts are always proclaiming the superiority of life when they were young and vigorous. It automatically invites the response: "You wouldn't really want to go back to time when [name your favourite bad example]?" Of course not! There is no such thing as a golden age. To just to even the score, I shall mention a few aspects of that time I do not miss.

    Firstly, prior to Vatican II, there was a lot of prejudice and bad relations between Catholics and Protestants. However, it never came to any sort of significant discrimination or other social evils. And it was not as bad as the present day war of the ungodly against the religious.

    Secondly, there was constant industrial action ie strikes. Far from me to say that unions are useless, but it definitely the case that membership has collapsed over the past decades, and workers have still become more prosperous. Strikes were most common in unions under control of the Communist parties, which also managed to infiltrate the whole political scene. It was not terrorism, but subversion and treason which we had to face.

     Thirdly, there was the pernicious habit of smoking, which robbed my father of at least 20 years of his life, and my brother and brother-in-law of at least 30. Today 16½ % of adult men - one in six - smoke, with a slightly smaller percentage for women, but in 1945 it was 72%.

     So what was life like materially when I was growing up? For a start, we could go to the measuring worth website and compare the value of money in 1966, the year decimal currency was introduced, with that in 2016. You will immediately note that there has been rampart inflation; based on the CPI, a dollar in 1966 would buy what $12.63 did 50 years later. More to the point, however, the "income value" was twice that of the "real price". What that means is that an hour's labour, or a day's labour, allows you to buy twice as much as it did 50 years ago. In 50 years, we've all become twice as rich.

     Sewage did not come to my suburb until the early 1960s. Prior to that, we had to use an outhouse in the backyard, which a council worker would empty once a week. (What a stinking job!) Television (black and white, of course) did not arrive here in Brisbane until 1959, at which time we all gathered outside the electric goods store to watch the simplistic programs on display. Prior to that, we used to sit around, sometimes in the dark, listening to serials, comedies, and dramas on the radio. And, of course, there was "Saturday Night at the Movies". Three cinemas graced the suburb closest to mine. We got there by public transport, of course, because cars were a middle class luxury, as were telephones. (My family didn't have either.) The lack of cars resulted in another phenomenon: a proliferation of corner stores. You could get your household needs at three such stores within walking distance of my home.

     I know this is all going to sound like the dark ages to a generation brought up on computers, the internet, mobile phones, CDs, and DVDs, but don't you imagine it! Our parents had it tough: first the depression, and then the war. But we grew up in the flush of post war prosperity. Let me give you a few pointers.

It was possible to raise a family on a single income. At the bottom of economic ladder where my family belonged, the wife and mother often had to seek part time or casual employment, but single incomes were regarded as the norm.

Despite that, they could afford children. They don't call us baby boomers for nothing. Today, despite everyone being twice as rich, our fertility is well below replacement rate. What has gone wrong?

In 1950 it required 301 weeks' of average income to purchase a median-priced house in a capital city. This was reduced to 200 weeks in 1955, and stayed that way for a couple of decades. Now it is 455.

We had full employment. Governments were in danger of losing office if unemployment went as high as 2 per cent. There were cases of workers leaving a job in the morning and picking up a new one in the afternoon.

As far a education went, anyone who was at all bright could automatically get a scholarship to university. That was how I, the son of an invalid pensioner, took my first degree. The second I financed by not too arduous part time work. I still don't understand why, these days, a degree should cost you a year's income.

And finally, we didn't lock our doors at night. Crime might have been reduced in recent decades, but it nowhere near as low as what my generation was accustomed to.

     So, materially, life in the 1950s and 1960s was not too bad. But socially it was much better. Every index of social disintegration is worse now than it used to be.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





1 November, 2019

Assisted dying outrages religions

Remarkable unanimity

Islamic and Jewish leaders have joined the churches in slamming any rollout of voluntary euthanasia in Queensland, the latest state t0 weigh the right to die. In a joint statement, 16 religious leaders headed by president of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference and archbishop of Brisbane Mark Coleridge, former primate of Australia and Anglican archbishop of Brisbane Phillip Aspinall, president of the Islamic Council of Queensland Habib Jamal and Rabbi Levi Jaffe of the Brisbane Hebrew Congregation warned that voluntary assisted dying was "not dying well".

"We believe that the Queensland government should main-tain the current laws and improve palliative care for a flourishing Queensland based on human freedom, human dignity and the common good," the statement said.

A modified version of the voluntary assisted dying (VAD) law that came into effect in Victoria in June passed the lower house of West Australian parliament last month, but faces a sterner test in the Legislative Council, possibly by the end of the year.

Queensland is at an earlier stage of assessing VAD but its unicameral state parliament means the process will be smoother if an all-party committee endorses the need for legislation and the state Labor government grasps the nettle.

This happened with abortion law reform in 2017, to the dismay of
the churches. Their effort to block euthanasia shows signs of being more concerted and co-ordinated. The joint statement argued that VAD offered a misleading choice: "You can choose to die horribly or you can take your own life."

But Everald Compton, of the Dying with Dignity organisation and an elder of the Uniting and Presbyterian churches, rejected the religious leaders' position. "I fundamentally disagree with the unreasonable position taken by my church and all the other churches -- which is based on creating fear and misrepresentating what voluntary assisted dying is all about," he said

The religious leaders said the provision of high-quality palliative care was paramount, so that death did not need to be terrible or feared. "High-quality palliative care is not merely a third option; it is best practice," they argued. "Queenslanders do not yet have universal access such as specialist palliative care that addresses the physical, psycho-social and spiritual needs of people."

The statement said VAD would undermine efforts to curb suicide in a state with the nation's second highest rate of self-inflicted death.

Other signatories were: moderator of the Uniting Church Queensland Synod Reverend David Baker, Reverend Peter Barson of. the Presbyterian Church, Conference president of the Churches of Christ Geoff Charles, moderator of the Queensland Congregational Fellowship Dr Joe Goodall, state chairman of the International Network of Churches Pastor Gary Hourigan, Elder Carl Maurer of The Church of Jesus Christ and Latter-day Saints, Pastor Carl Mutzelburg of Acts 2 Alliance, acting general superintendent of Queensland Baptists Reverend Stewart Pieper, Reverend Rex Rigby of the Wesleyan Methodist Church South Queensland, Bishop Paul Smith of the Lutheran Church, district and state ministries director of Christian Churches Queensland-NT Pastor Gary Swenson.

From "The Australian" of 28/10/2019





Pressure rising for drivers of electric cars to pay their way

Electric vehide drivers should be charged road-user costs, with 76 per cent of Australians calling on green-car owners to contribute to transport infrastructure, and almost one-in-two declaring it unfair they avoid paying fuel excise.

New polling obtained by The Australian reveals pushback against electric vehicle owners, with Australian motorists warning "there shouldn't be one rule for them and another for us". The sample of 1500 Australians, conducted by pollster Toby Ralph for the Australian Automobile Association, shows an "overwhelming sentiment that all road users should pay to fund the roads, not just those using petrol or diesel".

The research, based on 1400 quantitative and 100 qualitative interviews across the nation in July, also revealed concerns about Australia holding 50 days of fuel stocks, with 55 per cent saying it was insufficient and 31 per cent unsure.

AAA managing director Michael Bradley said the data spoke to the fact that "Australian motorists are incredibly price sensitive and very focused on high transport costs". "People understand motoring taxes build and maintain the roads and rail networks we all need, and Australians clearly want that burden shared equally," Mr Bradley said.

"Low emissions vehicle technologies are evolving rapidly and while no one wants the adoption of cleaner, safer cars stifled, Australia's tax system needs to be updated if it is to be ready for the changes coming.

"The task in front of government is to fix a structural flaw in the federal budget by creating a national road access charge for low emission vehicles, which brings this growing fleet into the tax system without disincentivising uptake."

According to Infrastructure Australia, electric vehicles are projected to account for 70 per cent of new vehicle sales and 30 per cent of the vehicle fleet by 2040. In February, the Electric Vehicle Council welcomed IA's identification of the need to construct a national electric vehicle fast-charging network as a "high priority initiative for Australia".

According to interviews conducted for the AAA-commissioned research, respondents raised concerns over electric vehicle owners not paying the fuel excise of 41.6c for every litre of petrol. "It's their choice to get (an electric car) but they should pay too," a respondent said.

Others said "when you think about it, it's like tax avoidance", "why should I subsidise them" and "it's only fair they pay something".

Debate over electric vehicles peaked ahead of the federal election after Bill Shorten flagged an electric vehicle target of 50 per cent of new car sales by 2030.

Both major parties have baulked at funding a major rollout of recharging infrastructure across the nation and supporting generous subsidies for electric vehicles, which have been adopted by some overseas governments.

The AAA research showed while a majority of Australians knew about the fuel excise, they were unaware of how much it was worth, and only older motorists knew it was used to pay for roads. Excise rates on fuel and petroleum products are indexed twice a year in line with the consumer price index.

On paying to increase fuel stocks to 90 days, 59 per cent of those surveyed said nothing and 21 per cent flagged they would likely pay less than 2c. Asked if they were aware Europe's petrol is "cleaner" than Australia's fuel, 72 per cent said they weren't and only 41 per cent of respondents were likely to pay more for cleaner fuel that would "reduce emissions and improve community health".

From "The Australian" of 28/10/2019


‘Unconscionable conduct’: private college fined $4.2m

A private education college that deliberately targeted disadvantaged and illiterate prospective students by offering them free laptops has been fined $4.2 million by the Federal Court.

Unique International College, which operated out of a single room in Granville in Sydney’s west, sold online diploma courses worth up to $25,000 often targeting vulnerable communities in former Aboriginal missions in regional NSW.

In six separate cases, Unique International College was found to have failed to inform students of the cost of the course they were signing up to, did not tell them they would incur a debt and did not give them copies of the contract they signed.

One judgment, relating to a 19-year-old with learning conditions who was signed up by Unique in Wagga Wagga, stated it was “exploitation of an obviously very vulnerable person for financial gain”.

“(Unique’s conduct) involved the exploitation of an uneducated indigenous person with no understanding of what he was agreeing to in return for a laptop which was worth substantially less than the debt which was being incurred,” Justice Nye Perram found in his Federal Court judgment on Thursday.

“It is difficult to imagine unconscionable conduct which could be worse.”

Each of the six people were left with a VET FEE-HELP debt of $26,400, according to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.

“These students enrolled by Unique were unlikely to be able to complete the courses, but would have been left with significant lifetime student debt,” ACCC Chair Rod Sims said.

“Some of these consumers enrolled in courses by Unique had poor literacy skills, and others could not use computer or did not have an internet connection.

“The ACCC will always prioritise taking action against businesses which engage in egregious conduct impacting vulnerable and disadvantaged consumers,” Mr Sims said.

Using the new VET FEE-HELP student redress measures, the government in the process of cancelling the debts of eligible consumers enrolled by Unique.

In 2017 the Federal Court found the college made false or misleading representations and engaged in behaviour amounting to unconscionable conduct, following evidence that more than 3100 students never completed a single unit of any of the college’s management or marketing courses, costing taxpayers more than $47 million in student loans.

During the trial the court heard evidence that the owner of the college, Amarjit Singh, transferred $22 million from his business account to his family’s account on one day in 2015, in addition to transferring a $5.7 million Kenthurst property owned by the college to another family member in the same year.

But in 2018 the company successfully appealed, with the Federal Court finding there was insufficient evidence that its conduct amounted to a system of unconscionable conduct beyond the six consumers still currently involved in the matter.

Justice Perram found Unique acted deliberately in remote communities on a number of occasions, including Walgett in October 2014, Wagga Wagga in March 2015 and Bourke in June 2015 but “was ignorant” to the fact it was contravening consumer law.

“One of Unique’s employee witnesses stated in cross-examination that he had not in fact heard of (Australian Consumer Law),” Justice Perram wrote.

The college has been found to have acted unconscionably in connection with goods or services, made false or misleading representations, failed to inform of a termination period, did not give a required document to a consumer and contravened requirements for all unsolicited consumer agreements.

It has previously had its registration cancelled and is no longer operating. The college operators have 28 days to pay the fine.

SOURCE  




How water rats are killing toxic cane toads in massive numbers by ripping out their HEARTS with 'surgical-like' precision to avoid being poisoned

Scientists have discovered water rats are learning to kill cane toads without dying from their toxins.

Cane toads have been devastating Australia's ecosystems since they came Down Under from Central America in the 1930s.

But now, water rats are killing the animals by eating certain parts of them that are free from their toxins.

Reproductive biologist Dr Marissa Parrott was working in Western Australia's Kimberly region when she saw the dire effects cane toads had on local wildlife.

Even large crocodiles are found dead with small cane toads inside their stomachs.   

Dr Parrott said that while working near a creek in WA's Emma Gorge, she saw more proof of water rats killing off cane toads.

'I found a number of very large dead cane toads, and all of them were lying on their backs with almost surgical type incisions down their chest. Every day I went there, there were up to five new bodies,' she told VICE.

'We found that in all the cane toads, the heart and liver had expertly been removed, and the gallbladder, which contains toxic bile salts, had been removed and placed outside the body.'

Dr Parrott set up infrared cameras and discovered that local water rats were behind the deaths.

She said that within just two years of cane toads moving into the region, water rats had figured out how to disable, kill and eat the toads, despite them having killed a number of predators.

Despite not being able to get a close-up of the killing, Dr Parrott believes the rats most likely sliced opened the toad's chests with their teeth - which is less poisonous than their backs.

She said the rats would then use their paws to take out the toads' organs. 

'They didn't eat as many medium-sized toads, but when they did, it was fascinating to note that as well as the heart and liver they had also eaten one or both of the thigh muscles after stripping away the toxic skin,' she said.

'We're not sure if they just wanted a bigger payoff for their efforts in overpowering the toad, or if it was easier to subdue the toads by holding down the legs first. Interestingly, they never attacked the leg muscles on the larger toads.'

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here




Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.





Most academics are lockstep Leftists so readers do sometimes doubt that I have the qualifications mentioned above. Photocopies of my academic and military certificates are however all viewable here


For overseas readers: The "ALP" is the Australian Labor Party -- Australia's major Leftist party. The "Liberal" party is Australia's major conservative political party.


In most Australian States there are two conservative political parties, the city-based Liberal party and the rural-based National party. But in Queensland those two parties are amalgamated as the LNP.


Again for overseas readers: Like the USA, Germany and India, Australia has State governments as well as the Federal government. So it may be useful to know the usual abbreviations for the Australian States: QLD (Queensland), NSW (New South Wales), WA (Western Australia), VIC (Victoria), TAS (Tasmania), SA (South Australia).


For American readers: A "pensioner" is a retired person living on Social Security


"Digger" is an honorific term for an Australian soldier


Another lesson in Australian: When an Australian calls someone a "big-noter", he is saying that the person is a chronic and rather pathetic seeker of admiration -- as in someone who often pulls out "big notes" (e.g. $100.00 bills) to pay for things, thus endeavouring to create the impression that he is rich. The term describes the mentality rather than the actual behavior with money and it aptly describes many Leftists. When they purport to show "compassion" by advocating things that cost themselves nothing (e.g. advocating more taxes on "the rich" to help "the poor"), an Australian might say that the Leftist is "big-noting himself". There is an example of the usage here. The term conveys contempt. There is a wise description of Australians generally here


Another bit of Australian: Any bad writing or messy anything was once often described as being "like a pakapoo ticket". In origin this phrase refers to a ticket written with Chinese characters - and thus inscrutably confusing to Western eyes. These tickets were part of a Chinese gambling game called "pakapoo".


Two of my ancestors were convicts so my family has been in Australia for a long time. As well as that, all four of my grandparents were born in the State where I was born and still live: Queensland. And I am even a member of the world's second-most condemned minority: WASPs (the most condemned is of course the Jews -- which may be why I tend to like Jews). So I think I am as Australian as you can get. I certainly feel that way. I like all things that are iconically Australian: meat pies, Vegemite, Henry Lawson etc. I particularly pride myself on my familiarity with the great Australian slanguage. I draw the line at Iced Vo-Vos and betting on the neddies, however. So if I cannot comment insightfully on Australian affairs, who could?



My son Joe


On all my blogs, I express my view of what is important primarily by the readings that I select for posting. I do however on occasions add personal comments in italicized form at the beginning of an article.


I am rather pleased to report that I am a lifelong conservative. Out of intellectual curiosity, I did in my youth join organizations from right across the political spectrum so I am certainly not closed-minded and am very familiar with the full spectrum of political thinking. Nonetheless, I did not have to undergo the lurch from Left to Right that so many people undergo. At age 13 I used my pocket-money to subscribe to the "Reader's Digest" -- the main conservative organ available in small town Australia of the 1950s. I have learnt much since but am pleased and amused to note that history has since confirmed most of what I thought at that early age.

I imagine that the the RD is still sending mailouts to my 1950s address!


I am an army man. Although my service in the Australian army was chiefly noted for its un-notability, I DID join voluntarily in the Vietnam era, I DID reach the rank of Sergeant, and I DID volunteer for a posting in Vietnam. So I think I may be forgiven for saying something that most army men think but which most don't say because they think it is too obvious: The profession of arms is the noblest profession of all because it is the only profession where you offer to lay down your life in performing your duties. Our men fought so that people could say and think what they like but I myself always treat military men with great respect -- respect which in my view is simply their due.


The kneejerk response of the Green/Left to people who challenge them is to say that the challenger is in the pay of "Big Oil", "Big Business", "Big Pharma", "Exxon-Mobil", "The Pioneer Fund" or some other entity that they see, in their childish way, as a boogeyman. So I think it might be useful for me to point out that I have NEVER received one cent from anybody by way of support for what I write. As a retired person, I live entirely on my own investments. I do not work for anybody and I am not beholden to anybody. And I have NO investments in oil companies or mining companies


Although I have been an atheist for all my adult life, I have no hesitation in saying that the single book which has influenced me most is the New Testament. And my Scripture blog will show that I know whereof I speak.


The Rt. Rev. Phil Case (Moderator of the Presbyterian church in Queensland) is a Pharisee, a hypocrite, an abomination and a "whited sepulchre".


English-born Australian novellist, Patrick White was a great favourite in literary circles. He even won a Nobel prize. But I and many others I have spoken to find his novels very turgid and boring. Despite my interest in history, I could only get through about a third of his historical novel Voss before I gave up. So why has he been so popular in literary circles? Easy. He was a miserable old Leftist coot, and, incidentally, a homosexual. And literary people are mostly Leftists with similar levels of anger and alienation from mainstream society. They enjoy his jaundiced outlook, his dissatisfaction, rage and anger.


A delightful story about a great Australian conservative


Would you believe that there once was a politician whose nickname was "Honest"?

"Honest" Frank Nicklin M.M. was a war hero, a banana farmer and later the conservative Premier of my home State of Queensland in the '60s. He was even popular with the bureaucracy and gave the State a remarkably tranquil 10 years during his time in office. Sad that there are so few like him.


A great Australian wit exemplified



An Australian Mona Lisa (Nikki Gogan)


Bureaucracy: "One of the constant laments of doctors and nurses working with NSW Health is the incredible and increasing bureaucracy," she said. "It is completely obstructive to providing a service."


Revered Labour Party leader Gough Whitlam was a very erudite man so he cannot have been unaware of the similarities of his famous phrase “the Party, the platform, the people” with an earlier slogan: "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuehrer". It's basically the same slogan in reverse order.


Australia's original inhabitants were a race of pygmies, some of whom survived into modern times in the mountainous regions of the Atherton tableland in far North Queensland. See also here. Below is a picture of one of them taken in 2007, when she was 105 years old and 3'7" tall




Julia Gillard, a failed feminist flop. She was given the job of Prime Minister of Australia but her feminist preaching was so unpopular that she was booted out of the job by her own Leftist party. Her signature "achievements" were the carbon tax and the mining tax, both of which were repealed by the next government.


The "White Australia Policy: "The Immigration Restriction Act was not about white supremacy, racism, or the belief that whites were higher up the evolutionary tree than the coloured races. Rather, it was designed to STOP the racist exploitation of non-whites (all of whom would have been illiterate peasants practicing religions and cultures anathema to progressive democracy) being conscripted into a life of semi-slavery in a coolie-worked plantation economy for the benefit of the absolute monarchs, hereditary aristocracy and the super-wealthy companies and share-holders of the northern hemisphere.


A great little kid



In November 2007, a four-year-old boy was found playing in a croc-infested Territory creek after sneaking off pig hunting alone with four dogs and a puppy. The toddler was found five-and-a-half hours after he set off from his parents' house playing in a creek with the puppy. Amazingly, Daniel Woditj also swam two creeks known to be inhabited by crocs during his adventurous romp. Mr Knight said that after walking for several kilometres, Daniel came to a creek and swam across it. Four of his dogs "bailed up" at the creek but the youngster continued on undaunted with his puppy to a second creek. Mr Knight said Daniel swam the second croc-infested creek and walked on for several more kilometres. "Captain is a hard bushman and Daniel is following in his footsteps. They breed them tough out bush."


A great Australian: His eminence George Pell. Pictured in devout company before his elevation to Rome





MY OTHER SITES

Alternative (Monthly) archives for this blog



DETAILS OF REGULARLY UPDATED BLOGS BY JOHN RAY:

"Tongue Tied"
"Dissecting Leftism"
"Australian Politics"
"Education Watch International"
"Political Correctness Watch"
"Greenie Watch"
Western Heart


BLOGS OCCASIONALLY UPDATED:

"Marx & Engels in their own words"
"A scripture blog"
"Recipes"
"Some memoirs"
To be continued ....
Coral Reef Compendium
IQ Compendium
Queensland Police
Australian Police News
Paralipomena (3)
Of Interest
Dagmar Schellenberger
My alternative Wikipedia


BLOGS NO LONGER BEING UPDATED

"Food & Health Skeptic"
"Eye on Britain"
"Immigration Watch International".
"Leftists as Elitists"
Socialized Medicine
OF INTEREST (2)
QANTAS -- A dying octopus
BRIAN LEITER (Ladderman)
Obama Watch
Obama Watch (2)
Dissecting Leftism -- Large font site
Michael Darby
Paralipomena (2)
AGL -- A bumbling monster
Telstra/Bigpond follies
Optus bungling
Bank of Queensland blues


There are also two blogspot blogs which record what I think are my main recent articles here and here. Similar content can be more conveniently accessed via my subject-indexed list of short articles here or here (I rarely write long articles these days)


Alt archives
Longer Academic Papers
Johnray links
Academic home page
Academic Backup Page
General Backup
General Backup 2



Selected reading

MONOGRAPH ON LEFTISM

CONSERVATISM AS HERESY

Rightism defined
Leftist Churches
Leftist Racism
Fascism is Leftist
Hitler a socialist
What are Leftists
Psychology of Left
Status Quo?
Leftism is authoritarian
James on Leftism
Irbe on Leftism
Beltt on Leftism

Critiques
Lakoff
Van Hiel
Sidanius
Kruglanski
Pyszczynski et al.





Main academic menu
Menu of recent writings
basic home page
Pictorial Home Page
Selected pictures from blogs (Backup here)
Another picture page (Rarely updated)



Note: If the link to one of my articles is not working, the article concerned can generally be viewed by prefixing to the filename the following:
http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/42197/20151027-0014/jonjayray.com/

OR: (After 2015)
https://web.archive.org/web/20160322114550/http://jonjayray.com/