Leftist class hatred in academe

One of the reasons why people become middle class is because they watch their pennies. Note that policy recommendations made below by Left-leaning academics are made WITHOUT research to back them. It could be that the baby bonus is most effective in influencing the decisions of middle class parents. Nobody knows and nobody seems to be interested in finding out. Typical Leftist arrogance. They just KNOW

The baby bonus has been branded an "unbelievably expensive" way to boost the birth rate that should be comprehensively overhauled in conjunction with the raft of payments to families. As pressure mounts on the Rudd Government to find billions of dollars in savings in the May budget, economists have called for a review of the current "mishmash" of family payments - two different Family Tax Benefits, two types of childcare payment and the Baby Bonus - to ensure the $17 billion a year serves a more coherent policy purpose.

Griffith University's Ross Guest, supported by influential economists Bob Gregory and Chris Richardson, said failing to means-test some family payments was creating too much middle-class welfare. The programs also led to inefficient and costly churning between tax receipts and welfare payments. Parents having a baby today receive a one-off $4187 payment regardless of household income, increasing to $5000 after July 1. The Child Care Tax Rebate was increased by Labor from 30 to 50 per cent of parents' out-of-pocket expenses to a new cap of $7500 per child, again regardless of income. And, if a mother is not working, she can claim more than $3000 a year under Family Tax Benefit Part B, whatever her partner earns.

Many mothers who do not necessarily need the baby bonus would not pass up the opportunity to take it, reasoning that every bit of financial help from the Government is welcome. But those in more comfortable income brackets argue the extra money does not affect their decision to have children, with some considering the bonus a defacto maternity leave payment from the Government. "I can see, most definitely, there are groups of people who would have children for the bonus, but in our situation it didn't really make much difference to us," Sydney's Carla Steege, who collected $4000 with the arrival of her daughter Annabell 10 months ago, said.

Ann Pearson, a 37-year-old strategist with AMP, gave birth to her first son seven weeks ago and recently claimed the baby bonus. A single mother living in the inner-Sydney suburb of Redfern, Ms Pearson said she hoped the baby bonus would not become means-tested because "if it was, I probably wouldn't have gotten it". The payment will allow Ms Pearson to spend more time with her new son before returning to her job: "When I got it, I put it straight on to my mortgage. It means, with the mortgage being that bit lower, I can have a more time to spend with Aidan at home before I go back to work," she said.

Professor Guest said a strong case existed for Labor to use the budget to rationalise these disparate family welfare policies, "bundling them together as one family support payment". "The baby bonus is just not an effective expenditure. We pay for every birth and most parents would have a first child anyway, irrespective of the bonus," he told The Australian.

Former treasurer Peter Costello introduced the baby bonus in 2004, citing it as a measure to improve the nation's fertility rate. He urged Australian couples to have "one for the husband, one for the wife and one for the country". Last financial year, it cost the government $1.16 billion, a figure that will climb as it increases to $5000. With more women having their first babies in their 30s, and richer women having more children, the baby bonus is increasingly ending up in the hands of wealthier families.

Despite Treasury's concerns, Wayne Swan this week ruled out any change to the baby bonus and said Australia's middle class did not receive too much welfare. But economist Professor Gregory said the baby bonus remained an inefficient means of improving fertility and the Government should consider treating all family welfare measures as "a whole". "If it was put in place to get more children, then it's unbelievably expensive. Every new mother gets it, but you might only get a few extra babies that wouldn't have been born regardless," said Professor Gregory, from the Australian National University Research School of Social Sciences.

Source

Baby bonus safe, Rudd says

The baby bonus is safe, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd says. Economists have called for a review of family payments, calling the baby bonus an "unbelievably expensive" way to boost the birthrate. Parents having a baby between now and June 30 will receive a $4,187 payment, no matter how much they earn. From July, the payment will rise to $5,000.

But Mr Rudd said the Government had no plans to change the bonus. "The baby bonus is absolutely safe," he told Fairfax radio today. "We committed ourselves to its retention before the election and we will stick with it. "You've got to look at the data, and I think it has had an impact in terms of nudging up slightly the birth rate in the country. "Some may dispute that, but I think it's effective and most mums and dads that I've run into certainly welcome that cheque arriving."

Source

Amazing that it's the politician and not the academics who says that "You've got to look at the data". It's a credit to Rudd and a great discredit to the academics






Life in black communities very dangerous for whites

Nurses need shelters from attack in black communities but the Leftist State government doesn't want to know about it

An internal Queensland Health report on nurses' security in remote locations in the Torres Strait has recommended that secure "bomb shelters" be provided for staff where they could hide when under attack. The report, which was provided to Queensland Health 16 months ago but tabled in parliament by Health Minister Stephen Robertson only on Wednesday, described the risk level posed to most employees working in the Torres Strait as "very high" or "extreme". As revealed this week by The Australian, the report has not been acted on since it was compiled in October 2006.

Mr Robertson tabled the report after The Australian revealed the case of a nurse who worked alone on Mabuiag Island in the Torres Strait. Last month, the 27-year-old woman was attacked while she slept and raped by an intruder.

The full report details how "strongrooms" needed to be established in each isolated facility. "A strongroom is a selected area within a building that has two exits, but all walls and doors are built to a standard that can keep a staff member safe until help (exit strategy) arrives," the report states. "This room should be self-contained and hold emergency bottled water and pre-packed food. It should have several lines of communication ... be able to withstand physical aggression and be fire resistant." The report says that if these initiatives were put in place, staff could also keep patients safe if under threat of violence.

On Wednesday, Mr Robertson said that a bureaucrat in Queensland Health had not passed on the report, but yesterday he asked the Crime and Misconduct Commission to investigate after a former district manager in the Torres Strait said he never received the risk assessment report. Mr Robertson had earlier accused the officer, who has since retired, of being responsible for the inaction on the report which saw it "lie on a desk for 16months".

The Queensland branch of the Australian Medical Association weighed into the controversy yesterday, saying there were clearly unacceptable inadequacies in the safety of health staff working in the Torres Strait. AMA president Dr Chris Davis said his organisation was concerned that Queensland Health appeared to have been made aware of the issues but had decided not to take action. "Queensland Health has a duty of care to provide a safe workplace for its employees," Dr Davis said. "The Queensland Government is very quick to ensure that employers discharge their obligations under the Act but as an employer themselves have not done this."

Nurses in remote communities have issued an ultimatum to the Government, demanding their facilities be brought up to safe and secure standards by March 28 or they will refuse to staff the island community health centres. The Queensland Nurses Union has also said there will be no more single-nurse assignments in island communities, and that at least two must be appointed at all times. If that is not done, they will provide only fly-in/fly-out day clinics.

Source





Police goons walk free

This is a tremendous disgrace. For betraying their position of trust they should have been locked up for years

Confronting secret footage of an armed robbery suspect being bashed by three Victorian detectives has been publicly released for the first time. The three policeman whose bashing of an armed robbery suspect was caught on secret video have walked free. A magistrate yesterday cleared the release of the video that killed the trio's police careers.The damning footage shows the suspect being kicked, slapped, tackled and hit with a telephone at the St Kilda Rd police complex.

The three former armed offenders squad officers were charged after the screening of the video footage at a police corruption watchdog hearing in September, 2006. It is the first time the graphic and damning video has been released to the media. The video, credited with leading to the disbanding of the armed offenders squad, was first aired at a controversial Office of Police Integrity hearing in September, 2006.

Yesterday, former Sen-Det Robert Lachlan Dabb, 36, former Sen-Det Mark Harrison Butterfield, 38, and former Det Sgt Matthew Adrian Franc, 38, left court free men, but with their careers over. Magistrate Peter Lauritsen sentenced Dabb and Butterfield to 10-week intensive corrections orders and Franc to a five-week Intensive Corrections Order. An ICO is a jail sentence served in the community [????] that combines community work, education and treatment.

The men pleaded guilty to the unlawful assault on May 10, 2006, of a suspect arrested over two armed robberies. Unlawful assault carries a maximum three-month jail term. The trio, who were given glowing character references in court, still face charges of misleading the OPI director.

The black and white video is filmed from a camera hidden in the ceiling of an interview room at the armed offenders squad offices in St Kilda Rd. It was placed following a letter of complaint to the OPI about the activities of members of the now-disbanded armed offenders squad. The suspect is slapped, kicked, flung across the room and hit with a telephone and tissue box in five separate attacks over four hours. He repeatedly cries in pain.

At one stage Butterfield tackles the man to the ground and tells him: "Welcome to the armed robbery squad." At another point he is told: "Start showing us some respect here. F------ (slap) armed (slap) robbery (slap) squad." In the final assault, Dabb strikes the man with a phone after he complains that he has yet to be given a phone call: "Want a phone call? "Here it is, here's ya f------ phone call . . . "Don't learn about attitude, do ya? Want to make another one?"

In dramatic scenes, Dabb collapsed in the witness box at the OPI hearing when he first viewed the video clips. The three men initially denied it was them in the video. All three have since resigned from Victoria Police.

On Wednesday, a former colleague of Franc gave evidence that he regretted that his offence had affected more than 30 detectives in the disbanding of the armed offenders squad. The court heard the assaults were aimed at getting a gun used in the armed robberies off the streets.

Source






Howard says that conservatism still sets the agenda

By Janet Albrechtsen

SITTING in a cafe in Washington on a sunny spring afternoon last Wednesday before a gala tribute dinner, former prime minister John Howard is, to coin a phrase, relaxed and comfortable. Speaking to The Australian in his first interview since losing the 2007 election, Howard is characteristically philosophical about his critics, his election loss, the state of conservatism and the future of the Liberal Party. For Howard, it is history that counts. And he is confident that history is on his side. Just as it will be on the side of conservatism.

The American Enterprise Institute, one of the most influential policy institutes in the US, has an eye on history, too. Which explains why one has to travel to Washington to see Howard get the dues he deserves, receiving the AEI's renowned annual award. It is given to an individual who has, in the words of the AEI, "made extraordinary intellectual or practical contributions to improved government policy or social welfare". Previously known as the Francis Boyer Award, recipients have straddled all fields of excellence and have included former US president Ronald Reagan, US Supreme Court justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia, Islam scholar Bernard Lewis, Henry Kissinger, Jeane Kirkpatrick and Alan Greenspan.

Just before the dinner, AEI scholar Danielle Pletka told The Australian that the recurring question some Australian media outlets asked her was: "But why Howard?" Howard's critics still don't get it. In the sweep of history, conservatism has triumphed. Back home, the Howard haters, who continue to gloat at his loss, will never accept that.

Just as they will never acknowledge that Howard deserves credit for his role as one of Australia's most successful prime ministers. The former prime minister understands that. "Well," he says smiling, "there have been people in the media who have been critical of everything I have done for 15 or 20 years because they are culturally and viscerally opposed to what I stand for."

He is equally unfazed by members of the Liberal Party who are quickly trying to dump Howard as part of the past. As the Four Corners program a few weeks ago demonstrated, the Liberal Party is no mood to celebrate its former four-time election-winning PM.

To be sure, Howard bears much of the blame for the final stain that tarnishes his record. After all, a leader is inevitably defined by their last act in office. Howard's failure to heed the advice of his senior Liberal colleagues to hand over the leadership to Peter Costello last September will always be remembered as a final act of hubris. Deciding to stay on, preferring to be remembered by history as a fighter, not a quitter, knowing that electoral defeat was ahead, his leadership record would be indelibly marked down.

Asked whether he accepts the lingering hostility some Liberals feel towards him, Howard says, "Leave me out of that," telling The Australian only that, "whenever a party loses, people want to move away from the past. Those things tend to find their balance. If you've got red meat achievements to point to, that will sort itself out over time."

Those achievements place Howard "right at the AEI sweet spot" says Christopher DeMuth, the president of the AEI. DeMuth points to Howard's economic policies that balanced the budget, continued the deregulatory policies of the Hawke/Keating governments, reorganised Australia's welfare system, privatised Telstra, reformed labour laws and cut taxes. And the Howard government's unerring support for the Iraq war, which has strengthened the US alliance, drew rounds of applause from the high-powered group of more than 1000 people who attended the black-tie dinner in Washington to pay tribute to Howard.

Out of office federally and in every state and territory, conservatives in Australia are not having an easy time. But again Howard looks to the historical record. "The conservative side of politics has had some striking gains in the last quarter-century. And they are permanent," he says, pointing to the implosion of the Soviet Union and the renewed sense that Western civilisation should feel proud of what it has achieved, replacing the left-liberal addiction to self-flagellation.

Since the election of the Rudd Government, the familiar refrain is that conservatism is beat. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has said that the right-left labels no longer apply. Yet, Rudd eagerly embraced much of the conservative agenda. And as Howard reflects on his election loss, it's a case of imitation being the sincerest form of flattery. Says Howard: "The most constant comment made in the lead-up to the last election is that Rudd was trying to be a younger version of me. And there is some truth to that ... He did not win because he was different. He won because he was like me." If you are interested in following the flow of ideas, says Howard, that points to the prevailing power of conservatism.

The problem, of course, is that in the wake of Rudd's embrace of the centre-Right, the Liberal Party is politically stranded, trying to mark out its own agenda in order to win back voters. Howard is sanguine, pointing to his own experience where an Opposition can have a critical influence on policy. "One of the most constructive and satisfying periods I had in parliament was between 1990 and 1993 when I was industrial relations spokesman for the Opposition. I think I helped turn the debate around in quite a big way on industrial relations. Even (Paul) Keating ended up talking the language of enterprise bargaining even though the reality was far less than he claimed. But I sensed a very real shift in the debate over that time.

"You have to remember when we went into Opposition in 1983, the Liberal Party still believed in centralised wage fixing. There was, for practical purposes, very little difference between our position and that of the Labor Party. Then we had quite an internal debate in the '80s about whether we should embrace individual contracts and various other things that are (now) taken as a given. Once we sorted out our own position, which took some years, then we were able to bring the full force of that position into the debate against the Labor Party.

"What I think is important is for the Liberal Party, in Opposition, to be arguing policy positions that represent an authentic difference. Not difference for its own sake, but differences that have their own virtues. And you can do that." Not an easy task. But Howard is certain that the party he led for more than a decade has history on its side.

Source