Wednesday, February 19, 2014



ZEG

In his latest offering, conservative Australian cartoonist ZEG says that Greenie policies make the effects of natural disasters worse



Australia reviewing  renewable-energy mandates

Comment from the USA
   
It was out with the Labor Party and in with the Liberal Party in the Australian elections last September (translation: the government switched over from six years of progressive dominance to their version of conservatism).

Part of Prime Minister Tony Abbot’s campaign platform was cutting government spending and taking a more reality-based stance on the country’s green commitments (including a deeply unpopular carbon tax), and he immediately started to make good on both of those promises by getting rid of the country’s Climate Commission and freezing renewables funding (not to mention his new government’s suggestion as to where the United Nations could stick their latest attempt to rope developed countries into a mutual impoverishment pact “global climate treaty”).

Now, the government is moving forward on reevaluating the economic wisdom of their mandatory renewable energy target (RET), much to the chagrin of both Australian and global greens. Via Reuters:

The target to ensure Australia generates 20 percent of its electricity from renewable sources in 2020 has been a boon to the nation’s wind and solar producers, but has been blamed by the conservative Coalition government for increasing power prices.

“In particular, the review will consider the contribution of the RET in reducing emissions, its impact on electricity prices and energy markets, as well as its costs and benefits for the renewable energy sector, the manufacturing sector and Australian households,” Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane said in a statement. …

Macfarlane said the outcome of the review was not set, though Environment Minister Greg Hunt last month proposed to delay the implementation of the target by five years. …

Green groups in Australia saw the appointment of Dick Warburton, a former Reserve Bank board member who has expressed doubt that carbon emissions cause climate change, as a clear sign that the government’s intention is to weaken or remove the target.

Which is probably a pretty good idea. The greens doth protest that weakening the target will ease investment in renewables and result in the country using more coal for electricity generation — but funnily enough, Germany’s very similar mandated energy targets of the past few years have in fact directly resulted in the country turning to coal for power generation, and a colossal waste of taxpayer money and loss of business competitiveness besides.

SOURCE






Brisbane Private school sacks rowing head coach David Bellamy over slang

Seeing that the word in question was my nickname in the army, I can't see what the fuss is about.  It's basically a jocular term, not offensive -- JR

ONE of Queensland’s elite private schools has sacked its director of rowing in a ­bizarre sex-talk scandal.

David Bellamy, one of Australia’s most respected coaches, was dismissed by Brisbane Boys’ College after telling rowers not to twirl their “wangas”: slang for ­penises.

Bellamy also admitted using “theatrical body movements” and waving his finger in front of his trousers to mimic a penis as he spoke to 50 rowers and coaches on January 14.

Headmaster Graeme McDonald told staff of his dismissal in an email on February 11.

Angry parents have rushed to Bellamy’s support, saying the incident was blown out of proportion and his dismissal an injustice.

Bellamy declined to ­comment, but friends with intimate knowledge of the affair said he used the word humorously when giving the boys a serious warning not to repeat the sexual pranks that had marred a previous rowing camp.

There was laughter when Bellamy told the boys: “It doesn’t matter whether you believe every wife out there has had a wanga waved at them by their husband.

“It doesn’t matter what you believe is appropriate. It doesn’t even matter what I believe is appropriate. “What matters is that the headmaster of BBC does not consider this appropriate ­behaviour.’’

The Sunday Mail understands a mother who overheard the speech complained that Bellamy’s words and actions were inappropriate in a church school.

The college, run by the Presbyterian and Uniting churches, is understood to have received other ­complaints from parents whose sons had told them about the “wanga” word.

SOURCE





I am, you are, we are Australian

 by Andrew Bolt

I AM an indigenous Australian, like millions of other people here, black or white. Take note, Tony Abbott. Think again, you new dividers, before we are on the path to apartheid with your change to our Constitution.

I was born here, I live here and I call no other country home. I am therefore indigenous to this land and have as much right as anyone to it.

What's more, when I go before the courts I want to be judged as an individual. I do not want different rights according to my class, faith, ancestry, country of birth ... or "race".

Blog with Andrew Bolt

I'm sure most Australians feel the same. We are Australians together, equal under the law and equal in our right as citizens to be here. That's how we've been for generations. It's why we've welcomed lawful immigrants and damned racists.

But this Australia is now under severe threat. Most incredibly, that threat is now led by Prime Minister Abbott, a Liberal. Abbott says he wants a "national crusade" to change the Constitution to recognise Aborigines as the "first Australians".

"If we had known in 1901 what we know now, if our hearts had been as big then as now, we would have acknowledged indigenous people in the Constitution back then," he said this week.

This is nonsense. The writers of our Constitution no more lacked heart than do people today.

The difference is they were inspired by the creed that all citizens - those, at least, we admitted - are as one before the law.

True, they did not always live up to that ideal (although, contrary to popular myth, they granted Aborigines the vote in all states where they had the franchise).

But even if we don't always follow our moral compass, the answer never is to break it. Changing the Constitution to divide Australians between the "first" and the rest - on the basis of the "race" of our ancestors - is not just immoral and an insult to our individuality.

Worse, it is socially dangerous. This will not "reconcile" us but permanently divide. It would do no good to a single Aboriginal in bush camps, but would concede a critical point: that Australians in our most fundamental legal document are now to be divided by "race".

Abbott insists he will not endorse any change that will have that practical effect in the courts. He means to treat the Constitution in this matter as if it were just a history book, not the foundation of our law.

But once he concedes the principle he concedes everything.

He will not get the "reconciliation" he imagines, some shiny day when we all hug each other in happy tears.

He will instead license demands from people, particularly race industry professionals, who will in some cases be satisfied with nothing less than apartheid.

Consider the history of this disastrous "reconciliation" movement. First, we were told we simply needed to say sorry to be reconciled.

As Aboriginal activist Professor Mick Dodson claimed: "The apology has the potential to transform Australia and, once and for all, to put black and white relationships in this country on a proper footing."

Prime minister Kevin Rudd duly said sorry in 2008, but then another step was needed, after all - a law to recognise Aborigines as the First Australians.

As Ballarat elder "Uncle" Murray Harrison put it: "As far as I'm concerned this is what it's all about, just being recognised would put the icing on the cake, mate."

So last year Parliament passed an "act of recognition", but that wasn't enough, either. Now the Constitution itself must change, and already we're told even that won't do.

Abbott's chief adviser on Aboriginal issues, Warren Mundine, this week said we must then negotiate treaties with each of Australia's hundreds of tribal "nations" to "acknowledge Australia's right to exist".

Pardon? Argue with hundreds of Aboriginal "leaders" over whether our nation actually is entitled to exist? Have the incendiary debate Israel has with its Muslim enemies?

What next? Well, Aboriginal leader Sol Bellear, chairman of the Aboriginal Medical Service, Redfern, spelled it out on the ABC: a future in which "no Australian court has the right to sit in judgment of my people."

Indeed, we already have an "Aboriginal Provisional Government", led by Michael Mansell, with such a separatist agenda. So when exactly will we be "reconciled"? When our country is torn apart on ethnic lines, with more recently arrived groups demanding their own customary laws, too?

Stop now. Say no to racism. Say no to racial division. Say no to changing our Constitution.

SOURCE





The Green/Left kill another industry

Some 180 workers in western Sydney will lose their jobs when the last aluminium recycling plant in NSW closes.

"This is the next wave of blue collar job losses in western Sydney," said Australian Manufacturing Workers Union NSW Secretary Tim Ayres. "There have been jobs flowing out of the Toyota and Holden decisions and a series of closures over the last few months."

Mr Ayres said the firm is the only aluminium recycler in NSW, churning through 55,000 tonnes of scrap metal each year.  "What this means about NSW is it puts a question mark over whether we can recycle aluminium," Mr Ayres said.  "Recycling uses 5 per cent of the energy needed to produce aluminium. All of our scrap aluminium will have to be exported.  "From the recycling perspective, you'd have to be concerned about what this means."

Mr Ayres said the Abbott and O'Farrell governments had shown "hostile indifference" to the plight of manufacturing workers, which was creating a "jobs crisis in NSW and particularly in Western Sydney".

He said both governments had no plans to ensure Australia remained competitive in the manufacturing industry.  "They need to do something to make sure they are going to get into global race and compete," he said.

"Barry O'Farrell is refusing to get involved. The north west rail link is the biggest project around and there is no local jobs plan attached to it and no strategy to engage with industry to build a sense of common purpose."

The state government blamed the impact of the carbon tax on the manufacturing industry, but Mr Collison said its impact had been "minuscule".

NSW Treasurer and Industrial Relations Minister Mike Baird said the closure of any manufacturing facility and the accompanying loss of jobs is always a cause for concern.

"Through the carbon tax, federal Labor chose to remove one of Australia's key competitive advantages - cheap energy," he said.   "Manufacturing and manufacturing jobs in Australia rely on cheap energy, as we are a smaller market.

"With higher energy costs and increased manufacturing in neighbouring Asia, Australian manufacturers are clearly facing challenges in remaining open.

"It's time for federal Labor to support jobs and vote to repeal the carbon tax."

Mr Baird said the NSW government is supporting jobs by taking action to reduce electricity prices.

SOURCE


Tuesday, February 18, 2014


Australia in frontline of BDS campaign

Perhaps much of Jewish mentality throughout the ages has been to keep a low profile in the diaspora, but I believe that Jews need to fight back against the racist campaign of the BDS movement.

The BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) campaign against Israel today is fought on many fronts across the world. From Israel Apartheid Week at universities, to Danish Banks to academic boycotts and others. It’s even been fought in fizzy drink companies!

The organizers and supporters of this movement like to compare themselves to the campaign against apartheid in South Africa – in other words a good and moral battle against an evil system of injustice. They like to disguise their intentions by using terms such as ‘non-violence’ and ‘international law’.

However, there is nothing moral or just or good about this battle. It is an absolute front for modern day anti-Semitism. The examples are plenty, but here in Australia, a country of immense racial diversity, the BDS movement itself will find itself on the defense.

This Wednesday a lawsuit will resume at the Federal Court in Sydney against Jake Lynch of Sydney University, who is a prominent supporter of the BDS campaign against Israel. The lawsuit was filed by Israeli legal center Shurat Hadin on behalf of an academic Dan Avnon from the Hebrew University. Avnon wanted to do research in Australia but Jake Lynch refused to sign the application, stating his support for the BDS movement. The lawsuit alleges that Jake Lynch is violating Australia’s racial discrimination act by discriminating against Dan Avnon based on his ‘Israeli national origin and his Jewish racial and ethnic origin’.

In a lawsuit like this, there are Jews in Australia who are for it and who are against it. Perhaps much of Jewish mentality throughout the ages has been to keep a low profile in the diaspora, but I believe that Jews need to fight back against the racist campaign of the BDS movement.

Stuart Rees, a supporter of Lynch, has described the lawsuit as ‘absurd’ and accuses Shurat HaDin of acting as a legal attack dog for the Israeli government by using the law to silence the people who support the BDS movement, yet it is ironic for Rees to complain about the ‘law’ being used when it is the BDS’s goal to ‘force’ Israel to act within ‘international law’.

The reality is that if Jews continue to remain silent against these evil campaigns and do not challenge the lies that are being spewed with venomous hatred by the BDS and others, those lies in time will become ‘fact’ by virtue of the lack of an opposing view.

People are entitled to their views and no one is forcing them to buy gefilte fish at the local kosher deli, but when they abuse their professional position, as Jake Lynch has done in a discriminatory way, the line has been crossed.

Jews are known to be the people of the book, so it’s time to use that legal book – and throw it at them!

SOURCE







We’re paying for the teaching of Marxist politics

MARXISTS murdered millions and wrecked every country they’ve led. Yet 25 years after the Berlin Wall’s fall, they still cling to power in Australia’s universities.

Amazing. Yes, our universities are the last refuge of the Marxist — of people such as Victoria University politics lecturer Max Lane, recently on the executive council of the Revolutionary Socialist Party.

Lane is now with the Socialist Alternative, which urges “the smashing of the capitalist state apparatus”, including the “dismantling” of “parliaments, courts, the armed forces and police”.

Its followers “reject Australian patriotism” and “oppose all immigration controls”, and Lane last week dutifully sent a letter to the Jakarta Post to warn its Indonesian readers our immigration minister is actually a pirate who kills innocent people.

“The forcible seizure of other people’s boats ... and the coerced towing them to a destination not of their choice would all seem to amount to piracy,” Lane thundered. “These are immoral, inhumane acts.

“I would like to see Immigration and Border Protection Minister, Scott Morrison, and the puppet General doing his work charged with piracy and criminal negligence causing death.”

It’s odd that we pay a man with such extreme views — and so ready to trash our reputation abroad — to teach students at a university.

Sure, universities should teach all perspectives, so an odd Lane here and there is a detour to be expected. But scores of them?

In fact, Lane is one of 12 academics listed to speak at Marxism 2014, a four-day conference over Easter, which the Socialist Alliance organisers persuaded Melbourne University to host on its grounds. (Would the university similarly play host to a conference of fascists?)

Twelve academics is an astonishing turnout of speakers for a conference to promote a totalitarian ideology which has caused such devastation.

But how well has the far Left captured our institutions — and public funding.

And so the Marxism 2014 speakers include, for example, Professor Jane Kenway, of Monash University’s education faculty, who teaches tomorrow’s teachers.

Then there’s socialist Rick Kuhn, a politics reader at the Australian National University; “socialist activist” Tom Bramble, a senior lecturer in industrial relations at the University of Queensland; Diane Fieldes, a teacher in industrial relations at the University of NSW; Lisa Milner, a filmmaker teaching media students at Southern Cross University; and Aboriginal radical Gary Foley of Victoria University.

Other speakers include academics whose influence goes beyond the students they teach.

Sarah Gregson, an industrial relations academic at the University of NSW, is also the president of her National Tertiary Education Union branch. (Her conference topic: “The RSL: foot soldiers of capital.”)

Ali Alizadeh, who teaches literature and creative writing at Monash, also writes regularly for Overland, a far-Left magazine generously funded by the Australia Council with more of our money.

By coincidence, another speaker is Melbourne Workers Theatre co-founder Patricia Cornelius, a former academic now on the Australia Council’s Literature Assessment Panel, which helps to decide how much in grants to give magazines like — hey! — Overland.

Hmmm. Why is it that Marxists are so dependent on state funding?

And why do they get so much of it? Why, when even these Marxists’ children have shown their parents their politics is unworkable?

You see, Marxism 2014 will hold a “School of Rebellion” to teach children as young as five “constructive, collective and organised rebellion” with lessons on “why unions matter” and “organising a student strike”, plus a little fun with “smashing capitalism: a piƱata party”.

But even the Green Left Weekly had to admit last year’s School of Rebellion ended with its 30 students rebelling against the school itself.

It reported the children were given a “graffiti workshop” which “involved the kids making their demands and ideas known with spray paint”.

They sure did: “Their demands included, ‘Free internet’, ‘Free Food’, ‘Free everything!’ ”

And then: “The older kids rebelled in a slam poetry session, electing a 10-year-old girl as their spokesperson and demanding to go outside and play soccer. Which they did.”

Marxism in a nutshell: Here are mini-Marxists demanding everything be given to them free, and then refusing to work themselves.

And how often have we seen what inevitably follows: the state using force to make some work to provide what the others take, and to crack down on those who protest? There will be no graffiti workshop at the School of Rebellion this year.

That’s Marxism, kids. It’s amazing that after so many disastrous failures, your parents still believe this stuff.

But far worse is that so many of your parents’ gurus are in our universities, trying to turn them into Schools of Rebellion, too. And we pay them.

SOURCE






It’s only fair that Gillard shares blame for return to lawless unionism

HENRY ERGAS

IT is an honour to be rebutted by a former prime minister. But Julia Gillard’s claim, (”Laws and Fair Work”, Letters, Feb 14) that I “misled readers” in describing Labor’s changes to the industrial relations laws does not stand up to scrutiny.

And even more important than errors in her claim are omissions which go to the heart of the current debate. Gillard’s contention is simply this: that she bears no responsibility for the industrial lawlessness which flourished under Labor.

As regards the building industry laws, she merely implemented changes retired judge Murray Wilcox had recommended. Far from doing “virtually nothing to police (the unions’) internal governance”, as I had written, she not only retained the relevant provisions of Work Choices in the Fair Work Act, but strengthened them in 2012. And rather than trample on freedom of association, her legislation provides “more effective remedies in relation to breaches (of that freedom) than ever before”.

Each of these assertions is incorrect, misses the point or both. I accept that the Wilcox review recommended that the Howard government’s building industry laws be modified. But even the review concluded that significant lawlessness remained and that strong powers were required to prevent it persisting.

Faced with that finding, a government which genuinely believed that (as Gillard had said) the industry needed “hard-edged compliance (with) no tolerance at all for lawlessness” would have monitored those changes to ensure they did not, in Wilcox’s words, “impede investigations of significant contraventions”.

Instead, as the lawlessness spread, Gillard made further changes, not recommended by Wilcox, preventing the regulator pursuing matters once the parties to a dispute had reached an agreement, regardless of the tactics by which that agreement had been secured.

The consequences were entirely predictable: the thuggery escalated dramatically, as extracting an agreement, even by extreme means, now provided far-reaching protection from the law.

With Labor then standing by as the building union was found guilty of 30 counts of contempt in the Grocon dispute alone, Gillard’s protestations of innocence can hardly be taken seriously. Gillard’s claims with respect to policing unions’ governance are no more convincing.

Yes, the Fair Work Act kept the relevant provisions of Work Choices; but Gillard’s appointments to the Fair Work Commission, and the way the commission was then managed, guaranteed they would never be effectively enforced, as the Health Services Union scandal shows.

That scandal’s facts don’t need restating. Nor do Gillard’s assertions of “complete confidence” in Fair Work Australia’s inquiries. Yet her assertions were made, and vigorously repeated, despite mounting evidence of flaws in those inquiries that an independent review by KPMG found gravely compromised their quality, timeliness and value.

It is true that, as the crisis peaked, Gillard introduced stiffer penalties against union officials guilty of wrongdoing. But that came three years after the problems had become apparent and was little more than an attempt to deflect a far stronger response.

For Gillard to present herself as a stern enforcer of good governance is consequently absurd. Rather, her message to the unions was, as she herself said, “crystal clear” - “unionism ... is what defines us as a Labor party”. And she would do whatever it takes to protect union interests.

Now Gillard maintains that far from imposing unions, the Fair Work Act enshrines Freedom of Association, including “the right to not be a member of a union and not to be represented by it”.

But as the New Zealand Court of Appeal noted, Freedom of Association must preserve the “integrity of choice of the individual employee, and in particular of that employee who seeks to remain outside collective action”.

Yet as well as gutting enforcement of the anti-coercion provisions, Gillard’s laws, by strengthening the award system and giving unions a crucial role in their determination, removed workers’ right to be employed on terms they chose. It was precisely so as to remove that right that Gillard made individual agreements virtually impossible; and it is thanks to that right’s removal that ACTU secretary Dave Oliver can proclaim unions “represent about 60 per cent of the workforce”, although union membership is barely one-fourth that.

Ultimately, that was the objective: to entrench a union movement whose position was crumbling as workers voted with their feet. Two parts Fritz Lang to one part MC Escher, Gillard’s byzantine Fair Work Act sought to privilege unions in everything from rights of entry to control over superannuation funds.

Not that the workers themselves derived much benefit. Gillard willingly paints the Howard years as a gulag; but surveys show job security and work satisfaction (see chart) increased then, only to drop on Gillard’s watch.

And rising unemployment and falling participation rates highlight the gap between Gillard’s rhetoric that “a job is an incredibly precious thing” and the reality she left behind.

Yet Labor is fighting tooth and nail to keep even the worst features of Gillard’s legislation intact. Under the tax laws, a taxpayer can be subject to compulsory examination, without protection against self-incrimination, if the tax office suspects a contravention; so too, under the competition and securities laws, can any company director or manager; but Labor wants union thugs to retain protections other citizens are baldly denied.

Our industrial laws must do better than that. They should slam the door shut on intimidation and corruption. Rather than empower a sectional interest at the community’s expense, they should facilitate efficient contracting between employers and employees, thereby promoting trust in the workplace and encouraging secure, high-quality jobs.

And rather than partiality, they should be administered with competence and integrity.

None of that will happen without serious analysis of the system’s objectives and design.

And Gillard is right, “public policy debates are best informed by the facts”. She would do well to heed her own advice.

SOURCE






How Queensland bikies are held in solitary confinement

Prison authorities refuse to release images of the cells being used to hold bikies in solitary confinement, citing “safety and security considerations”.

The Sunday Mail, however, has used sworn statements from lawyers who represent the bikies to paint a picture of what is going on behind closed doors in our prisons.

According to those statements, prisoners are forbidden from wearing underpants and, in the bikies-only ­facility at Woodford prison, are clothed in pink uniforms.

They are held in lockdown for 23 hours each day in cells “the size of a large dining table”, with only a mattress and a toilet.

According to some affidavits, the cells have been infested with cockroaches, ants and mites. There are surveillance cameras above the toilet, and above the shower in an ­adjoining cell, where inmates are given an hour a day “outside time”.

That cell is the same size but with a “caged area to allow for natural light”.

Cells are searched daily while ­inmates are forced to stand with their heads against the wall with arms raised.

Inmates are strip-searched ­before and after visits from their lawyers, and given half the standard daily food rations, their lawyers claim.

A government spokesman yesterday said the cells were “very different” than the picture painted. They all had a shower, a window, a sink, desk and chair, and bookshelves.

But Attorney-General Jarrod Bleijie said he made no apologies for being tough on members of organised crime gangs – and it was working.

“They used their notoriety to be top dogs in the prison population and they actually continued their illegal activities by dealing drugs and intimidating prison staff,” Mr Bleijie said.

“Keeping them away from the general prison population has disrupted all of that and jail is now a real deterrent for them.

The prison regime is doing what it’s meant to do: We now have gang members resigning from their clubs and turning over a new leaf and some have had their restrictions lifted.”
There are about 50 “Criminal Motorcycle Gang” prisoners held in Queensland jails.

The government says “health and psychological services” are offered to inmates, and gang members were able – like other prisoners – to participate “in meaningful activities.”

SOURCE


Monday, February 17, 2014



‘Rainmaker’ PM pledges fair and responsible drought package



TONY Abbott arrived in the NSW outback town of Bourke today to talk drought — but instead brought more rain with him than the district has seen for two years.

As a thunderstorm pelted down on the shearing shed of 40,000-hectare Jandra station, the Prime Minister promised local farmers his government wanted to do more help them cope with the current drought.

“This is a great Australian sound, rain on a tin roof, but I am very conscious this has been a severe drought; it’s a natural disaster and a lot of people are doing it tough,” said Mr Abbott, who is on a two-day tour of drought-hit western NSW and northwest Queensland.

“The important thing is that the government has a (farm assistance package) response that is intelligent, fair and (fiscally) responsible.

“But there will be better income support, better access to the loans people need and an emphasis on social support that farmers and rural communities need in times like this.”

Cabinet is expected to sign off on a drought package in just over a week.

Jandra station owner Phillip Ridge welcomed Mr Abbott as a rainmaker.

“If I had known what he would bring; I’d have asked him here months ago,” Mr Ridge said, as giant rain puddles, a sea of red mud and rows of bogged cars collected outside.

Rain also forced the cancellation of a later planned visit to a property near Longreach in western Queensland.

But Mr Ridge said one downpour would not break the two-year drought.

He said debt and high fixed costs were killing rural Australia.

He wants lower interest rates on cheap government loans available to help farmers through the drought. Rates are currently set at 5 per cent.

More than 70 per cent of Queensland and 62 per cent of NSW has not had significant rain for two years.

Mr Abbott and Agriculture Minister Barnaby Joyce are touring drought-hit areas to hear directly how farmers would like the government to help.

“It’s very important to see and feel how you guys live,’’ Mr Abbott said, having given up a seat in an air-conditioned four-wheel drive.

Cabinet will consider a drought assistance package for farmers in the next fortnight.

The Prime Minister said any government assistance package would ensure the agricultural sector survived the current drought, and that farmers remained viable, strong and producing food for export to Asia’s bombing markets.

But he said failing farm businesses would not be propped up.

Mr Ridge told Mr Abbott it was hard for any farmer to keep going, no matter how good, when it hadn’t rained for two years.

He said his sheep were weak, some had died, he was having to buy expensive hay to feed cattle and that his wool harvest was down by one third.

The Prime Minister flew from Bourke to western Queensland, where more rain forced him to cancel a visit to an outback property.

Instead, Mr Abbott addressed a meeting at Longreach’s Stockman’s Hall of Fame, telling them

he believed drought support was more akin to “natural disaster’’ relief than industry assistance.

The government has in recent times rejected funds for Holden and SPC Ardmona, despite Mr Abbott after the election declaring Australia was “open for business’’.

But Mr Joyce said he believed people in city areas would back a “significant’’ government support package.

SOURCE





PM shows the meaning of 'fair go'

There are few more quintessentially Australian terms than a "fair go". And there is no better phrase to draw together the events of the first parliamentary sitting week of the year - and indeed the start of the Abbott government's term.

A "fair go", according to Mark Gwynn, writing for the Australian National Dictionary Centre's Ozwords, was first recorded during the Queensland shearers' strike of 1891. As the Brisbane Courier reported on March 25 of that year, union leaders questioned whether they received a "fair go" in the course of their arrest for conspiracy.

Their question appears more than a little disingenuous in the context of the activities preceding their arrest - not to mention the fact that 13 of the unionists charged were sentenced to jail terms. The union leaders and unionised shearers had used physical force, and the threat of such force, to harass, bully and pressure non-union shearers and wool growers into ceding to their demands. The unionists were attempting to control whom wool growers could and couldn't employ, along with the terms and conditions of that employment. Their actions were the antithesis of a "fair go".

It's interesting to reflect on this as car manufacturers close and businesses are under pressure. We should ask ourselves whether unionism really gives workers - and the businesses who employ them - a fair go. After all, one can't exist without the other.
Advertisement

On Monday, Prime Minister Tony Abbott announced a royal commission on trade union governance and corruption designed to "ensure that honest workers and honest businesses get a fair go". The Prime Minister said: "Honest workers and honest unionists should not be ripped off by corrupt officials and honest businesses should be able to go about their work without fear of intimidation, corruption and standover tactics."

No Australian - apart from those engaging in intimidating, corrupt and standover tactics - would disagree with the statement. But such behaviour forms only part of the problem.

The additional challenge for the government, employers and unions in the context of the imminent closure of Australian car manufacturing, and pressures on a range of diverse Australian businesses, is to review our rigid workplace relations system and do something to fix it. After all, there's no point being entitled to some of the most generous employment conditions and highest wages in the world if you don't have a job.

If the government is brave enough to tackle this crucial policy area, the question is will the opposition and the media give the government a fair go to fix the system?

Will we ever see Labor act in the same bipartisan manner as the Coalition did when it was in opposition, particularly under leader John Howard during the critical Hawke-Keating economic reforms in the 1980s? Or, like the shearers' strike of 1891, will a fair go be a narrow one, defined by unions and Labor in their interests alone, rather than the interests of the nation?

The same questions might more broadly be applied to the reporting of, and reaction to, Coalition government decisions. Will good policy outcomes and the tough decisions be highlighted, or as seems the case, just those that are negative? Are we giving the government a fair go?

We've heard endlessly about the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection's alleged secrecy over asylum seekers, but virtually nothing about the fact that not one illegal boat or asylum seeker has landed in Australia for more than 50 days. In contrast, at one stage under Labor 3000 asylum seekers were arriving per month. One thousand people died at sea. And 14,500 genuine refugees, waiting their turn in refugee camps, were denied places in Australia because of illegal boat arrivals.

In the interests of a truly fair go, let's consider the first Rudd Labor government at the same stage. Looking back, Kevin Rudd's most memorable achievements five months into government seem to be visiting Cate Blanchett and her new baby in hospital and hosting the 2020 summit.

The contrast with the Abbott Coalition government could not be more marked.

The government is making tough decisions on manufacturing, immigration and the environment. Let's hope this extends to workplace relations reform, and if it does, for the good of all Australians, let's give it a fair go.

SOURCE






Victorian Primary school principals shut down religious education classes

Hundreds of primary school principals have stopped offering weekly religious education in schools, despite a legal obligation to offer the classes.

Current legislation states principals "must" schedule the contentious "special religious instruction" (SRI) classes in the school timetable when accredited and approved instructors are available, but Education Department figures suggest the number of Victorian state schools delivering SRI programs declined by almost a third in the past two years.

In 2011, 940 government schools delivered an SRI program, but by 2013 the number plummeted to 666 - a drop of 274. In real terms, 130,100 students received SRI in 2011, with just 92,808 in 2013.

Christian organisation Access Ministries is the leading provider of instruction, delivering 81 per cent of programs through its weekly 30-minute Christian religious education (CRE) classes.

Joe Kelly has been principal of Cranbourne South Primary School for 15 years, and acknowledged that until two years ago he had been "blindly supporting" Access Ministries' presence. That was until he took a closer look at the actual classes and curriculum.

"It is not education," Mr Kelly said. "It has no value whatsoever. It is rubbish - hollow and empty rhetoric … My school teachers are committed to teaching children, not indoctrinating them."

In early 2012, Mr Kelly sent Access Ministries a two-page letter explaining why they would not be allowed back in his school. He subsequently spoke to a representative of the evangelical organisation.

"We did meet, and we agreed in the end," Mr Kelly said. "His words: 'If the school does not want Access Ministries, we will not force our way in'."

Mr Kelly said his actions created no backlash from within the school community, and nor was there any reprimand from the Education Department for his defiant stance - something he hoped would give heart to other principals considering exercising discretion.  "A lot of principals feel as strongly as I do, but they are not comfortable being as provocative as I am," he said.

Education Minister Martin Dixon said he had "full confidence in school principals making decisions in the interests of their parent body and the school community".

Despite the decline in numbers, Dr Evonne Paddison, chief executive of Access Ministries, said CRE was a "choice" that the parents of nearly 90,000 Victorian children still make.  "Some areas are seeing growth and others not so," she said. "This is not an unusual pattern. CRE happens because parents want it."

Not all parents, of course. Members of the grassroots group Fairness in Religions in Schools have long agitated for change on this issue, and with some success.

Prior to August 2011, the SRI enrolment forms used by schools were "opt-out", meaning parents had to fill in the form or their child would automatically end up being taught religion, enrolled by default.

In the past two years, however, the forms became "opt-in", meaning parents have to make a conscious choice to enrol their child in religious education. This simple change had a massive impact on the popularity of SRI. Namely, far fewer kids are enrolled.

Emerald Primary School principal Mark Carver said before the form was changed, perhaps 75 per cent of students in a class of 24 would receive instruction.

"Last year that was dropping close to 50 per cent," Mr Carver said. "And once it gets below that, it becomes a difficult thing in terms of supervision."

Dr David Zyngier, a senior lecturer in curriculum and pedagogy at Monash University, said his biggest concern remained for parents who opt-in but did not understand what lessons were being taught, or that they were being taught by volunteers - not teachers.

"I have reviewed all six booklets produced by Access Ministries, and it's basically low order, unintelligent, busy work and rote learning," Dr Zyngier said.  "It horrified me. There's nothing educational about it. It's all about becoming a disciple of Jesus."

Dr Paddison said the trained volunteers implement a curriculum designed with four levels of primary schooling in mind, as outlined in the Victorian Essential Learning Standards.  "As any adult interacting with young children will have some impact, we aim to make sure it is a positive one," Dr Paddison said.

SOURCE






Let the demolition of rogue union begin

Paul Sheehan

It is common for people to take a voyeuristic schadenfreude in reading insults about others. I'm aware many readers like reading insults about this columnist, so let's get started. First, my corruption. Then my hypocrisy.

Federal Labor MP Laurie Ferguson posted an item on his website on April 16 last year: "The NSW Supreme Court has rejected an appeal by David Ballard against a decision where his witnesses' evidence was found to be 'false', 'implausible' and 'far fetched'. Will the Herald's Paul Sheehan offer profound (if delayed) apologies, after his advertising campaign for Ballard?"

Ferguson returned to the fray on November 27, via Twitter (a goldmine of indiscretion): "You were less interested reporting the absolute demolition of your close mate [Charkey's] court effort despite your friendly articles." A few minutes later he made a more direct accusation: "You are more than a close mate and you know the judgment was an unmitigated total demolition of your slanderous campaign."

Given that I have never spoken to the plaintiff in this case, building contractor David Ballard, a former boxing champion known as Charkey Ramon, before or after his original court case, Ferguson was not only wrong but he has nailed his colours to the mast of the under-siege Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union. Let's just say his objectivity is clouded because his younger brother Andrew, a CFMEU official, was mocked by me for his performance under cross-examination in Ballard v Multiplex.

Then there is the CFMEU's staunch ally in the NSW Parliament, the Greens MP David Shoebridge. On May 22, 2012, he told Parliament: "I have known Andrew Ferguson for well over a decade, including in my professional capacity as a lawyer representing the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union from time to time … Now that a superior court of record has made a conclusive finding against the likes of Ballard … it is clear that Mr Ferguson and the CFMEU are owed an apology. We are all still waiting, Mr Sheehan."

I am familiar with the judgment of Justice Robert McDougall in this matter, all 76,000 words of it. In 2012 I prepared a robust dissent. It was withheld from publication on the grounds of prudence. Times have changed. The scale of corruption touching the CFMEU has become a public issue.

Let's just say I rate McDougall's judgment as highly as I rate the work of his fellow NSW Supreme Court judge Stephen Campbell in the matter of Regina v Kieren Loveridge. In November, Campbell held that Loveridge would spend a non-parole period of six years in prison for his unprovoked and fatal assault on Thomas Kelly, and unprovoked assaults on Matthew Serrao, Rhyse Saliba, Aden Gazi and Marco Compagnoni, all while he was on probation for a prior assault. This judgment was an insult to the grieving Kelly family and an assault on commonsense.

Now McDougall can observe the unfolding royal commission into the bribes, pay-offs and slush funds endemic in the construction industry, not unlike the evidence laid out in Ballard v Multiplex and the CFMEU. A former CFMEU official Craig Bates gave evidence he received payments from companies that wanted to remain "preferred contractors" of the CFMEU. A former finance director of Multiplex, Ian Widdup, gave evidence he made secret cash payments of hundred of thousands of dollars to the union from Multiplex. Former CFMEU organiser John Henderson gave evidence Ballard was forced off a job by the union. Len Anthony gave evidence the CFMEU wanted Ballard out of the industry. former Multiplex employee Joseph Taylor said he attended a meeting where it was decided to lock Ballard out of a construction site, leaving his equipment locked inside.

McDougall inherited this case after the original judge fell ill and thus did not see the overwhelming bulk of the evidence first hand. He found the testimony of the whistle-blowers insufficient as the plaintiff, and two of his key witnesses, Bates and Widdup, had been found to have given false evidence in other matters. The crucial element was the judge's disdain for the criminal history of Bates, which utterly infected his credibility in this case.

Ballard lost his case and again on appeal. His witnesses were shredded by a battery of silks. His personal finances were shredded by the standard legal tactic when big confronts small - attrition via process - and a bill in excess of a $1 million.

The defining fact, which no amount of lawfare can wash away, is that Ballard was an independent contractor who fell foul of the CFMEU and paid a price. Anyone who still doesn't think that collusion has been built into the industrial landscape for decades, at a cost of tens of billions of dollars, should consider the words of Ken Phillips, executive director of the Independent Contractors of Australia, who told me on Friday: "There is an industrial relations cartel in Australia of big unions and big corporations that have been cutting industrial relations deals then passing on the higher costs … The ICA has presented a 10,000-word submission to the Productivity Commission's inquiry into the construction sector which details our argument that a cartel exists, where major construction companies and unions work to suppress competition in the sector, and we identify cost blowouts of around 20 to 30 per cent."

Last week, I spoke to the solicitor who did most of the work for the plaintiff in Ballard v Multiplex, to see how Ballard was holding up. She did not know. But she did say this: "Every time I think about this judgment, it makes me angry." Let the royal commission roll on

SOURCE




Sunday, February 16, 2014


Victor Dominello: 'What is happening to our country?'

This guy hasn't got a clue.  The crimes have nothing to do with us ordinary Australians.  The culprits were respectively a Muslim and Africans whom we unwisely let into our country.  If he had a clue he would be moving to stop such immigration

A NSW minister has revealed how he wept while overseas and questioned his conviction that Australia was the best nation on earth when he heard the horrifying news about two NSW girls – a 14-year-old allegedly gang raped in a park and a 12-year-old whose father allegedly condoned her illegal "marriage".

"I shed a tear, more than one," Victor Dominello, the Minister for Citizenship and Communities, told the Premier’s Multicultural Media Awards on Thursday night.

He told the audience that he came to the event "with a heavy heart". He had just returned from India, where he had heard the stories about the girls.

Mr Dominello admitted he wondered: "What is happening to our country?"  Despite his long conviction about the greatness of Australia, he thought: "We may not be the best country on earth."

He despaired at what led boys and men to harm girls and women.

"We need to be raising boys to be gentlemen, who will protect our women, not raise a hand against them," Mr Dominello said to wide applause from the audience.

The alleged rape at Doonside ignited some racial tensions after the victim, from the Pacific Islander community, described her attackers as African.

Mr Dominello did not mention any ethnic groups but he stressed such crimes were not new, and he pointed out that the killers of Anita Cobby, who was abducted at Blacktown in 1986, had the names Murphy, Murdoch and Travers.

However, he implored the gathered media – as members of "the fourth estate" – to put the spotlight on the unacceptable treatment of girls and women.

A 16 year-old boy has been refused bail over the alleged gang rape.

The Premier's Multicultural Media Awards recognises excellence in journalism across media outlets in NSW's multicultural community.

SOURCE






Carbon tax figures add to pressure to repeal

Australian companies paid $6.6 billion in the first full year of the carbon tax, with the seven biggest electricity producers each slugged more than $250 million.

The first annual tally of carbon tax liabilities, released on Friday by the Clean Energy Regulator, was largely as forecast.

But the Abbott government seized on the sheer scale of the figures to increase pressure on Labor to "get out of the way" of its election promise to abolish the tax. Opposition leader Bill Shorten has vowed to block the government's carbon repeal bills in the Senate.

Environment Minister Greg Hunt said the "hit on the economy" from the tax was worse than Labor had predicted when the Gillard government introduced it last year.

He said the cost to the economy was $7.6 billion once reduced fuel tax credits and charges on the refrigeration and aviation industries were considered.

Of the 348 companies that paid the tax, NSW-based Macquarie Generation had the biggest bill at nearly $470 million. Great Energy Alliance, the company behind Victoria's Loy Yang power plant, paid $425 million.

Sixteen of the top 20 carbon tax contributors were power companies, with a combined bill of $4.1 billion, according to the six-monthly update by the Clean Energy Regulator.

Manufacturing companies paid a total $1.1 billion.

Mr Hunt used the numbers to renew the attack on Labor which has defended the tax.

"All Australians can blame Bill Shorten [for] helping to push up electricity bills and the overall cost of living," he said. "It's time for Labor to get out of the way and support the repeal of the carbon tax."

Mr Hunt said the $7.6 billion paid by companies had resulted in only a 0.1 per cent fall in emissions. Proof, he said, that "it doesn't even work".


SOURCE





NSW national parks open to amateur shooters

The first hunt by licensed amateurs in a NSW national park will take place on Saturday near Griffith as police continue to search for shooters who illegally gunned down six brumbies in a state forest to the north.

On Saturday, four volunteer hunters will target feral goats at the Cocoparra Nature Reserve under National Parks and Wildlife Service supervision as part of a controversial three-year state government trial.

The reserve is one of 12 parks opened to amateur hunting by the government after Premier Barry O'Farrell struck a deal with the Shooters and Fishers Party to get electricity privatisation legislation through the Parliament.

National Parks said the hunting was designed to help protect the Cocoparra Pomaderris, a native shrub, and the Inland Grey Box woodland endangered ecological community.

The reserve will be closed while the hunting takes place.

Licensed hunters were allowed to resume unsupervised shooting in about 200 state forests this month following a six-month hiatus. The Department of Primary Industries, which oversees licensed hunters, said almost 700 permits had been issued within nine days of the ban being lifted.

But by Sunday, six wild horses - two mares and four stallions - were found illegally shot dead at Newnes State Forest near Lithgow. Police are investigating and have ruled out two hunters who had permission to shoot in the forest around the time the horses' bodies were found.

Investigators nonetheless believe the fatal shots were the work of experienced marksmen.

The Chifley local area command crime manager, Inspector Luke Rankin, said police had spoken with both hunters registered through the Department of Primary Industries to shoot in the area. "We're pretty certain that they weren't involved," he said. "We believe this is an instance of illegal hunting."

Police are appealing to the public for assistance. "People that were camping there would have heard [the rifle shots]," Inspector Rankin said.

SOURCE






The Federal Government uses a comic book to stop the boats

THEY are the Government’s new secret weapon to stop the boats: comic books.  News.com.au has learned this picture-based novel, written in the dominant Afghan languages Dari and Pashto, has been distributed overseas as part of an effort to discourage asylum seekers from coming to Australia by boat.

A spokesman for Immigration Minister Scott Morrison said the book was distributed under the Abbott and Rudd governments.  He said the book was originally developed and distributed under the Rudd administration.

It has an emotional plotline.  Meet our protagonist. He’s an asylum seeker. He lives in squalor and works as a mechanic.

He dreams of new beginnings. Perth, in particular.

The lead character pays to flee his country.  And has a tearful goodbye.

He flies to another nation.  And he meets up with a stranger. That person, who we assume is a people smuggler, shows him a photograph of a boat.

With a worried look in his eyes, he boards a crowded vessel headed for Australia.

It all goes wrong.  The asylum seekers encounter dangerous swell

The asylum seekers are picked up by the Navy ...

And are taken to a detention facility.

He longs to go home and imagines dancing at a party.

The final page contains a stark warning.  “If you go to Australia without a visa on a boat, you won’t be settled in Australia”.

The Government has launched similar advertising campaigns in Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Vietnam and Indonesia “using a range of channels and languages”, including TV, radio and press advertising.

Diaspora communities here in Australia have also been targeted by a campaign.

SOURCE  (See the original for graphics)


Friday, February 14, 2014


Finally, a Conservative Leader

A view from America

In the middle of 2013, a French journalist asked me who I thought was today's outstanding center-right head of government. After a few moments' thought, I responded: "She died in April. Requiescat in pace."

Looking around the world, the search for what might be called a full-spectrum conservative government leader was, until recently, a depressing exercise. On many issues, Britain's Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron seems positively ill-at-ease with most of his own MPs (and certainly grass-roots Tories) who are more-than-a-few clicks to the right of him. Across the Channel, most European center-right governments are pursuing policies best described as marginally-less-social-democratic than those of the left. In Latin America, the picture is equally disheartening, especially after Michele Bachelot's return to the Chilean presidency, following what some regard as a mediocre performance by the hitherto-governing center-right administration.

Lately, however, there has been a sign of hope. And it comes in the form of Australia's new Prime Minister, Tony Abbott. Thus far Abbott has matched his open adherence to distinctly conservative convictions by implementing policies that reflect those principles.

Elected prime minister in September last year, Abbott is in many respects the left's nightmare come true. For one thing, he's a practicing Catholic, who, though he doesn't draw attention to his faith, is generally associated in people's minds with the Church's conservative wing. Among other brickbats, that's earned him (rather sectarian) epithets such as the "mad monk."

At the same time, Abbott possesses - like his political mentor, Australia's most successful modern conservative politician, John Howard - the common touch. In private and public, he comes across as rather normal and unpretentious. In Australian politics, that will take you a very, very long way. But Abbott is unique insofar as he combines an ability to communicate with ordinary people with being that rarity among conservative politicians: someone genuinely interested in ideas.

I can't think of any other contemporary government leader who would quote one of modern conservatism's leading intellectuals, Roger Scruton, in a speech to the World Economic Forum. A Rhodes Scholar and Oxford graduate, Abbott actually reads serious books, is well acquainted with the writings of conservative luminaries old and new, and somehow managed to find time while being an MP and cabinet minister to contribute articles relatively regularly to serious-minded Australian conservative and free market publications such as Quadrant and Policy. In short, he's unafraid to bring intellectual steel into the public square.

p>Even more worryingly for the left, however, Abbott has been willing to buck the "popular" (i.e., lefty) wisdom on many occasions because of his beliefs. In 2009, he became leader of the then-opposition Liberal Party after resigning from the shadow cabinet and leading a parliamentary revolt against a Cameron-like leader who had signed up holus-bolus to the climate change agenda. "Unelectable" was most Australian commentators' verdict on Abbott. How wrong they were.

Abbott's willingness to match his ideas with corresponding actions has been very evident of late. On economic policy, his government has moved in the opposite direction of those who favor Dodd-Frank-like behemoth approaches to the financial industry. Instead it's opted to simplify regulation. As the minister responsible for the reform bluntly pointed out, "no amount of legislation will ever be a guarantee against another Storm Financial." Indeed it's often excessive regulation that creates opportunities for financial shenanigans by industry insiders.

Regarding the welfare state, Abbott's minister for Social Security, Kevin Andrews (another conservative politician-thinker), has announced a major overhaul of a welfare system that was starting to drift in a distinctly European-direction. Predictably the left are up in arms. But so too are those rent-seeking Australian businesses who now find themselves dealing with a government uninterested in subsidizing them. That's nothing, however, to the fury that greeted Abbott's disbanding of the climate-change bureaucracy established by the preceding Labor government.

Abbott has also long understood that conservative governments can't treat cultural issues as the orphans of their policy agenda. He's never hidden his belief that Western civilization is generally a very good thing - particularly its Anglosphere component. Nor have Abbott's views on social issues ever won him applause from the left. On these and other subjects, Abbott has stressed he's never been impressed by the "inevitability" argument that's invariably trotted out by progressivists as they try to stream-roll their preferred objectives. That suggests Abbott isn't likely to fall for the trap which John Stuart Mill proposed as the best way to transform conservatives into liberals: i.e., you convince conservatives that a liberal position is actually a conservative view.

The first sign of Abbott's seriousness about obstructing the left's long march through the institutions was his government's appointment of the policy-director of the center-right Institute of Public Affairs to the nation's Human Rights Commission. This was widely seen as the beginning of an effort to re-balance an organization long criticized as monolithically left-wing. Since then Abbott has indicated that major changes are coming to the ABC: Australia's government-funded institutional - and ideological - equivalent of the BBC. The left isn't disguising its nervousness.

Along the same lines, Abbott's education minister, Christopher Pyne, has initiated a review of the national curriculum implemented by the previous government. A moment's glance at the curriculum's treatment of history soon illustrates the extent to which it seeks to downplay Australia's indisputably Western heritage. In the words of Sydney's Cardinal George Pell, "Europe, Britain and the United States are mentioned 76 times, while Asia is referred to on more than 200 occasions." This disparity is odd because although Australia is certainly in Asia, no objective observer could say that Australia is "of" Asia. Moreover, while Australian students learn about "Gaia" and other deep-green fantasies in grade 9, many Australian universities find they need to put the same students through remedial English classes once they begin college.

Then there are Abbott's initial steps on the international stage. Take, for instance, his recent remarks at Davos. Much of the address was devoted to pushing a strong free trade agenda and insisting that governments should let business do what it does best: promote lasting economic growth. "After all," Abbott said, "government doesn't create wealth; people do, when they run profitable businesses."

In the same speech, however, Abbott made the conservative point that economic prosperity and freedom can't be sustained in a value-neutral world. Nor did Abbott shy away from relentlessly pressing one of the most important moral arguments for free trade articulated long ago by Adam Smith: that economic freedom, combined with the right institutions, radically reduces poverty faster than any other approach. "No country," Abbott added, "has ever taxed or subsidized its way to prosperity."

All in all, the address added up to a solid integration of sound economics with conservative principles. That's what makes Abbott different from, say, Canada's Stephen Harper or Spain's Mariano Rajoy. Abbott happily engages in the indispensable task of moral suasion in favor of conservative positions. What's more, he's quite good at it. With his rare combination of plain-speaking and intellectual substance, Abbott makes conservative ideas sound, well, reasonable to the average voter.

Of course no conservative government can do everything. Even Margaret Thatcher couldn't shrink the state's share of GDP during her time in office. Australia's three-year parliamentary terms additionally limit any government's room for maneuver. Abbott also surely knows that not all his MPs embrace all his views. The Liberal Party has always been an amalgam of Whigs, Tories, classical liberals, social conservatives, free marketers, protectionists, quiet religious believers, equally quiet skeptics, assorted careerists, and unabashed pragmatists.

Yet, like John Howard, Abbott has thus far proved adept at managing those differences. He also appears to grasp that what the conservative historian Maurice Cowling once said of the Tory party applies equally to its Australian equivalent: its business is to win elections. This is important, not just because ideological puritanism sometimes make the perfect the enemy of the good. It also matters because if Abbott's government can maintain its current course and win elections, Abbott has an outside chance of doing, albeit in a more modest way, for his generation of conservatives across the world what Reagan and Thatcher did for theirs.

For a "mad monk," that would be no small achievement.

SOURCE






CFMEU chiefs blacklisted from all Victorian building sites

MORE than a dozen militant union chiefs have been slapped with building site bans in a dramatic escalation of hostilities in Victoria's $39 billion construction industry.

Mugshots of officials, including CFMEU state secretary John Setka and his chief lieutenants, will be sent to building site managers.
The Master Builders Association of Victoria, which represents 7500 building companies, has issued the picture gallery, saying the unionists' right-of-entry permits issued under federal law had lapsed.

MBAV industrial relations general manager Lawrie Cross told the Herald Sun that the list and photographs would be a new tool in the fight against unlawful entry.  "Project managers on sites can use this to identify those officials who do not have permits," he said.

The builders' fightback came as the Federal Government launched a widespread royal commission into corruption and bribery in the building industry this week.  The $100 million inquiry is expected to focus on unlawful entry to building sites and standover tactics as part of its probe.

Federal Employment Minister Eric Abetz supported the MBAV's move, saying that officials walking on to sites without permits was a "perennial problem in Victoria".

The list of officials from the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union who have no valid right-of-entry permits include its entire leadership.  Mr Setka, assistant secretaries Shaun Reardon and Elias Spernovasilis, president Ralph Edwards and vice-presidents Noel Washington and Derek Christopher top the list.  There are 13 banned CFMEU workers on the list, including organisers Mick Powell and Paul Sullivan.

Union officials are supposed to provide 24 hours' notice for entry for industrial relations disputes but can go on site immediately if they identify a safety concern.

But builders complain the right of entry is abused and officials come on to sites to go on "fishing expeditions", which leads to penalties for late jobs.

A memo to builders, seen by the Herald Sun, details the officials who do not have the right to visit construction sites.  "Attached is a list of current personnel from CFMEU Vic & Tas (Construction and General) in relation to their current federal right-of-entry permit status as at the 11th of February 2014," the statement says.  "Any personnel in red do not have a federal right-of-entry permit and can be refused entry onto your site under all circumstances as they do not have authority to enter your workplace under the Fair Work Act 2009."

Senator Abetz said illegal entry to building sites could be included within the royal commission if there was evidence.
"This has been a perennial problem especially in Victoria," he said.

The Herald Sun understands some officials allow their right-of-entry permits to lapse to make it more difficult to have them removed.  Building company bosses then only have the option of calling police to have officials removed for trespassing.

Mr Setka has convictions for trespass dating back to 1987.
Christopher was convicted and fined $1500 last year for an incident on a building site.  Christopher pleaded guilty in the Melbourne Magistrates' Court in August.

SOURCE






Greens to move motion to remove Lord's Prayer in favour of 'silent reflection'

The Lord's Prayer will be put on the parliamentary chopping block on Thursday and replaced with silent reflection, if the Greens have their way.

Greens spokesman on multiculturalism, Richard Di Natale, will move a motion in the upper house on Thursday morning to refer the prayer to the Senate's Procedure Committee.

Senator Di Natale's motion will ask the committee to consider amending section 50 of the Senate's standing orders to replace the prayer with the following:

"Senators, let us in silence pray or reflect upon our responsibilities to the people of Australia, to the States and Territories which we represent, and to all future generations."

This text is based on what the ACT legislative assembly says at the start of its sitting days.

Federal parliament has been reciting prayers at the start of each sitting day since 1901 - a practice that Senator Di Natale argues is an "anachronism" in today's multicultural Australia and a breach of church-state separation.

Senator Di Natale first announced his plan to get rid of the Lord's Prayer last month, while Christine Milne was on leave and he was acting Greens leader.

He says that since then, his plan has received unanimous support from within his party, but had a mixed reaction from other MPs.

Senator Di Natale said he had also received some "gentle ribbing" from fellow MPs during the prayers in the Senate this week.

Coalition MPs are not expected to support the Greens move in the Senate.

In January, government Senate leader Eric Abetz said he strongly supported keeping the prayer, describing Senator Di Natale's move as a "Green attack" as part of "their ongoing attempt to rewrite our history and deny our heritage".

DLP senator John Madigan dismissed the idea at the time, saying it was ironic that a man whose last name translates to "of Christmas" was trying to change parliamentary prayers.

Labor has not had an official position, although lower house frontbencher Mark Dreyfus, who is Jewish, has called for a multi-faith model, rather than abolishing the Lord's Prayer.

SOURCE






And not a drop to drink without a certificate

A reader is astonished:

"I work in the food and beverage industry in South Australia, and just thought I would forward you on this bizarre and ridiculous junk that I spend many hours attending to every week. I have just been informed that I need to be registered to provide drinking water to patrons."



Astonishing. Just read all the questions on that form at the link.  Bureaucrats are tougher on people who’d give you water than on people who’d let you thirst.

Let us now rewrite St John’s Gospel in the manner now preferred by the South Australian Department of Health:

4 Now he had to go through Samaria. 5 So he came to a town in Samaria called Sychar, near the plot of ground Jacob had given to his son Joseph. 6 Jacob’s well was there, and Jesus, tired as he was from the journey, sat down by the well. It was about noon.

7 When a Samaritan woman came to draw water, Jesus said to her, “Will you give me a drink?” 8 (His disciples had gone into the town to buy food.)

9 The Samaritan woman said to him, “You are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. Besides, I have not filled in my Application for Registration as a Drinking Water Provider.

10 Jesus wept.


SOURCE



Thursday, February 13, 2014


50 days of failure for people smugglers

The latest Operation Sovereign Borders weekly update reveals that for 50 days there has not been a single successful people smuggling venture to Australia by boat, Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, the Hon Scott Morrison said today.

Operation Sovereign Borders is preventing criminal people smugglers from fulfilling their promise of passage to Australia.

Not only will people seeking to come illegally by boat not be settled in Australia, under the Abbott Government's policies they will not get here.

There is still a long way to go but 50 days of failure for the people smugglers should be welcome news to anyone who wants to stop criminal people smugglers putting people's lives at risk.

The last people smuggling venture that made it to Australia and had all passengers handed over to Australian immigration authorities was on December 19 last year.

The government is also continuing to remove illegal arrivals to Australia who are found not to be in need of Australia's protection.

This week 46 Sri Lankan nationals were removed to Sri Lanka including 37 involuntary removals.

The Abbott Government is not just stopping the boats as we promised we would do at the last election but we are sending back those arrivals Labor allowed to illegally enter Australia by boat during their failed years in government.

This is the resolve that is needed to get the job done.

This week, during my second visit to Malaysia as Minister, I announced Australia's intention to hand over two Bay Class patrol vessels to Malaysia to enhance the Malaysian Government's maritime enforcement and deterrence capability.

The strong co-operation of the Malaysian Government in efforts to prevent people smuggling as part of the Coalition Government's regional deterrence framework is appreciated.

This latest measure strengthens the agreement with Malaysia secured late last year to further disrupt and prevent people smuggling operations in and through Malaysia by air, land and sea.

SOURCE






Mother Barred from Pool for Wearing a Dress Says There’s a Way Around Rule: Be a Muslim

An Australian woman said she was prevented from swimming in a public pool because she wore a dress instead of traditional swimwear — but may have gotten a pass if not for one small issue.

“I can only let Muslims in the pool in dresses,” the lifeguard said Friday according to Katherine Pulo, 39, who was interviewed by the Illawarra Mercury.

Pulo said she’s worn the dress previously without incident and asked the lifeguard, “How do you know I’m not Muslim?”

“You’re not Muslim,” she said the guard replied.

Pulo issued a complaint with the local council, citing discrimination.

After she arrived at the Olympic Pool in Kembla, about an hour and 20 minutes south of Sydney, with her two sons, 8 and 5, they called for her to join them in the water. But Pulo replied, “I can’t,” she told the Mercury.

“I feel discriminated against,” Pulo told the Mercury. “Just because I’m not bound by a religion shouldn’t mean I can’t dress modestly. It’s my choice. Why should I miss out on going for a swim because I’m conscious about my body?”

A friend of Pulo, Fiona Garcia, whose daughter was swimming with Pulo’s children, said she approached the lifeguard over the incident, telling him, “This is discrimination.”

Informed that he would be the subject of a complaint, the guard replied, “Put in two [complaints],” Garcia told the Mercury.

Wollongong City Council’s manager of property and recreation, Peter Coyte, said swimmers at the city’s public pools were required to wear “swimming attire” in the water.

“Council works within guidelines set out by (New South Wales) Health, and therefore doesn’t permit the wearing of inappropriate clothing, or ‘street’ clothing, due to potential health risks,” Coyte told the Mercury.

Signs were posted at all council-run pools, advising swimmers that appropriate swimming attire must be worn in the water, and lifeguards were required to enforce the rule, a council spokeswoman said.

Yet the council apologized and indicated it would investigate Pulo’s complaint.

SOURCE





Embarrassing nanny state red tape strangling builders in South Australia

BUILDERS are spending more than 20 hours on jobs that should take six, and are forced to complete complicated risk assessments for basic tasks because of "embarrassing" overregulation, their peak industry group says.

In its latest policy release, the Master Builders Association has put forward a six-pronged plan to tackle red tape and duplication of regulation, including the establishment of a South Australian productivity commission to report on statewide economic issues.

The recently appointed director of policy for the SA branch of the MBA, Ian Markos, said a "nanny state" approach was stifling job creation.

"There's a raft of laws and regulations. You've got employment laws, you've got taxation laws, you've got environmental laws, you've got work health and safety laws, local council regulations. We're saying enough is enough," he said.

"We have members telling us of six-hour jobs taking 21 hours, seven-page risk assessments required to use a silicon gun, even when the same information had already been recorded on another form, and even bricklayers battling to understand what their 'hierarchy of controls' are when building a small wall."

The MBA says builders have been forced to:

EMPLOY three people for a full day to install a window when the underlying job took two people only three hours.

SPEND more time filling out a risk assessment on a crane than the crane took to unload the steel on a building site.

PAY safety consultants to interpret safety laws before being given reports they still cannot understand.

COMPLETE a consultation document and written risk assessment before safety barriers could be installed to protect the public.

However, as a former regulator with SafeWork SA, Mr Markos acknowledged the difficulties associated with streamlining a bloated bureaucracy.

"When you're talking about bureaucrats, they have a vested interest in writing laws and writing codes to maintain their job," he said.

"A lot of those bureaucrats have never worked in the private sector. A lot of them don't even mix or meet with the people in the private sector, or have a real understanding of how these rules may affect the people that are trying to run a business and employ people."

Romaldi Constructions managing director Mario Romaldi said the Federal Safety Commission was a prime example of unnecessary duplication that was taking a toll on the industry.

"Why have our state-based legislation if the Federal Safety Commission is going to overrule it?" he said.

"While having to manage the copious amounts of paperwork, the guys working on site don't have enough time to keep their eye on the actual safety issues."

"It is very costly, and especially these days when lots of us are working for small margins, to have that cost imposed could be the difference between winning and losing projects."

The MBA is also calling on the State Government to:

REQUIRE all new legislation to be supported by a regulatory impact statement and cost-benefit analysis and be subject to Parliamentary scrutiny.

LOBBY the Federal Government to close the Federal Safety Commission.

REMOVE barriers to local participation in State Government projects.

SIMPLIFY tendering processes.

RECOGNISE, emphasise and encourage the entrepreneurial spirit.

SOURCE





COMPARE AND CONTRAST

Disrespecting Christ

Josh Ladgrove's one-man show, Come Heckle Christ, will feature at the festival later this month despite more than a dozen official complaints.

The show begins with Ladgrove, who has long hair and a beard, arriving on stage in flowing robes and sticky taped to a makeshift crucifix.

However, the comedian says the show is not a commentary on religion.   "The show is just an opportunity for the audience to come along and heckle an idiot - that's me - for an hour," he said.  "It's an entirely improvised show; there is no script, there is no premise, there's no preconceived idea of what needs to be said.

"It absolutely does not have to be about religion or Christianity or Jesus; it's simply a means to an end and a catchy title."

Ladgrove says he performed the show at last year's Melbourne Fringe Festival without complaint and is surprised at the reaction ahead of the Adelaide shows.

"I didn't think that Jesus was a particularly controversial topic," he said.  "I didn't think it was something that was so sensitive that it was off limits.

"Surely if we can't poke fun at religion and if we can't exercise our freedom of speech, then what's the point of being a free democratic society?"

However, Reverend Fred Nile from the Christian Democratic Party in New South Wales has taken to Twitter to query why the South Australian Government and BankSA were supporting "anti-Christian hate".

He says "free speech does not justify blasphemy" and has urged people to email both the State Government and BankSA and ask them to stop the show.

SOURCE

Disrespecting Islam

COMEDY is known for pushing boundaries. But Susan Provan has some she will not cross. The extensively travelled director of Melbourne's International Comedy Festival has zero tolerance for racism.

Her stance on racism raised the ire of the Herald Sun's right-wing columnist Andrew Bolt when she deliberately crossed two American comics off the festival's invitation list in 2003 after they made derogatory jokes about Muslims. But Provan is unapologetic.

"It worries me, the whole governments' exacerbation of fear that is going on in the world at the moment, and I think the Muslim community particularly are suffering here," she says. "I've been incredibly lucky in that I have been able to travel to a lot of these places and I just think if people could have a wider sense of other communities, they would be a lot more relaxed and less fearful about perceived threats."

But doesn't that mean racially charged events of the past year will not be the stuff of gags at the 20th comedy festival?

Not at all, she insists. "Comedians have always commented on what is going on in the world and deliberately set out to shock and challenge, whether you agree with them or not. When something big happens, comedians talk about who is going to dare to stick their toe in the water and do the first jokes about something that is devastating. It's always interesting to see how it is perceived."

SOURCE

Wednesday, February 12, 2014



More multiculturalism in Australia:  Gang rape by Africans

COMMUNITY leaders have warned of possible reprisal attacks by Blacktown’s Pacific Islander community targeting young African-Australian men in the wake of the gang-rape attack on a 14-year-old Islander girl.

Blacktown Uniting Church Reverend Liva Tukutama said it was vital he and other Pacific Islander leaders reached out to African leaders to stop the young men of their communities seeking vengeance.

Meanwhile the victim’s mother says her daughter has been “broken into pieces” after what police described as a “horrendous” sexual assault by up to six men.

With tears welling in her eyes, the mother of the girl said she was heartbroken, furious and wanted to kill the attackers who had left her daughter traumatised beyond words.

The devastated mother’s comments came the same day a CCTV image of a man at a nearby bottleshop provided to The Daily Telegraph was passed on to police as part of the extensive investigation into the incident which has shocked the city.

“I’m feeling angry and disgusted at what’s happened to my daughter and I want to catch those mongrels and kill them,” the girl’s mother said.

“My daughter is broken into pieces. To herself, she feels ugly. Since this happened she is always putting her head down …. It’s disgusting what they did to her.  “She is a beautiful, nice girl — beautiful, beautiful.”

She said the 14-year-old was too traumatised to tell her or her sisters about what had occurred and was devastated that online bullies had already targeted her daughter for simply being in the park where the sexual assault took place at night.

She was reportedly “hanging out” with two friends in Bill Colbourne Reserve, Doonside around 11pm on Saturday night when the trio noticed “five or six” African-Australian men drinking alcohol.

The Daily Telegraph has obtained CCTV footage of a man buying a bottle of alcohol from the Doonside Cellars about 9pm on the night, who was yesterday identified by one of the victim’s friends as a member of the group in the park. Police are reviewing the CCTV image from the bottle shop and other businesses as they hunt down the rapists.

Bottle shop staff have confirmed that the timestamp vision is 90 minutes slow since the CCTV’s timer is not calibrated to the correct time.

A receipt corresponding to the filmed purchase show indicate the sale was made at 8.58pm.

At 11pm that night the teenage girl became the victim of a prolonged gang rape described by Superintendent Gary Merryweather as “horrendous” and “unprovoked”.

It is understood the girl — who was being consoled by friends at school yesterday — was walking home when one of the men “touched her inappropriately”.

That man and the remainder of the group then allegedly “overpowered” the teenager in the park before raping her in an ordeal that last 30 minutes, Supt Merryweather said.

After the rape, the victim raced to the nearby home of her friend whose family members described her as “almost inconsolable” and “practically hysterical”.

The victim’s friend, who cannot be identified, told The Daily Telegraph he had seen a group matching a description of the alleged offenders drinking from a liquor bottle shortly before his friend was raped.

“We were just hanging around,” he said. “I had to leave the park ...(The victim) is stressed today.”

The girl’s friend said the men were known drug dealers and that that the third friend in the group had intended to make a purchase.

The friend’s mother is understood to have called police and the young victim was taken by ambulance from the home a few hours later.

“Being of such a tender age she is traumatised to an extent that I can’t even describe at this stage,” Supt Merryweather said.

SOURCE






Labor backpedals on call for navy inquiry

LABOR has backflipped on its call for an inquiry into the navy over allegations of asylum seeker abuse, saying it has every confidence in the servicemen and women on the high seas.

Opposition leader Bill Shorten on Saturday issued a statement clarifying Labor was not seeking an inquiry into the navy's alleged conduct, despite earlier comments to the contrary by an opposition MP.

"Our navy servicemen and women do an outstanding job on the high seas," a spokesperson for Mr Shorten said in a statement to AAP.   "The opposition has every confidence in the skills and professionalism of our navy."

Earlier shadow parliamentary secretary Matt Thistlethwaite said claims that sailors had burned asylum seekers should be treated with "healthy scepticism", adding he had confidence in the navy.

But given the allegations were still being aired, he said an independent investigation would be appropriate.  "That's the best way to vindicate the Australian navy," he told Sky News on Saturday.

The suggestion sparked an explosive response from Immigration Minister Scott Morrison, who issued a lengthy statement blasting Labor as weak for supporting "baseless sledges" against the navy.

"Unlike the Labor Party, the government will continue to back our navy and customs personnel in the face of these wild, unsubstantiated allegations," he said.

"Labor's call for an inquiry, thereby legitimising these outrageous and unsubstantiated claims of torture, is a vote of no confidence by Labor in our navy and Customs and Border Protection Service."

The opposition said the minister was being "hysterical", and the culture of secrecy around border protection wasn't making the navy's job any easier.

Customs and Border Protection also issued a statement on Saturday, hosing down claims it would be launching fresh inquiries into the abuse allegations levelled at the sailors.

"Border Protection Command remains confident its personnel continue to act with the highest levels of professional conduct in a demanding and difficult environment," the statement said.

SOURCE






Paying piper for slander begs answers

“OUR” ABC and the late US senator Joseph McCarthy have a lot in common.

Both are guilty of making reckless and unsubstantiated accusations and public attacks against individuals and institutions that hold views contrary to their own.

At least Senator McCarthy correctly identified the very real Communist infiltration of senior circles in the US State department. The ABC’s success rate is not as good.

It has been reduced to publishing secret documents - stolen by an American defector - that undermine the security of Western democracies.

Now the ABC has joined Fairfax Media in an attempt to undermine the Coalition’s all-too successful Operation Sovereign Borders exercise that has halted the flow of illegal people-smuggler vessels.
Stopping the boats also means stopping the deaths at sea that Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young dismissively refused to accept any responsibility for by saying: “Tragedies happen, ­accidents happen.”

Both the ABC and Fairfax have done their best to justify the publication of uncorroborated claims of torture by RAN personnel made by disaffected illegal people-smuggler clients.

On Friday, finally gave them a deserved broadside, saying Customs and the RAN had saved “thousands of lives” between Christmas ­Island and Java over the past four years.

“My people have been spat on, abused, treated like servants, and have ­endured all of that to save more than a thousand lives, and yet they’ve also had to endure the horror of fishing out hundreds of people floating dead in the water,” he said.

“I am absolutely sick to the stomach that this Australian iconic news agency would attack the navy in the way that it has.”

Senator Johnston joined the growing chorus for an ­investigation into the ABC, saying naval personnel were heroes.

“If ever there was an event that justified a detailed inquiry, some reform, an investigation of the ABC, this event is it,” he said. “They themselves have cast a giant shadow over the veracity of their reporting and yet they’ve besmirched these hardworking people.”

ABC chief Mark Scott would not respond.

Showing far greater leadership, Senator Johnston stood up for the men and women who have to deal with illegal boat arrivals and told of the onerous service they provide.

“I have got people on nine-day turnarounds to Christmas Island, I’ve got post-traumatic stress to deal with … and I’ve got unsubstantiated allegations. Let’s get a bit real here and give somebody a bit of natural justice please,” he said.

“Let’s see the allegations first, let’s have more than just rumour, innuendo, and hearsay please.

“When you give me something to act upon that is more than just hearsay, innuendo and rumour we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it.”
He said he had spent a week aboard an Armidale-class ­patrol boat and had the greatest confidence in the service men and women. “I’m backing them at every turn of every corner. I have not said much because, I have to confess, I was extremely angry. I ­required some time to cool off.

“They are heroes. They have done a courageous - laden with integrity - difficult task thrust upon them by probably the greatest policy failure Australia has ever seen.”

Foreign Minister Julie ­Bishop agrees: “There most certainly should be an apology.

Our navy personnel are working in very difficult circumstances. In the recent past they’ve had to deal with over a thousand deaths at sea from asylum-seeker boats sinking at sea,” Ms Bishop said.

“The ABC claimed there was evidence to support claims our navy had deliberately mistreated asylum seekers by causing them bodily injuries, that they’d deliberately abused them. Well, those claims have not been substantiated.

“The ABC management admits it got it wrong, but it refuses to apologise. If these claims were made against individual navy personnel, it would be the basis for a defamation action.”

The relevance of the ABC is under question as it never has been before. The emergence of the internet as a major international news source has ­undermined any relevance the disputed Australia Network may once have had.

Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull believes that live streaming of ABC News 24 would effectively and more cheaply satisfy the Australian Network audience.

Merging ABC and SBS has been mooted. The actual need for expansive taxpayer-funded communication networks operated by the government must be questioned.

Public broadcasting should be paid for by those it plays too, and receive a greatly reduced level of taxpayer support.

Those who want to pay for “our” ABC should be able to do so, those who feel that it is no longer “ours” should not be obliged to

SOURCE





Put charities commission on backburner

The New Zealand Charity Commission was in operation for half a decade before the NZ government decided it wasn't providing value for money and abolished it. In the UK, the Charity Commission for England and Wales has stuck around for decades despite multiple reports declaring it is not providing value for money - the latest such report was released just this week by the Parliamentary Accounts Committee and deemed the commission 'not fit for purpose.'

Compared with those countries, Australia is lucky. We can abandon our experiment with this failed model of charity regulation after just one year.

The Australian Charities and Not-for-Profits Commission (ACNC) was created by the Gillard government in December 2012 to reduce red tape, enhance public trust in charities, and police fraud and wrongdoing in the sector.

So far, the ACNC has not made significant progress on these goals, and the international record of charities commissions suggests that future success is unlikely. On public trust, for example, it is noteworthy that in early 2013 Australians already rated charities more trustworthy than Federal Parliament, the High Court, or the ABC. More importantly, trust levels in Australia were approximately the same as in England and much higher than in New Zealand, both of which had charities commissions at the time.

On red tape reduction, the ACNC has so far failed to obtain the cooperation of the state governments of NSW and Victoria. Considering the large portion of the charity sector's regulatory burden that state governments represent, no serious effort to reduce red tape can proceed without those governments' cooperation.

Donors must be able to give to charities with confidence. Fortunately, the kind of oversight that gives donors confidence can now be conducted without added layers of red tape.

Wealthy philanthropists, who represent an increasingly important segment of Australia's charitable donation market, usually conduct their own research. They review a charity's finances and operations, and after their donation has been spent, they evaluate what kind of 'social return on investment' the charity was able to achieve.

For small household donors who may not have the means to conduct extensive research on their own behalf, a new resource has emerged: online charity evaluators. These sites compile information about charities - statistical data as well as more holistic information - and then organise this information in a way that is accessible to the average non-specialist who just wants to write a cheque to a good cause.

 It is vitally important to preserve the separation between the institutions of civil society and government. Abolishing the ACNC is the first step in preserving charities' independence and returning their regulatory burden to a reasonable level.

 SOURCE