Australian Politics
Anthony Albanese is deserted by the one group of voters he thought he could count on
Labor's traditional working class vote is deserting the Albanese government, according to a new poll.
In an even more concerning development for besieged Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, voters with vocational and TAFE educations are not defecting to progressive parties, such as the Greens or Teals, but directly to the Coalition.
The exodus was reported by Victorian-based pollster Redbridge, which found blue collar support for the government had slumped from 36 per cent to 30.
This sees the Government's two-party preferred support with this group drop from 57 down to 48 per cent.
More than half of those polled (53 per cent) said Labor is focused on the right priorities, with only 30 per cent thinking they the government had the right focus.
The dip in support from blue collared workers comes despite Mr Albanese's strong ties to the working class.
Mr Albanese continuously revisited stories from his childhood during his election campaign - recalling how he was raised by a single mother in commission housing.
The Prime Minister even labelled himself a 'working class boy from public housing'.
The cost-of-living crisis has turned many voters against Mr Albanese who was recently photographed enjoying a glass from a $500 bottle of wine - making him appear out of touch with his humble roots.
In another ominous sign for Labor, for the first time a majority of voters think Opposition Leader Peter Dutton and Coalition are ready to govern.
RedBridge Director Tony Bary said the trends were not good for Labor.
'A lot of the lead indicator numbers in our polling is moving away from Albanese and will start to drag his vote down if he doesn't take strong remedial action,' he told the Daily Telegraph.
'The Albanese Government's capacity for navel gazing on issues that aren't personally relevant to most voters is starting to become a big political problem.'
*****************************************************
Granny flat rule changes come into effect in Victoria amid hopes it will cut red tape
Cherie Gaskin wanted to provide her elderly parents with a safe, comfortable and affordable place to live.
When she decided to construct a secondary building, or granny flat, in her Bendigo backyard, Ms Gaskin said she had not realised how tricky the process would be.
"It's complicated, it's difficult, it takes much longer than what you think, and it's expensive," she said.
Ms Gaskin has welcomed changes to Victorian planning laws that mean secondary dwellings under 60 square metres will no longer require a planning permit.
"It's a great option now for people and everybody wins," she said.
The single mother said her parents, who live on the pension, were becoming anxious about their housing options amid an increasingly competitive rental market.
"I kind of looked at the backyard and thought 'it's not a huge backyard, but it is big enough'," she said.
Ms Gaskin applied for a permit to build a dependent person's unit, which there were specific regulations for.
She found a local builder who specialised in building granny flats and understood the legislation.
After some delays and a horrible experience of being scammed out of almost $30,000, she said her parents were due to move into their new home before Christmas.
She said there were strengths to the arrangement beyond just the economic advantages.
"When I was a kid, my grandfather, my mum's father, he lived with us for a while. I've got very fond memories of that," she said.
It would be a "return to those sorts of traditional families".
"With this new legislation, that whole process will be a lot easier, and with a lot more economic benefit for everybody," Ms Gaskin said.
What can you build?
Under the new laws, a secondary building of up to 60sq m on a block of land measuring 300sq m or more can be built without the need for a planning permit.
The Victorian government says this is the case even in a "heritage or neighbourhood character area" when specified requirements like height and colouring are met.
Only two local government areas allow people to live permanently in tiny homes without council approval. Thousands of people around the country are doing it anyway.
Anyone is allowed to live in the building, whether family, friends, or a renter.
This ruling applies as long as environmental or flooding overlays do not affect the lot.
However, applicants will still require a building permit.
The buildings also must be self contained, requiring some kind of kitchen and bathroom, and there can only be one secondary home on a lot.
The secondary home cannot be connected to a reticulated natural gas supply, and it does not need to allow for car parking space.
In New South Wales, changes to legislation in 2009 made it easier to build a secondary dwelling without development approval if the property was considered compliant.
Rules can differ between local councils, but across the state, as long as the property owner has obtained an occupation certificate, the secondary dwelling can be lived in by family or rented to tenants.
In South Australia, the government is seeking to clarify rules around granny flats or ancillary dwellings and to streamline the approvals process.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-12-15/victoria-granny-flats-rule-changes/103108998
***************************************************SA parliamentary committee recommends stricter rules but no duck hunting ban
A parliamentary committee has recommended duck hunting remain legal in South Australia but with stricter regulations for hunters and harsher penalties for those who break laws aimed at preventing animal cruelty.
The Select Committee Report on Hunting Native Birds also recommends controls such as marshals for shooting on crown land and funding for compliance by staff from the Department for Environment and Water.
A similar committee recommended banning duck hunting in Victoria in August.
Most duck hunting in South Australia occurs in the Riverland and the South East, near the Victorian border, so the committee has recommended preferencing South Australians for hunting permits if a ban eventuates in Victoria.
The RSPCA says the inquiry failed to address the concerns of South Australians who want the sport banned.
RSPCA animal welfare advocate Rebekah Eyers said the report did nothing to protect declining native bird populations.
"There's less wetland habitat that's available and we're heading into a drier El Niño — this is really serious," Dr Eyers said. "We have five out of the eight species being hunted in long-term decline. "This is a native bird emergency and hunting should be stopped."
No 'epidemic' of bad behaviour
The Legislative Council committee was made up of two Labor MLCs, two Liberals, one Green, one One Nation member and the independent Frank Pangallo.
One of the Liberals — Ben Hood — said duck hunting was already highly regulated. "I don't think the evidence that was heard from the committee was showing an epidemic of bad behaviour by hunters," he said.
"A majority of hunters are doing the right thing every season, but we do of course need to strike a balance with these recommendations. "They're not going to please either side of the debate but if should someone be found in breach of the [National Parks and Wildlife] Act then more serious penalties should be considered, but hunters should also know what they need to abide by."
Environment Minister Susan Close said the government would consider the recommendations.
"The state government is committed to balancing the best available ecological science with the social and cultural values of the community on this issue," she said.
The Department for Environment and Water has separately proposed changing a series of lakes in the South East from crown land into conservation parks, which would prevent duck hunting on them.
The Wattle Range Council voted this week to formalise its opposition to the proposed changes to Lake George, near Beachport, under the South East Coastal Lakes Project.
"I wanted to put the motion to council so our ratepayers and the community could see that we supported their stance," councillor Sharon Cox said.
"We have to remember that as elected members we have to represent them."
************************************
Natural Lifestyle Homes fined $100,000 for illegal demolition of 135-year-old Brisbane cottage
A judge has slapped an inner-city luxury home builder with a massive fine for the illegal demolition of a 135-year-old Brisbane cottage during a $2.4m mansion build, stating that fines need to be high enough to deter developers who may see flouting laws “as simply a cost of doing business”.
District Court judge David Kent ruled that Natural Lifestyle Homes (NLH) must pay a $100,000 fine after it pleading guilty to two charges related to carrying out a development without a permit at a 1888-built cottage that “was one of, or the oldest” home on one of Paddington’s most prestigious streets.
This came after Brisbane City Council appealed against Chief Magistrate Janelle Brassington fining NLH just $20,000 in June. The maximum penalty for a company is $3,002,625.
Judge Kent ruled that the $20,000 fine was “manifestly inadequate” and “fails to create a financial cost that gives effect to general deterrence” and $100,000 better reflected the seriousness of the offence.
“It is so low that it does have a tendency to be potentially seen as simply a cost of doing business for developers in this area,” Judge Kent ruled of the initial penalty.
The total building cost of the redevelopment, at 41 Wilden St, was in the range of $2m to $2.4m which Judge Kent said “dwarfs the amount of the fine”.
NLH co-owner Clifford William Keane had previously applied to demolish the cottage and create a replica of it as part of the construction of his massive new family home.
This was refused by the council because of the cottage’s heritage.
Despite not having approval, NLH later demolished the protected building without referring to council, or the building certifier or the Planning and Environment Court.
Council had only given development approval for a new home to be built but stipulated the 1888-built cottage must be retained.
It was to be shifted to allow the new construction work at the front of the block, but NLH “at some stage reached a decision that moving it forward and up into location on the new residential build was no longer feasible”.
So NLH decided to demolish or “disassemble” the cottage and build a replica of it instead.
“The serious actions taken, not in emergent circumstances, had the effect of overturning the council’s refusal of demolition,” Judge Kent ruled.
“Rather the council was presented with the fait accompli of the total destruction of the 1888 cottage which was explicitly protected by the statutory scheme, and by the conditions of the development approval which, as outlined above, the respondent disregarded,” he stated in his decision.
“The only retaining artefacts are an original door and a portion of two original windows,” Judge Kent’s decision states.
“By committing the offences (NLH) avoided the costs of consultants to advise on whether the cottage could be moved and reinstated prior to the exercise being commenced as well as the associated costs of performing the entire operation effectively, which may well have been significant; it appears to have been a difficult and complex exercise,” he states in his decision.
“There is no explanation as to why structural engineers were not consulted by (NLH) as to the feasibility of this relocation plan either before the cottage was relocated to the back of the site or at the point when the time came to attempt to move it forwards and into position,” Judge Kent states.
The home just four kilometres from the central business district and is a short stroll from the cafes and boutiques of Latrobe Terrace, is owned by NLH shareholder Mr Keane and his wife Jacinda, who was not prosecuted by council.
The Keane’s paid $1.08m for the cottage on a 400sqm block in October 2018, property records show.
The construction of a new $2.4m home by NLH was for Mr Keane and his wife who were intending to live there, and it was not intended to be a profitable exercise for NLH, the court heard.
NLH’s shareholders at the time of the demolition, Mr Keane, 41, from Paddington and business partner Mathew Ralph Carrolll, 54, a registered builder from Bardon, were also prosecuted by council and were slapped with fines of $19,000 and $15,000 by Chief Magistrate Brassington, but the council did not appeal those orders.
Mr Keane and Mr Carroll, through NLH, been flipping inner city properties for many years and were experienced in the industry, the court heard.
Mr Keane is a carpenter and has a degree in built environment while Mr Carroll has been a builder since 1998.
***************************************
Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM -- daily)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
***************************************
Evelyn Rae, a conservative Australian political commentator
Margo Robbie -- a beautiful australian
My son Joe at ANU
One of the happiest pictures ever -- Cleo Smith, aged 4
No comments:
Post a Comment