It appears that in a Morrison-led economy not all of his aspirational folk "who have a go" are actually managing to "get a go"

Credit Suisse Research Institute, Global wealth report 2019, excerpt:

For the past decade, global wealth creation has centered around China and the United States. This year, the United States extended its unbroken spell of wealth gains, which began after the global financial crisis in 2008. The United States also accounts for 40% of dollar millionaires worldwide and for 40% of those in the top 1% of global wealth distribution. Wealth in China started the century from a lower base, but grew at a much faster pace during the early years. It was one of the few countries to avoid the impact of the global financial crisis. China’s progress has enabled it to replace Europe as the principal source of global wealth growth and to replace Japan as the country with the second-largest number of millionaires. More tellingly, China overtook the United States this year to become the country with most people in the top 10% of global wealth distribution. 

The rest of the world has not stood still. Other emerging markets – India in particular – have made a steady contribution, which we expect to continue over the next five years. However, overall worldwide growth was modest in the 12 months up to mid-2019. Aggregate global wealth rose by USD 9.1 trillion to USD 360.6 trillion, representing a growth rate of 2.6%. Wealth per adult grew by just 1.2% to USD 70,850 per adult in mid-2019. The number of new millionaires was also relatively modest, up 1.1 million to 46.8 million. The United States added 675,000 newcomers, more than half of the global total. Japan and China each contributed more than 150,000, but Australia lost 124,000 millionaires following a fall in average wealth.....

Comparing total wealth gains and losses across the most important countries....The main losses occurred in Australia (down USD 443 billion), Turkey (down USD 257 billion) and Pakistan (down USD 141 billion).

During the past year, the total number of UHNW  [Ultra High Net Worth] adults has risen by 6,870 (4%), with every region except Africa recording a net increase. The regions adding most members were North America (4,570), Latin America (870) and Europe (710). China (up 370) and India (up 54) had a relatively quiet year. The individual countries gaining the most members were the United States (4,200) and – more surprisingly – Brazil (860) and Russia (400). Losses occurred in Korea (down 140), Turkey (down 230), Italy (down 270) and Australia (down 280)......

According to our estimates, the number of global millionaires could exceed 62 million in 2024, a rise of almost 16 million from today, and 49 million from the beginning of the century......Among developed economies, millionaire numbers in Germany, France, Italy and Sweden are expected to rise roughly in line with the global average. Canada and Spain should perform a little better, and Japan and Portugal much better. However, growth of millionaire numbers in the United Kingdom after Brexit is unlikely to match the rest of the world and we think this will also be the case with Australia and Norway. 

Also according to Credit Suisse:

• only 29 of the current crop of wannabe millionaires will make it into the winners circle by 2024; and

• Australia's wealth to GDP ratio has fallen since its 2015 level.

Read the full report here.

While for all those other Australians who are not even close to becoming millionaires, the Australian Bureau of Statistics reveals in System of National Accounts 2018-19:

• households have $46.42 billion less in total savings than they had four years ago;

• net household savings are the lowest they have been since the Global Financial Crisis years;

• these households spend less on daily needs to offset almost stagnant wages growth and a collective income tax payable bill which is $56.15 billion higher than it was in June 2015;

• regardless of any reduction in spending on daily needs, households owed a total of $95.8 billion more in loans, placements & accounts payable than they did in June 2018; and

• although employee compensation (wages) has grown modestly in the last financial year, as a share of gross national income employee wages have dropped to 48.44 per cent of the total.

Intelligence and Security Committee of the Australian Parliament declined to recommend passage of Minister for Home Affairs Dutton's identity matching services bill

The Guardian, 24 October 2019:

Mark Dreyfus, as the most senior Labor member on the committee, also commented on the bill: 

The Intelligence and Security Committee of the Parliament is declining to recommend the passage of the identity matching services bill. 

Instead, Labor and Liberal members of the committee are uniting to recommend that the identity matches services bill be completely redrafted and referred back to the Intelligence and Security Committee for further inquiry when it is reintroduced. 

In taking this step, I congratulate all members of the committee for putting the national interest first and sending a strong message about the value of this committee. 

The identity matching services bill purports to facilitate the exchange of identity information pursuant to the objective of an intergovernmental agreement reached by Coag [in] October 2017. 

But it includes none of the limitations or safeguards anticipated by that agreement. 

The bill includes almost no limitations or safeguards at all. 

As explained in the committee’s report, the identity matching services bill would authorise the Department of Home Affairs to create and maintain facilities for the sharing of facial images and other identity information between government agencies and in some cases, non government agencies entities. 

The bill would also authorised the Department of Home Affairs to develop and maintain to centralised facilities for the provision of what are called identity matching services. 

The first of these two facilities would be called an interoperability hub. 

The Hub would act as a router through which government agencies across Australia could request and transmit information as part of an identity matching service. 

The second would be a federated database of information contained in government identity documents. As discussed in the committee’s report, the potential implications of these two new facilities for the privacy of all Australians are profound. 

Those implications do not appear to have even been considered by the Minister for Home Affairs or by his department. 

While a bill provides for six different identity mentioned services, the service that elicited the most concerned from submitters to the committee’s inquiry is the face of identification service. 

That service would enable authorities across Australia to use huge databases of facial images to determine the identity of an unknown person. 

Using that service, a law enforcement agency could submit a facial image for matching against a database of facial images contained in a in government identification documents, such as a database containing every driver licence photo in Australia. 

In return, the agency would receive a small number of matching or near matching facial images from the database. The agency could then access biographical information associated with those images. 

The potential for such a service to be used for mass or blanket surveillance, such as CCTV being used to identify Australians going about their business in real time was raised by numerous submitters to the inquiry......

Mark Dreyfus: Like my colleagues on the committee, I do not believe that the government is proposing to engage in or to facilitate the mass surveillance of Australians. But I do accept that, given the near complete absence of legislated safeguards in the Identity-Matching Services Bill 2019, those concerns cannot simply be ignored. If there is no intention for the proposed identity-matching services to be used to engage in mass surveillance activities, the government should not object to amending the bill to ensure that those services cannot, as a matter of law, be used in that manner. 

Concerns were also raised about the proposed one-to-many identity-matching service being used to identify people who are engaging in protest activity. This does concern me. It was only this month that the Minister for Home Affairs, the minister responsible for this very bill, called for mandatory prison sentences for people who engage in protest activity; called for the same people to have their welfare payments cancelled; and also called for them to be photographed and publicly shamed. As presently drafted, this bill would not prohibit authorities from using the proposed face-matching services to identify individuals in a crowd who are engaging in lawful protest activity. That would be concerning in the best of times; it is particularly concerning in the light of the authoritarian disposition of the Minister for Home Affairs. 

A raft of other concerns was expressed about the Identity-Matching Services Bill, including in relation to this government’s abysmal record on cybersecurity. 

I do not propose to list all of the concerns here today, but I encourage everyone to read about them in the committee’s report. 

I would like to thank my colleagues on the committee, Labor and Liberal, for their work on this important report. It should not escape anyone watching these proceedings today that, by agreeing to the set of recommendations contained in this report, the Liberal members of the committee have placed the national interest first. For that, I would like to pay tribute to Senators Stoker, Fawcett and Abetz, and the members for Canning, Berowra and Goldstein. I would like to pay particular tribute and extend my thanks to the chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee, the member for Canning. I also thank the committee secretariat for their excellent work, both in this parliament and in the last parliament, which underpins this report.

Text of the Identity-matching Services Bill 2019 can be found here.

Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, "Advisory report on the Identity-matching Services Bill 2019 and the Australian Passports Amendment (Identity-matching Services) Bill 2019" can be found here.

Australian Home Affairs Minister calls for welfare payments to be stopped for climate change protesters

The six-person protest in Creek Street, Brisbane
Image: Daily Mail

According to an interview with 2GB radio shock jock Ray Hadley, Australian Minister for Home Affairs & Liberal MP for Dickson Peter Dutton is not happy with six climate change protesters belonging to Extinction Rebellion blocking Creek Street, Brisbane, for one hour and forty minutes on Wednesday 2 October 2019.

He also took exception to the fact that the magistrate they appeared before did not record convictions after all six entered guilty pleas.

Of course in the end Dutton sheeted home the blame for this incident to Queensland Labor governments appointing magistrates who were too tolerant of civil disobedience – just as he did in 2016 after Magistrate Trevor Morgan said he would probably be proud if it were his daughter taking part in protest action.

It seems Dutton hasn’t forgotten those protesters who climbed on his electoral office roof in 2016.

The New Daily, 3 October 2019: 

Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton has called for climate change protesters to be “named and shamed”, jailed and have their welfare payments stopped. 

Warning protesters in Queensland are “putting lives at risk”, Mr Dutton said the fines are not good enough after the activist group Extinction Rebellion caused traffic chaos in Brisbane. 

“The community expectation is that these people are fined or jailed and they should be jailed until their behaviour changes because they are putting lives at risks. They are diverting police and emergency service resources from tasks they should be undertaking otherwise,” Mr Dutton said. 

Speaking on radio 2GB, Mr Dutton was then asked by host Ray Hadley if the protesters should have their welfare payments stopped because they are “bludgers sticking themselves to roads”. 

“Well, I agree, Ray,” he said….. 

Mr Dutton urged people to surveil the protesters and distribute their images. 

“People should take these names and the photos of these people and distribute them as far and wide as they can, so that we shame these people,” Mr Dutton said. 

“They are acting outside of the law. Let their families know what you think of their behaviour.” 

“They keep turning up week after week because a slap on the wrist is just not working.” 

Mr Dutton also called for mandatory sentencing of protesters disrupting traffic and shutting down cities….. 

“But you know raiding farms, climbing on to the roof of my electoral office and then get told by the magistrate he would be proud of her if it his daughter had done it.

The Saturday Paper, 4 October 2019:

A number of Liberal National Party MPs have supported Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton’s call to strip welfare payments from climate protesters and jail them. Employment Minister Michaelia Cash told The Australian ($): “Taxpayers should not be ­expected to subsidise the protests of others.” Other supporters include ($) Scott Buchholz, the assistant minister for road safety. Their backing comes after Dutton agreed with the 2GB radio host Ray Hadley that welfare payments of climate protesters should be cut and added: “they should be jailed until their behaviour changes”.  The Greens leader, Richard Di Natale, told the ABC that Dutton was starting to “sound more like a dictator than he is an elected politician. Because somebody says something that he doesn’t like, that he doesn’t support, he’s saying we’re going to strip away income support.” Some activists have taken leave from their jobs to protest against government inaction on climate change. The Morrison government is also seeking to require Newstart recipients who fail drug tests to use cashless welfare cards.

The Ugly Face of Climate Change Denialism on NSW North Coast: "your world's future is in the hands of God, not in the predictions of a little girl and false prophets"

Coffs Harbour Christian Community School, newsletter, 26 September 2019, p.1:

https://twitter.com/FairAusPol/status/1178869197574553601

The Daily Examiner, 3 October 2019, p.1:

The Dean of Grafton’s Christ Church Cathedral has spoken out against a Coffs Harbour school principal who used a school newsletter to slam students for their recent climate strike.

In a column released last Thursday, Coffs Harbour Christian Community School principal Rodney Lynn dismissed the climate change protest as “doomsday waffle talk” and took aim at the face of the global climate strike, Swedish 16-year-old Greta Thunberg.

In response, Christ Church Cathedral’s Very Reverend Gregory Jenks said the piece was typical of the agenda of conservative right-wing Christians, and said it was inappropriate commentary from someone involved in the education system.....

Rev Jenks said he believed the views of Mr Lynn were not good for the planet and not good for children.

“I think it betrays a stunning ignorance of thinking on climate science, and (Mr Lynn) is not in the same league to be up against thousands of climate scientists,” Rev Jenks said.....

Rev Jenks, who is an adjunct senior lecturer in the School of Theology at Charles Sturt University, said Mr Lynn’s use of scripture was “incredibly naive and fundamentalist”.

“What’s sad is this isn’t a personal agenda, this is typical of the agenda of conservative right-wing Christians articulating a ultra-conservative expression of Christianity and it’s nasty,” he said.

ABC News, 1 October 2019:

Trevor Crawford has two children at the school and said he was "absolutely disgusted" when he read the column in the school newsletter.

He said the column was "over the top", especially Mr Lynn's indirect comments about Ms Thunberg.

"To turn around and use her condition of Asperger's as a mental problem and that must be a reason why she shouldn't be believed, it's wrong," he said.

An estimated 6 million marchers participated in the global climate strikes, led by Ms Thunberg, on September 20 and 27 this year.

Liisa Rusanen from the Coffs Coast Climate Action Group also criticised Mr Lynn, saying "everything Greta Thunberg says is thoroughly backed by science".

"I'm surprised that a school principal doesn't recognise that.".....

The newsletter was published a day after Prime Minister Scott Morrison warned against causing children "needless anxiety" about climate change.

In 2004, Mr Lynn apologised after distributing leaflets describing state schools as "seed plots of future immorality, infidelity and lawlessness".

The school's chairman declined to comment, and Mr Lynn has been contacted for comment.

Daily Mail, headline, 1 October 2019:

White, middle-aged Christian private school principal slams climate campaigner Greta Thunberg, 16, as a 'little girl with mental problems' - and urges students not to believe her 'doomsday waffle talk'

BACKGROUND

Coffs Harbour City Council holds its next ordinary monthly meeting on 10 October 2019. Media reports this week suggest that councillors may be considering declaring a climate emergency, thereby joining 55 other Australian local governments who have declared to date. These include Clarence Valley, Lismore, Byron Bay and Tweed councils in the Norther Rivers region.

Students and supporters in the Coffs Habour area participated in the 20 September 2019 global School Strike 4 Climate. Coffs Harbour students also participated in two other school strike protests in 2018 & early 2019.

Up to 29 September 2019 the Australian media have reported 44 women died by violence so far this year

Forty-four women were murdered in this country in just 272 days - that's the equivalent of one death every 6 days.

https://twitter.com/JointDestroyer/status/1178133707225387008

With rare exceptions women who die violently are usually killed by male acquaintances, partners, husbands or other male family members.

Tweet of the Week

THE GRETA THUNBERG HELPLINE:
For adults angry at a child. pic.twitter.com/JAtIKyG4Va

— Mark Humphries (@markhumphries) September 26, 2019

Meet the Indue Class Warfare Card

Think the Australian Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison Government is not seriously considering a national roll-out of the Indue Cashless Debit Card?

Do you think that living many hundreds of kilometres in any direction from current debit card trial sites proves that that the Liberal Party's head hater of the poor and vulnerable is not yet planning to specifically target you and your family?

Recently noticed that your bank's ATM now has a function icon which allows the limited use of these particular debit cards in order to facilitate a person's ability to access the paltry 20 per cent of a welfare payment which can be paid out in cash under this punitive income management scheme?

https://youtu.be/9RZSTx9khWw

20 September 2019 Student Strike 4 Climate in the NSW Northern Rivers

On 20 September 2019 at gatherings large and small across Australia during the Global Climate Strike  in excess of an estimated 300,000 people met to protest government and industry inaction in the face of global climate change.

Approximately 268,500 of these people participated in all eight capital cities.

Incredible pictures as Australia’s gathering for the #climatestrike
This is the huge crowd building up in Sydney.
Australia is setting the standard!
Its bedtime in New York...so please share as many pictures as you can as the strikes move across Asia to Europe and Africa! pic.twitter.com/7eAPUQPq5C

— Greta Thunberg (@GretaThunberg) September 20, 2019

Protests were reportedly also held at another 104 cities, towns and villages.

Echo NetDaily estimates close to 6,000 students and supporters participated in Byron Bay, 3,400 in Lismore and 1,580 in Pottsville.

In Grafton 200 people listened to stern words directed at prime minister and parliament.......

The Daily Examiner, 21 September 2019, p.3:

With more than 200 people marching down Prince St, it would be hard to deny something is building.

Supported by a sizeable contingent of adults, students in the School Strike 4 Climate marched through the Grafton CBD to protest inaction on climate change.

In a rousing speech in Market Square, strike leader and Year 12 student Shiann Broderick called out Prime Minister Scott Morrison and said a select few were benefiting from coal projects that were “sacrificing our future”.

Ms Broderick sent a clear message students would not be backing down after Mr Morrison and others in the community had earlier criticised the strikes. “We will not restrict our activism to out-of-school hours because this is the only way to make you listen,” she said.

“You are unhappy that we are not at school but I would be at school today if I didn’t have to teach you how to do your job.

“You say you don’t support schools being turned into parliaments but I think we should turn the parliament into a school since you so obviously need educating.”

With the crowd buzzing, Grafton High student Oskar Robertson said he was “sick and tired” of not having a say in decisions affecting his future and was “tired of old men in suits deciding on things that won’t even affect them”.

He too urged the crowd to keep up the fight against those who continued to “pass up our future for money”.

“If they don’t heed our demands and pass us off as some dumb kids trying to get off school for the day, we will shout so loud we will rock Parliament House to its foundations,” he said.

“We don’t want dirty coal and gas, we want clean energy that won’t poison our lungs and the lungs of the earth, that won’t send us hurtling towards an extinction event.”.......

Are some homeless people being denied access to affordable housing in Australia also?

It would be foolish in today's political environment - and with society seemingly drifting mindlessly further to the right each decade - to reject the propostion outright that this would not be occurring somewhere in Australia today.......

The Guardian, 17 September 2019:

Homeless people are being denied access to affordable housing because social landlords are routinely excluding prospective tenants who are deemed too poor or vulnerable to pay the rent, a study has revealed.

Research by the Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) found that “screening out” of homeless applicants nominated for newly available lets was widespread, as housing associations and local authorities increasingly ration their shrinking stocks of social homes.

In many cases nominees were refused a home because of the likelihood they would accrue major rent arrears after moving on to universal credit, because of the probability they would be hit by the bedroom tax or because the benefit cap had made them a financial risk.

Others were rejected after social landlords identified they had unmet mental health or addiction problems, often because of cuts to local NHS and housing support services. Individuals with unmet support needs were regarded as “too high a risk to tenancy sustainment”, the CIH said.

Homeless people were at risk of being caught in a “catch-22 scenario”, the CIH said, with some landlords’ letting practices creating a “perverse situation where the reasons why people may need access to social homes the most can often become barriers to accessing them”.

Some housing associations demanded that prospective tenants who would be moving on to universal credit pay a month’s rent up front, an impossible requirement for many homeless people. Landlords have been badly hit by rent arrears caused by tenants’ five-week wait for a first universal credit payment.

Faye Greaves, the CIH policy and practice officer, who wrote the report, said: “For decades, we have failed to build enough homes, and our welfare safety net is no longer fit for purpose. More and more people are turning to local authorities and housing associations for help to access social housing.

“But that leaves housing providers having to find a balance between people in acute need, local priorities and their need to develop sustainable tenancies. What we found is that relying solely on processes can end up having the opposite effect to that intended.”

It called on ministers to launch a major social housing building programme and scrap right to buy. There has been a net loss of 165,000 social homes in England since 2012, the CIH estimates. It adds that 90,000 of the 340,000 new homes needed every year should be set at social rent. In 2017-18 only 6,434 homes were built for social rent.

The findings will concern critics who believe some housing associations are becoming increasingly estranged from their charitable mission to house homeless people. Many were set up in the late 1960s on a wave of public outrage over growing homelessness typified by the famous BBC drama Cathy Come Home.

Jon Sparkes, the chief executive of Crisis, called for proper scrutiny of social landlords’ letting practices: “Having a safe and stable home is a human need, and this report paints a sorry picture of the difficulties that people who are homeless, or who are at risk of becoming homeless, face in accessing this basic right.”

Pre-tenancy screening is causing tension between housing associations, which want to minimise the damage to their balance sheet of taking on tenants at risk of rent arrears, and councils, which want to exercise their right to nominate social tenancies to reduce growing numbers of homeless people on their books.

The research did not ask what happens to homeless people who are refused social tenancies but the assumption is that most will continue to be housed in high-cost and often unsuitable temporary accommodation in the private sector. Local authorities in England spend nearly £1bn a year on temporary accommodation.

In recent years cuts to government grant funding have meant housing associations have adopted more commercial, profit-orientated approaches, resulting in some being accused of concentrating on building homes for private sale and “affordable rent” at the expense of the people they were set up to help.

The National Housing Federation, which represents housing associations, said its members were committed to providing homes for those most in need and on the lowest incomes but action was needed to reverse the “dire shortage of social rented housing caused by decades of underinvestment”.

David Bogle of Homes for Cathy, a group of housing associations dedicated to restoring the sector’s commitment to ending homelessness, welcomed the report. “Housing associations and local authorities need to be given additional support to develop new social homes and to allocate those homes to those who are homeless and in greatest need.”......

Report: CIH: put people before process when allocating social housing, 17/09/2019

Quote of the Week

"...now, as in the past, they [religious leaders] assume the right to impose their faith on others. Far from being denied a "voice" in the public square, they have a megaphone. What irks them is that fewer of us are listening." [Freelance journalist Julie Szego, writing in The Sydney Morning Herald, 1 September 2019]

Morrison Government's understanding of human rights and aged care appears flawed

"Restrictive practices can elicit concern for a number of reasons. Fundamentally, they impact on the liberty and dignity of the care recipient. In circumstances where they are not absolutely necessary, their use is likely to sit uncomfortably for many. Their use without lawful consent may infringe the resident’s legal rights and constitute a civil or criminal offence, such as assault or false imprisonment, although there are very few cases in Australia where a criminal or civil complaint has been pursued to challenge the use of a restraint in an aged care setting. Physical and chemical restraint can have significant adverse effects on a resident, both physically and psychologically. There are also fundamental questions about their effectiveness."  [Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety, Background Paper 4, May 2019]

9 News, 20 August 2019: 

The Commonwealth government recently introduced changes aimed at limiting the use of restraints in residential facilities. 

But experts believe the regulations have created many more problems than they solved. 

They are urging the Commonwealth to scrap the regulations and start again from scratch. 

Queensland's public guardian Natalie Siegel-Brown said the changes placed her agency and the community in a "really compromising" position. 

"Unfortunately in their current form, the principles actually regress the recognition of human rights of people living in aged care, particularly with respect to chemical restraints," she told the committee in Sydney on Tuesday. 

"But the entire suite itself lacks any monitoring, enforcement or oversight in any event, and this can lead to greater problems." 

Colleen Pearce, from the Victorian Office of the Public Advocate, said aspects of the regulations were flawed and ambiguous. 

"We consider the principles are inconsistent with people's human rights (and) would preferably be contained in legislation," 

Dr Pearce told the committee. "(The principles) introduce, in the case of physical restraints, a new flawed and ambiguous substitute decision-making regime, provide virtually no regulation of chemical restraint usage, and lack the safeguards of other restrictive practices regulatory schemes." 

Joseph Ibrahim, the head of the Health Law and Ageing Research Unit at Melbourne's Monash University, described the regulations as stupid. 

"There is no monitoring mechanism, there are no sanctions associated, there is no way of implementing or making sure the law comes into effect," Professor Ibrahim said. 
A group of advocates believe the government should be prohibiting the misuse of restraints and over-medication, rather than regulating them. 

They argue medication should only be used for therapeutic practices and be administered with a patient's free and informed consent. 

The group includes Aged and Disability Advocacy Australia (ADA) and Human Rights Watch, both of which addressed the hearing on Tuesday. 

"Older people in nursing homes are at serious risk of harm if this new aged care regulation is allowed to stand as is," ADA chief executive Geoff Rowe said. 

"Australia's parliament should act urgently to ensure that everyone, including older people, is free from the threat of chemical restraint.".....

The Canberra Times, 21 August 2019:

New rules on the use of restraints in aged care could lead to more elderly residents being sedated, a parliamentary inquiry has heard. 

The regulation is also unenforceable, and does nothing to relief the staffing pressures that have led to the use of restraints, expert witnesses have said..... 

Professor Joe Ibrahim from Monash University's Health Law and Ageing Research Unit said the regulation also did not recognise the pressures within aged care that forced staff to use restraints. 

"Staff restrain residents to get through their day because they don't have enough hands to get through what's needed or they don't have the skills, knowledge, ability to assess why a person has responsive behaviours or unmet needs to address that," Professor Ibrahim said. 

"A law that isn't monitored, has no sanctions, no way of checking, it will drive practice underground." 

Queensland Nurses and Midwives Union professional officer Jamie Shepherd said he knew of a case where one registered nurse had to administer medication to 166 residents on night shift, and management resisted rostering on an enrolled nurse to help until the RN threatened to call an ambulance each night to assist. 

Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation federal professional officer Julie Reeves said through a recent member survey, she learnt of an aged care home where there were just six staff rostered on overnight to look after 420 residents. 

"We cannot always effectively manage challenging behaviour issues for dementia residents while at the same time caring for others who have very complex health issues. 

We receive little to no support from management when things don't go as planned," she quoted the member as saying. 

Australian Human Rights Commission president, Emeritus Professor Rosalind Croucher said while parts of the regulation had merit, it should not be allowed to proceed unless there was a mechanism for independent oversight. "If it's a choice of it or nothing, nothing might be better than it as it is," Professor Croucher said....

Physical restraining devices currently allowed in Commonwealth-funded aged care facilities are:

Bed rails
Chairs with locked tables
Seat belts other than those used during active transport
Safety vests
Shackles
Manacles
[my yellow highlighting]

Chemical restraint is any medication or chemical substance used for the purpose of affecting a person's behaviour, other than medication prescribed for the treatment of, or to enable treatment of, a diagnosed mental disorder, a physical illness or a physical condition. 

Use of chemical restraint is specifically excluded from assessment in the National Aged Care Mandatory Quality Indicator Program. [See p.15]


BACKGROUND:

 Quality of Care Amendment (Minimising the Use of Restraints) Principles 2019

Vast majority of Australians (84%) support new laws to ban political parties and candidates from making “inaccurate and misleading” claims

The Guardian, 18 August 2019: 

The vast majority of Australians (84%) support new laws to ban political parties and candidates from making “inaccurate and misleading” claims, according to a new poll for the Australia Institute. 

On Sunday the progressive thinktank released a discussion paper canvassing options for truth in political advertising laws, following reports of widespread misinformation in the 2019 election campaign and calls from MPs including independent Zali Steggall and Liberal Jason Falinski for new minimum standards. 

The paper noted that truth in advertising laws operate in South Australia, where the Electoral Commission can request material be withdrawn and retracted and financial penalties apply, and New Zealand, where the media industry is self-regulated by an advertising standards body. 

It argues that industry bodies including Free TV Australia and the Advertising Standards Bureau could regulate truth in advertising, preventing the Australian Electoral Commission from being drawn into the contentious political process of adjudication. 

“Several models for increasing the truthfulness of election campaigns are available to policymakers,” it said. “They are popular and proven to work in other jurisdictions.” 

The paper includes results from a Dynata survey of 1,464 people conducted in the last week of July, with a margin of error of 3%, that found 84% of all voters want truth in advertising laws, with support in Labor, the Coalition and Greens all above the 84% level. 

Most respondents supported a range of penalties including fines (62%), forcing publications to retract claims (60%) and loss of public funding (54%). Criminal charges were supported by 42% of respondents. 

Respondents were unsure who should be the arbiter of truth, with support split between the judicial system (27%), electoral commissions (26%) and industry bodies (21%), with 15% unsure and 7% suggesting a new panel of experts. 

The survey also found 90% support for the proposition that newspapers, TV channels and social media networks should run corrections if they publish inaccurate or misleading ads.....

Galaxy Poll showed 2 out of 3 people believe religious organisations and individuals should not be allowed to discriminate against those who don’t hold the same views

Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG), Media Release 13 August 2019: 

 Religious Discrimination – What Australia Really Thinks 

The results of a Galaxy Poll, commissioned by Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG+) have been released today. 

Mr Morrison needs to consider the opinion of the “Quiet Australians” before he forges ahead with a Religious Discrimination Act, Commission or Commissioner. 

The issues of religious freedom for some are in reality discrimination for others. 

Very few are against religious freedom. But as the Poll shows many are against discrimination. Additionally, Christians in Australia are not persecuted but the legislation is being put in place just as a precaution because marriage equality became a reality in this country in 2017. 

Of those who were polled 51% identified as being religious and 49% identified as having no religion. 

The Poll shows 63% do not agree that the religious organisations should have the right to discriminate against LGBTIQ people. The same percentage applied when asked if religious organisations should have the right to discriminate against unmarried mothers, divorcees and couples in de facto relationships. (33% identified as Christian)

The Poll also showed that 62% believe religious organisations and individuals should not be discriminated against just because of their faith. 

Additionally, the Poll showed that 68% (2 out of 3) people believe, religious organisations and individuals should not be allowed to discriminate against those who don’t hold the same views. 

The Poll showed that 48% Christians do not agree with discrimination of LGBTIQ people and others who do not comply with the religious organisations ethos, while 13% do agree with discrimination.

Ends