OUR ABC: Will voters be foolish enough to believe Turnbull Government protestations of innocence?

The Liberal Party of Australia Federal Council comprises 14 delegates from each State and the ACT - the State / Territory President, the State / Territory Parliamentary Leader, the President of the Young Liberal Movement, the President / Chairman of the Women’s Council and 10 other delegates.

According to the Liberal Party website; It is the Organisational wing’s highest forum for debating Federal policies. Views of the Federal Council are not binding on the Parliamentary party, but do carry considerable weight as the stated position of the organisation on a range of policy issues.

More than 100 Liberal Party MPs, senators and party members were in Sydney on 16 June 2018 for the party’s 60^th annual federal council which is expected to be the last one before the next federal election.

Here are some of the smiling faces at the event readers might recognise.

Twitter: A bevy of Liberal ministers: Sen. Mitch Fifield, Sen. Mathias Cormann, Julie Bishop MP & Malcolm Turnbull MP

The Young Liberals put forward the motion “That federal council calls for the full privatisation of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, except for services into regional areas that are not commercially viable” and on a more than 2 to 1 show of hands the council voted in favour this motion.

Fairfax media snapshot of ABC privatisation vote

Council delegate Mitchell Collier, federal vice president of the Young Liberals, asserted there was no economic case to keep the broadcaster in public hands.

He stated to the meeting that; “There are several ways we could privatise the ABC – we could sell it to a media mogul, a media organisation, the government could sell it on the stock market….Privatising it would save the federal budget $1 billion a year, could pay off debt and would enhance, not diminish, the Australian media landscape.”

At the end of the motion debate Mitch Fifield reluctantly got to his feet at the urging of the Chair to offer “comments and observations” but did not condemn the idea of privatisation or oppose the motion outright.

As the vote was on a show of hands only with no official count taken there is no record of how Fifield voted.

Four members of the party’s federal executive voted in favour of the call for privatisation -  Federal Liberal vice-presidents Karina Okotel and Trish Worth, Young Liberal president Josh Manuatu and vice president Mitchell Collier who moved the motion. Incoming Federal Liberal vice-president NSW member Teena McQueen also voted for privatisation.

The federal council also voted in favour of an efficiency review of the SBS network.

After the vote became public two Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) members made statements to the media.

RMIT University professor and IPA Senior Research Fellow Sinclair Davidson said privatisation of the ABC should be the “default” Coalition policy as the Liberals were the party of small government which supported private enterprise.

He also told Sky News that ‘Selling the ABC to Gina Rinehart would be magnificent’

IPA research fellow Chris Berg said the preferred option would be for ownership to be transferred to ABC staff or Australian taxpayers.

The Australian Minister for Communications and yet another IPA member, Senator Mitch Fifield, who has previously stated that there is “merit in the proposal to privatise the ABC is currently trying to hose down alarm in the national electorate over that federal council vote.

His claims that the Turnbull Government supports the Australian public broadcaster and denies it has any intention of selling off the ABC.

Given past behaviour of the Abbott and Turnbull governments, the belligerence displayed towards the ABC and the stable from which Fifield comes, I don’t believe a word of his denial.

Just as the Prime Minister's denial is not one on which I would depend.

The Australian Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs put a dog whistle to his lips and blew hard last week

This is Australian Minister for Citizenship and Multicultural Affairs, Liberal MP for Aston and child of British migrant parents, Alan Edward Tudge, quoted by ABC News on 14 June 2018:

The Federal Government is considering new English language requirements for anyone seeking permanent residency, with figures showing close to 1 million people in Australia cannot speak basic English.

Australia accepts up to 190,000 permanent migrants each year and while they need to prove they can understand English, their spouses, children and extended family accompanying them do not.

Multicultural Affairs Minister Alan Tudge argued this had created the "concerning situation" where "close to a million" Australians now do not speak the national language.

"That's not in the interests of those migrants but nor is it in the interests of social cohesion, because if we can't communicate with one another, it's very difficult to integrate," he said.

So there are “close to a million” Australians who don’t speak English, are there?

Although the article mention the 2016 Census it is unclear if Alan Tudge has actually read the English proficiency data released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

As is usual for a Coalition minister, he is applying a dog whistle to his lips and blowing hard.

This is what that census actually revealed:

*In the Australia in 2016 there were 2,071,384 females and 1,997,244 males who spoke another language at home who reported they spoke English well or very well;

*Another 460,039 females and 359,882 males who spoke another language at home reported a degree of difficulty in speaking English;

*That’s a total of 819,922 people stating a degree of difficulty or 3.5% of a population of 23,401,907 persons counted at the 2016 Census; and

*Of the number who had difficulty in speaking English only 193,036 (aged 0 to 85 years and over) spoke no English at all - that’s 0.82% of the entire Australian population.

So what any reasonable person can say with regard to English proficiency is that a total of 193,036 people from a non-English speaking background, ranging from newborns up to the very old do, not speak any English.

That number is 806,964 short of being one million - it's not even "close to a million".

As a ploy for presenting yet another bill to parliament which allows denial of permanent residency or denial of citizenship to migrants from non-English speaking countries, Alan Tudge’s argument is full of holes.

Being political tzar of all one surveys does not always mean that the world will bow down before you

There is no disputing that since becoming the ministerial head of that new 'super' federal government department, the Department of Home Affairs, Minister for Immigration and Border Protection Peter Craig Dutton has enjoyed a level of political power not shared by his ministerial colleagues. 

However he is obviously not happy that this power does not intimidate Australian courts and tribunals.

Perhaps this is because his Migration and Refugee Division and Character Assessments and Cancellations Branch are not always winning Dutton's war against orphans, refugees and those under threat of torture.

Administrative Appeals Tribunal decisions¹ in 2018:

1615725 (Refugee) [2018] AATA 1255

The Department of Immigration and Border Protection refused the applicant’s Protection visa. The applicant claimed he could not return to Malaysia due to his homosexuality as he would be subject to discrimination and abuse. The Tribunal set aside the decision. 

1419288 (Refugee) [2018] AATA 282

An application made by a family of three for Protection visas was refused by a delegate of the Minister for Immigration and Border Protection. The applicant seeking protection claimed he was at risk of torture if returned to Pakistan. The Tribunal remitted the decision with the direction that the applicant satisfied section 36(2)(aa) of the Migration Act 1958.

Manash (Migration) [2018] AATA 180

The review applicant sought two Orphan Relative visas for his younger siblings on the basis that their only existing carer, their mother, was incapacitated and could not care for them. The applications were refused by a delegate under section 65 of the Migration Act 1958 and the Tribunal remitted the applications for reconsideration with the direction they met the criteria for the visas.

Sheikh (Migration) [2018] AATA 1056

The Department of Immigration and Border Protection refused the visa applicant's Student visa. The visa applicant was a child residing in Somalia and both of his parents were deceased. His maternal aunt, an Australian citizen, was his carer and was attempting to return home to Australia to her family with the child. The Tribunal set aside the decision. 

Footnote:

1. "The review of decisions to refuse or cancel a visa on character grounds is a small component of the broad range of decisions about visas reviewed by the AAT, and an even smaller component of the overall caseload managed by the AAT. 

To put these matters in context, in 2016–17, the Tribunal finalised 42,224 reviews, of which 168 decisions (or less than 0.4 per cent), related to visa cancellations and refusals on character grounds

In considering and deciding these matters, Tribunal members are bound to apply Ministerial Direction No. 65 which sets out three primary considerations which must be taken into account. These include protection of the Australian community; the best interests of minor children in Australia; and expectations of the Australian Community.  The Direction also sets out five ‘other considerations’ which must also be taken into account, including: international non-refoulement obligations; the strength, nature and duration of ties; impact on Australian business interests; impact on victims; and the extent of impediments if removed.  These decisions are routinely published and contain an explanation of the Members’ evaluation of each of these considerations." [AAT appearance at Senate Estimates, 25 May 2018]

Only 39 days to go until concerned Australian citizens can opt out of the Turnbull Government's collection of personal health information for its national database

Apparently this email is currently being sent out to registered Australian citizens.

Australian Digital Health Agency, email, 5 June 2018:

Hello,

You are receiving this email because you registered your email address at myhealthrecord.gov.au to find out more information about how to opt-out of the My Health Record system.

If you do not want a My Health Record, you must register your choice between 16 July and 15 October 2018 during the opt-out period. It is not possible to opt-out of having a record before the opt-out period starts.

The opt-out period will not apply to individuals who have previously chosen to have a My Health Record, or were included in the Nepean Blue Mountains or North Queensland opt-out trials in 2016. Individuals who have an existing My Health Record can cancel their record at any time. Instructions on cancelling a record can be found on the My Health Record website.

Once the opt-out period starts you will receive another email letting you know that the opt-out period has started and what to do if you still want to opt-out.

A My Health Record is a secure online summary of an individual’s key health information. 1 in 5 Australians already have one. It’s an individual’s choice who sees their My Health Record, what’s in it and who it is shared with. My Health Record has safeguards in place to protect an individuals’ information including encryption, firewalls and secure login.

For further information about the My Health Record, please visit the My Health Record website.

Thank you,

The My Health Record System Operator
www.digitalhealth.gov.au

[my yellow highlighting]

Where the Trump Regime goes the far-right in Australia's Turnbull Government are sure to follow

Emboldened by the Heartland Institute's capture of the US Trump Government, I suspect that Australia will see a renewed push by one of the compatriots of this American lobby group  - the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) - to further wind back federal and state environmental protections.

The IPA already has an uncomfortably close relationship with the Turnbull Government as a number of its members are within its ranks.

This is the current state of play in the United States.

DeSmog Blog, 29 May 2018:

A lawsuit filed in March by the Southern Environmental Law Center and Environmental Defense Fund has revealed new levels of coordination between Scott Pruitt's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the climate science-denying think tank the Heartland Institute.

The EPA had repeatedly failed to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests by the two groups, which resulted in the lawsuit and subsequent release of the email communications.

However, both the EPA and the Heartland Institute have strongly defended their actions revealed by the newly released emails. EPA spokesperson Lincoln Ferguson told the Associated Press that communications with the Heartland Institute helped “to ensure the public is informed” and that this relationship “… demonstrates the agency’s dedication to advancing President Trump’s agenda of environmental stewardship and regulatory certainty.”

The current head of the Heartland Institute is former Congressman Tim Huelskamp who also was quick to defend the relationship.

“Of course The Heartland Institute has been working with EPA on policy and personnel decisions,” Tim Huelskamp said in a statement to AP. “They recognized us as the pre-eminent organization opposing the radical climate alarmism agenda and instead promoting sound science and policy.”

In March Huelskamp wrote a piece in The Hill titled “Scott Pruitt is leading the EPA toward greatness,” in which he made it quite clear that the reason for this greatness was that “Trump and Pruitt share an understanding that climate change is not a significant threat to the prosperity and health of Americans.”

While in Congress, Huelskamp’s top donor was Koch Industries, the massive petrochemical empire owned by the conservative billionaire Koch brothers, Charles and David.

However, this latest revelation is unlikely to derail Pruitt’s career at the EPA. Pruitt is currently the subject of at least ten investigations. At a scathing hearing in April, he was told by one Congressman that “you are unfit to hold public office and undeserving of the public trust.”

Still, Pruitt remains the embattled chief of the nation's top environmental agency under Trump, and, perhaps not surprisingly, President Donald Trump has been supportive of Pruitt……

Like his boss, Pruitt is quick to blame the media for his problems.

“Much of what has been targeted towards me and my team, has been half-truths, or at best stories that have been so twisted they do not resemble reality,” Pruitt said in his opening remarks to Congress during the April hearing. “I'm here and I welcome the chance to be here to set the record straight in these areas. But let's have no illusions about what's really going on here.”….

Supported by funding from the Koch network, Heartland has been actively spreading disinformation about climate science for years.

What the latest EPA emails reveal is the extent which these Koch-funded climate deniers are now in direct communication with the EPA and helping influence policy. 

One email from John Konkus, EPA’s deputy associate administrator for public affairs, assures Heartland's then-president Joseph Bast that “If you send a list, we will make sure an invitation is sent.”

The list refers to Heartland’s recommendations for economists and scientists that the EPA would invite to a public hearing on science standards. Under Trump and Pruitt, climate science deniers are now hand-picking who advises the EPA on climate change science….

Read the full blog post here.

BACKGROUND

 DeSmog Blog, undated:

May 16 - 18, 2010

The Institute of Public Affairs was a cosponsor (PDF) of the Heartland Institute's Fourth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC4). [28]

DeSmogBlog concluded 19 of the 65 sponsors (including Heartland itself) had received a total of over $40 million in funding since 1985 from ExxonMobil (who funded 13 of the organizations), and/or Koch Industries family foundations (funded 10 organizations) and/or the Scaife family foundations (funded 10 organizations). [29]

October 1, 2010

Together, the Heartland Institute, Americans for Tax Reform, the Property Rights Alliance, and the Institute of Public Affairs sponsored the Heartland Institute's Fifth International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC5) in Sydney, Australia. [30]

The Conversation, 6 June 2016:

A group of prominent Melbourne businessmen founded the IPA in 1943 in the wake of the United Australia Party-Country Party coalition’s devastating election loss.

Inaugural chairman G.J. Coles (founder of the Coles supermarket chain) outlined the IPA’s approach. He said it:

… did not wish to be directly involved in politics, but it wanted to help create a modern political faith, which would be constructive and progressive and which would receive a large measure of public support.

Concerned the Labor Party was leading Australia down a path of central planning and socialism, the IPA set out to develop and promote an alternative vision. To that end it published a 70-page pamphlet titled Looking Forward: “a post-war policy for Australian industry”.

One person paying close attention was Robert Menzies, who in 1944 described the pamphlet as:

… the finest statement of basic political and economic problems made in Australia for many years.

Many of the policies outlined in Looking Forward were incorporated into the platform of the Liberal Party, founded the following year.

Though the IPA and the Liberal Party were characterised in their early decades by a mildly Keynesian, interventionist approach to the economy, since the 1980s both have switched to a more hardline neoliberal philosophy – embracing free markets, lower taxes and trickle-down economics.

Shared personnel

David and Rod Kemp, sons of the IPA’s founder and driving force C.D. “Ref” Kemp, became key figures in both the IPA and the Liberal Party.

David wrote his honours thesis on the founding of the IPA, then combined an academic career with stints advising Malcolm Fraser before entering parliament in 1990. Rod took over and revitalised the IPA in 1982 before he was elected to the Senate, also in 1990. Both were ministers in the Howard government.

Former Liberal MP and leading economic “dry” John Hyde ran the IPA from 1991 to 1995, before being replaced by Mike Nahan, who is now treasurer in the Western Australian Liberal government....

When Herald Sun columnist Andrew Bolt was found to have breached Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act in 2011, the IPA was outraged and immediately launched a campaign to repeal the offending section.

A full-page advertisement was taken out in The Australian. It included the names of senior Liberals such as Jamie Briggs, Michaelia Cash, Mathias Cormann, Mitch Fifield, Nick Minchin and Andrew Robb.

Barnaby Joyce continues to lay waste to his political reputation

This was Nationals MP for New England Barnaby Thomas Gerard Joyce in late May 2018....

Photograph: Alex Ellinghausen @ellinghausen on Twitter

His journey to this point....

1. Stood for election to the Australian Senate on the back of an untrue statutory declaration in 2004;

2. As a senator for Queensland made an untrue declaration in 2010 and continued making untrue declarations in 2013 and 2016 by which time he was a Member of the House of Representatives with a NSW seat and Deputy Federal Parliamentary Leader of the National Party;

3. Became Deputy Prime Minister on 12 February 2016;

4. December 2016 began a relationship with a female member of his staff;

5. Calls for his resignation as Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources in June-July 2017 after allegations of ministerial misconduct in the allocation of Murray-Darling Basin water licences;

6. In August 2017 refused to resign from the Australian Parliament once it was discovered he had been ineligible to nominate as a candidate at federal elections since birth due to dual citizenship and, refused to stand down as Deputy Prime Minister;

7. Parliament referred the matter to the High Court of Australia;

8. Was ruled ineligible to sit in the Australian Parliament in an October 2017 High Court ruling and removed from parliament;

9. Accepts $40,000 cheque from billionaire head of mining company at a 21 November 2017 National Agricultural Day gala dinner, thanks her effusively saying he intends to spend this money on his property. Allegedly returned cheque next day incorrectly telling media that it was only a novelty cheque he was handed on the night, not a bankable cheque.

10. Having corrected his citizenship status, was re-elected as the MP for New England in a 2 December 2017 by-election and then re-instated as Deputy Prime Minister by the Turnbull Government;

11. On 6 December 2017 admits he separated from his wife but fails to reveal commenced co-habitation with a new pregnant partner;

12. January 2018 holidays with new partner in Queensland and on the Clarence Coast NSW;

13. On 7 February demands his personal privacy be respected;

14. February 2018 publicly admits to reporters that former staffer is his new partner, but it is not until 19 March that he officially includes her as such on Register of Members' Interests;

15. In February 2018 an internal investigation into his use of parliamentary expense entitlements was reportedly underway;

16. Allegations of sexual harassment appear in the media as well as allegations of public intoxication;

17. On week’s leave from 20 February 2018 to avoid embarrassing the Turnbull Government by becoming Acting Prime Minister while Turnbull was overseas;

18. Calls for privacy for self and new partner;

19. Resigned as Deputy Prime Minister 26 February 2018;

20. On 14 March 2018 belated entered gift of six months free rental accommodation in Armidale onto Register of Members' Interests. 

21. In March 2018 publicly raises doubts that he is the biological father of expected male child;

22. Baby born 16 April 2018 and admits he is the biological father;

23. By late April it was common knowledge that he had signed book deal for an autobiography with an August 2018 deadline for completion;

24. After giving a number of newspaper and televised interviews over the course of eleven weeks concerning his failed marriage/new relationship, he was reportedly paid $150,000 in May for a Channel 7 television interview yet to be aired; 

25. States this money will be placed in trust for infant son and social media discusses trusts as tax minimisation tool; 

26. As of 31 May 2018 existence of trust account and payment for interview not included in Register of Members' Interests; 

27. Commenced up to eleven weeks personal leave as of 29 May 2018 after private interview with Prime Minister. Media reporting that this leave is covered by a medical certificate, which ensures that he meets provisions concerning member absence from parliament and obliges the Opposition by convention to pair him in House Of Representatives voting thus allowing Coalition to continue governing.
Personal leave covers period in which Channel 7 interview might go to air; and

28. Release of Channel 7 promotional clips shown on 29 May 2018 reveal there is almost nothing Joyce will not say or do to keep the media spotlight trained on him.

To be continued....

http://cathywilcox.com.au/

Sometimes it is hard to believe how bone-achingly stupid governments can be…… Part One

Before the Abbott Coalition Government appointed John Lloyd Australian Public Service Commissioner in 2014 he was Director, Workplace Relations and Productivity at the far-right pressure group, the Institute for Public Affairs - so this was all but inevitable....

The Sydney Morning Herald, 18 May 2018:

The Prime Minister's department has refused to release emails relating to the public service commissioner John Lloyd and a right-wing think tank, saying they could prejudice an investigation into a possible breach of the law.

Mr Lloyd has previously rejected suggestions he gave special access and research to the Institute of Public Affairs after Labor senators last year raised an email he sent to a member of the group with an attachment showing what he described as "generous" provisions in public service enterprise agreements.

A freedom of information request sought emails held by Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet secretary Martin Parkinson mentioning Mr Lloyd and the IPA, and dated from October 23, after senators referred to the email in a Senate estimates hearing.

The department responded to the request last month by refusing to release two emails in Dr Parkinson's inbox, dated December 20 and December 22.

"I am satisfied that disclosure secretary Peter Rush wrote.

Releasing the documents could also "reasonably be expected to prejudice the impartial adjudication of a particular case", Mr Rush said.

One document is 30 pages long, and another is five pages.

The department and the Australian Public Service Commission have refused to answer repeated questions from Fairfax Media asking who is under investigation, who is conducting the probe, and the matters being investigated.

"The department has no comment," Prime Minister and Cabinet said in two separate statements.

The APS commission said it would not comment "on speculation about any investigation".

The issue of an investigation is still dogging John Lloyd and was addressed at a Finance And Public Administration Legislation Committee Estimates hearing on 21 May 2018, where at 1:57pm Lloyd went from professing unfamiliarity with a government act relevant to his current situation to this…….

Fairfax Media journalist tweeting about Senate Estimates hearing, 21 May 2018:

This is awkward. Public Service Commissioner John Lloyd is flat out refusing to say whether he is under investigation over his relationship with the IPA #estimates

— Michael Koziol (@michaelkoziol) May 21, 2018

A verbatim exchange-
McAllister: Are you under investigation for breaking the law?
Lloyd: I’ll take that on notice #estimates

— Michael Koziol (@michaelkoziol) May 21, 2018

Yes, the Federal Coalition Government really opted for a member of the brains trust with  the appointment of John Lloyd.

The Turnbull Government has the solution to its poll number blues already at hand - but will it act?

lesterlost.com

State and federal governments have known for years that there is a correlation between unoccupied residential housing, negative gearing of investment properties and capital gains by individuals in the higher income percentiles.

According to 2011 census, in Sydney's "emptiest" neighbourhood of the CBD, Haymarket and The Rocks, one in seven dwellings was vacant.

By the time of the 2016 Census there were 200,000 more homes sitting empty across the country than there had been a decade ago.

An est. 11.2 per cent of residential properties were unoccupied, up from 9.8 per cent in 2006.

There is currently an artificial scarcity of residential housing in this country which governments seem intent on ignoring.

Similarly homelessness has increased in Australia and rental accommodation is frequently beyond the financial reach of many people whose sole income is a Centrelink pension, benefit, allowance or payment.

It has been reported in 2018 that 250 people are turned away from crisis centres across the country every day.

Again, governments are not paying enough attention to the social and economic costs to their own budgetary bottom line this growing problem will cause.

The latest Newspoll published on 13 May 2018 was conducted from Thursday 10 May to Sunday 13 May with 1,728 survey respondents.

It shows the Lib-Nat Coalition’s primary vote standing at 39% to Labor’s 38%. However the Coalition trailed Labor 49 to 51 on a two-party preferred basis, with that margin the coalition's best position since September 2016. 

That is the 32^nd Newspoll in a row where the Labor Opposition was ahead of the Turnbull Government on a two-party preferred basis.

If Turnbull & Co really wanted to turn primary and two-party preferred polling numbers around they would announce some substantial new policy measures in the months following the 2018-19 Budget.

The phasing out of negative gearing of investment properties over a ten year period, reforming capital gain provisions and creating more tied grants for social housing would be a good start.

Once a banker always a a banker

People need to know why Malcolm's on the side of the cheating banks.

Here are the ads we're running on TV. It's not good enough that Turnbull spends all his time defending and supporting the big end of town and treats working people like trash. #auspol #banksrc pic.twitter.com/lHDatAo27Y

— ETU⚡️VIC (@ETUVIC) May 13, 2018

via @ETUVIC

There are currently fifteen [15] members of the Turnbull Government who formerly worked in the banking, finance, insurance, and/or for-profit superannuation industries and three [3] who worked for large accountancy firmss or lobbying groups.

Entrenching inequality in the Australian way of life

There are no real winners in this 2018-19 federal budget – everyone loses something because funding/staffing cuts include services which affect the smooth running of the country, such as regulatory oversight, law, policing and communication. 

Partial winners in the longterm are those in the two highest income/asset deciles. The Anthony Pratts, Gina Rineharts, 'Twiggy' Forrests, Bruce Mathiesons, Malcolm Turnbulls and Peter Duttons of this world.

Those losing the most are low income households, especially those dependent on welfare payments and those with an annual  salary/wage between $41,000 to $87,000 because they will be assessed under the same tax rate as now but with less of the tax benefit pie on their plates in the future.

Federal Budget 2018 Facts of Life - a non-exhaustive list

* Funding in this budget does not fully compensate for funding cuts and tax increases in the last three federal budgets.

* Cuts from previous budgets are still impacting on health services; education funding for schools and vocational studies have been reduced by a combined total of $17.27 billion, funds for the public broadcaster are frozen representing a loss of $84 million on top of $254 million in budget cuts since 2014.¹

* Cuts are also occurring in:

Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) with permanent funding  cut from $346 million to $320 million over two years and staff numbers reduced by 30 investigators in the next year.

Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions with funding cut from $77.4 million to $73.75 million in two years.

The Australian Federal Police funding cut from $1.03 billion to $926 million within four years.²

* Although the federal government is contributing $43 billion, to fund what it calls its “share” of the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) from 2018–19 to 2021–22, there is still no dedicated funding stream for NDIS.

* Rural, regional and remote area health is only receiving 16.66 million a year for five years to improve health outcomes in those areas across Australia – none of which appears to go directly to treatment of patients or additional services.

* Personal income tax cuts aren’t being offered to those on taxable incomes below $20,548 per annum. Those workers with a taxable income of $20,548 will receive $1 a year in income tax relief. It is reported that the full range of personal income tax relief (which provides the most benefit to the highest earners) will eventually cost est. $17.8 billion annually in lost government revenue if scheme continues until 2027.³

* Individuals earning $100,000 to $125,330 per annum now receive a low and middle income income tax offset despite being in high wage/salary deciles.

* There are estimated 101,508 older Australians on the waiting list for appropriate home care packages.⁴ At least 60,000 of these do not have even the initial lowest level of home care package and, all the federal government is offering is funding for an extra 14,000 high level packages still leaving 46,000 elder people with no hope of receiving assistance in the foreseeable future to keep living at home.

* There is a proposal to change the progressive tax system from 2018-19 so there are only four income tax brackets and people with incomes from $41,000 to $200,000 per annum will pay the same tax rate. This means that est. 62 per cent of future benefits would go to the highest salary/wage earners with only 7 per cent going to those on the lowest wage.⁵ 

According to Budget Strategy and Outlook Budget Paper No. 1 2018-19; When completed, the plan ensures that about 94 per cent of taxpayers are projected to face a marginal tax rate of 32.5 per cent or less in 2024–25.

* People over retirement age receiving the Age Pension are being urged to consider funding part of their retirement through the Pension Loans Scheme which will be expanded on 1 July 2019, with the available fortnightly loan plus pension amount increasing to 150 per cent of the maximum rate of fortnightly Age Pension. The current maximum fortnightly pension amount is $907.60. This loan will normally be repaid when the secured real estate asset (usually the principal home) is sold or from the pensioner’s deceased estate.⁶

* This budget continues the funding model which skews federal primary and highschool funding towards private schools via the Quality Schools scheme with funding for government schools set at $7.6 billion and non-government schools at $11.8 billion in 2018-19 increasing to $9.6 billion and 13.8 billion in 2021-22 .<sup>7

* The Northern Territory remote area Aboriginal children and schooling component has been cut by over $47 million across the next four financial years.</sup>

*TAFE further technical education funding has been cut by $270 million on top of previous budget cuts.

* The Goods and Services Tax has been extended to cover online hotel bookings made via offshore websites. This is expected to raise $5 million in the 2019-20 financial year.

* Mobile blackspot program funding ceases in 2019.⁸

* The cashless debit card trial in Ceduna (South Australia) and East Kimberley (Western Australia) will be extended for another year to 30 June 2019. The federal government refuses to make the costs of this measure public.

* Part or all of a welfare payment will be withheld to clear a welfare recipients court fines or address arrest warrants.

* There has been no increase in unemployment benefits.

* Women & girls necessary sanitary products are still subject to a consumption tax payable at the supermarket/chemist checkout.

* Finally, the Turnbull Government cracked a joke in the budget papers – a new National Energy Guarantee is expected to reduce annual residential power bills by $400 at some unspecified date in the future.⁹

Footnotes:

1. http://theconversation.com/budget-2018-boosts-aged-care-rural-health-and-medical-research-health-experts-respond-96100

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2018/may/08/budget-2018-peter-costello-slams-budget-management?page=with:block-5af1743ae4b0123ab0021348

https://theconversation.com/budget-2018-whats-in-store-for-education-95510

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-05-08/budget-2018-abc-funding-frozen-in-$84-million-hit-bottom-line/9740690

2. http://www.afr.com/news/policy/budget/federal-budget-2018-asics-shock-26m-budget-cut-20180509-h0zud4

3. https://www.budget.gov.au/2018-19/content/incometax.html?income=20547

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/17-8b-a-year-the-cost-of-the-turnbull-government-s-personal-tax-cuts-20180509-p4ze88.html

4. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-03/govt-scrambles-amid-growing-queue-for-home-care-packages/9387692

5. http://www.tai.org.au/node/4227

6. https://www.dss.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/05_2018/d18_13635_budget_2018-19_-_factsheet_-_more_choices_for_a_longer_life_-_finances_for_a_longer_life.pdf

7.https://www.budget.gov.au/2018-19/content/bp3/download/Budget%20Paper%203.pdf

8. http://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2018-05-09/budget-2018-mobile-blackspot-funding-ceases/9741786

9. https://budget.gov.au/2018-19/content/essentials.html