Showing posts with label far right politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label far right politics. Show all posts

Monday, 30 November 2020

Scotty and Josh are riding the superannuation wrecking ball in 2020


Josh and Scotty a double act since 2018
IMAGE: The Guardian

Employers are required to fulfil their obligations under the Superannuation Guarantee (Administration) Act 1992 (or under industrial agreements in many cases) to make superannuation contributions on behalf of their employees.

The current statutory rate of employer compulsory superannuation contributions is scheduled to rise incrementally by 10 per cent in 2021 and reach 12 per cent in 2024.

According to the Financial Review on 15 July 2019; Politicians, public servants and academics are among the est. 2 million workers or 18 per cent of all employees who would be unaffected if a scheduled rise in the compulsory Super Guarantee from 9.5 per cent to 10 per cent to 12 per cent did not occur as their existing employer superannuation contribution is already above 12 per cent.

Another est. 300,000 people, or 3 per cent of all employees are not included in the Super Guarantee as they earn less than $450 a month before tax and est. 63 per cent of these workers are female.

Add to this the reportedly 2.2 million employees who do not receive their full super entitlements because their employers unlawfully do not pay all or any employer contributions to eligible workers and, the size of the workforce who might receive a benefit from a 0.5 per cent increase in the Super Guarantee next year has shrunk to est. 8.2 million workers.

Based on full-time average adult weekly earnings in October 2020 an employer’s compulsory superannuation contribution per worker would be est. $651 per month at 9.5% in 2020 and $681 per month at 10% in 2021.

That’s an increase of $30 a month or $7.50 a week next year.

A dollar a day is not going to break either the employer or the worker and, at the end of the 2021-22 financial year there would be an extra $415 in interest payments in that worker's superannuation account – and if that worker has another 30 years before retirement that $415 dollars in interest could represent up to $29,000 more in his/her superannuation account at the end of that time period.

When one considers that an est. 98 per cent of all businesses in Australia employ 20 or less people and as that would only mean an employer contribution increase of $20 or less a day for the vast majority of employers, it is hard to see this as an unreasonable move.

After all, even the Morrison Government admits that superannuation assists middle income earners to smooth their income over their lives, and Without compulsory superannuation, middle income earners would not save enough for retirement.

However, the Abbott-Trunbull- Morrison Government does not fancy 8.2 million workers receiving an extra $30 a month in their super accounts next year.

So Josh Frydenberg is doing a good imitation of Chicken Little and screeching the sky will fall if $1 a day is added to a worker’s superannuation account in 2021. 

He bespoke a study from Treasury to back him up when it comes to not increasing the Super Guarantee this year and moving towards a policy of forcing homeowners on age pensions or retirees with little super to either sell their house or borrow against it in order to fund retirement, so that Scott Morrison can happily continue his personal war on the poor and vulnerable.

Put simply the Morrison Government is arguing that neither workers, their bosses nor the national economy can afford an increase in the amount of money which enters a worker’s superannuation for his/her financial benefit on retirement.

Quite frankly I see no real justification for that stance.

A stance that is also incredibly hypocritical given that by 2007 the Parliamentary Contributory Superannuation Scheme saw newly elected federal parliamentarians receiving government compulsory contributions into their own superannuation accounts at a rate of 15.4 per cent in order to bring superannuation arrangements for parliamentarians in line with current community standards.

The lack of congruence between what federal politicians see as community standards applicable to themselves and community standards as applicable to ordinary workers is so marked that the ordinary voter has begun to notice......


Sunday, 22 November 2020

Barilaro, the stealthy empire builder in 2020

When Liberal MP for Willoughby Gladys Berejiklian was sworn in as Premier of New South Wales on 23 January 2017, Nationals MP for Monaro John Barilaro (left) had already been Deputy-Premier under Bruce Baird for 38 days.

On 30 January 2017 Berejiklian made Barilaro Minister for Regional New South Wales. Twenty-six months later Berejiklian expanded this ministerial portfolio into the Minister for Regional New South Wales, Industry and Trade.

On the same day Barilaro’s regional portfolio was expanded, Berejiklianestablished the new Department of Regional NSW to better coordinate support for communities, businesses and farmers in the bush.

The new department headquartered in Queanbeyan acts as a central agency that brings together functions from the Department of Planning Industry and Environment cluster and, is being led by Secretary Gary Barnes, formerly the Coordinator General, Regional NSW, Department of Planning, Industry and Environment.

The departmental workforce is expected to eventually reach around 5,000 employees, according to its Linkedin entry.

John Barilaro said the department will bring together Primary Industries, Local Land Services, Resources and Geoscience and regional coordination across government… is imperative we have a government designed to properly support every corner of this State.

What this means for regional communities is that Barilaro has gathered into his ministerial portfolio the processes for carrying forward increased land clearing, increased native timber logging on private and Crown land, as well as further exploration and mining in regional NSW. 

Water security has also been included in this portfolio - which would cover planning for future water storage and water diversion.

Based on Berejiklian Government promotional material for the Department of Regional NSW it is clear that Barilaro now sits atop a portfolio which holds in its departmental domain an est. 40 per cent of all NSW residents, in around 99 local government areas which produce approximately one-third of the total NSW gross state product.

Barilaro has gathered his own party members as minsters with responsibilities within the department - Nationals MLA for Northern Tablelands and Minister for Agriculture and Western New South Wales Adam Marshall and Nationals MLC and Minister for Mental Health, Regional Youth and Women Bronnie Taylor.

There does not seem to be a NSW Liberal Party politician within cooee of the new regional department.

Five months after becoming New South Wales regional czar, John Barilaro began to flex his muscles with threats to destabilise the Berejiklian Government and the political koala war briefly erupted.

One cannot escape the suspicion that Barilaro is not seeking to raise the profiles of those mere 18 National Party members in the 134 member NSW Parliament, but is intent on creating an alternative state government situated in regional New South Wales. 

Reading Mr. Barilaro's personal and political history as played out in the media, it is evident that he is a moderately wealthy former local government councillor & businessman, unashamedly ambitious, erratic, a dogwhistler since the beginning of his political career, willing to resort to threats and name calling, flouts the road rules at will, has long been happiest pulling the house down around the ears of government agencies in the name of  'reform', is willing to put his bootheel on the neck of north-east NSW and, apparently intends to keep pushing Gladys Berejiklian until she breaks.


Saturday, 14 November 2020

Tweets of the Week




Friday, 13 November 2020

A Commonwealth Integrity Commission which cannot burst the Canberra bubble?


Well, it is official. The exposure draft of Commonwealth Integrity Commission Bill 2020 released on 2 November 2020 forbids the Integrity Commissioner - or entities acting on his/her behalf - from openly mentioning parliamentarians or their staff in a corruption investigation report.

The Integrity Commissioner has the power to not investigate credible corruption allegations if he/she is so inclined and, can kick the problem over to the Australian Federal Police to investigate and report back or referred to the agency that is the subject of allegations to self-investigate.

The exception to this ability to kick the can down the road appears to be when the Integrity Commissioner is ordered to conduct a corruption investigation by the Minister.

All Commonwealth Integrity Commission hearings are to be held in private session when dealing with corruption in, or the integrity of staff members of, public sector agencies, higher education providers or research bodies.

Public hearings may be held with regard to investigations of alleged corruption in law enforcement agencies.

Witnesses called during hearings have to stay silent about anything to do with an investigation - including that they have been served a notice - under penalty of imprisonment for 2 years or 120 penalty units, or both.

The Integrity Commissioner also has the power to only partially publish the findings of a corruption investigation.

In addition it seems that the Integrity Commissioner can shield from public view an investigated person to whom allegations or adverse findings are attached, solely on the grounds that the commissioner believes it would damage the person's reputation it the corruption allegations or findings became known.

If a final report is prepared (whether by the Integrity Commissioner or another entity), the report may include certain findings and recommendations. However, findings may only be included about whether a person engaged in corrupt conduct if the conduct relates to a staff member of a law enforcement agency.

The final report of another entity (such as the Australian Federal Police) must not deal with any corruption issues that relate to parliamentarians or offices of parliamentarians.

See complete copy of exposure draft at

Deadline for submissions on the exposure draft is 12 February 2021.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Attorney-General Christian Porter have set aside a grand total of $147 million for the development and operation of the Commonwealth Integrity Commission (CIC), which at first glance appears to be intended to hide corruption on the part of federal politicians, their staff and any person in a federal government department or agency the government of the day wishes to protect.

Tuesday, 10 November 2020

"You and your boof-headed party, Mr. Gulaptis, and the appalling anti-environment government which you are part of, will be responsible for the extinction of koalas in our region...."


Chris Gulaptis MP, the NSW Nationals & Koalas

Our local State MP Chris Gulaptis, the Nationals’ Member for Clarence, has claimed that he loves Koalas like every other Australian. The Grafton Nannas believe he has a very strange way of showing this recently-revealed affection.

Since 2011, when the Nationals came into government in NSW, they have been pressuring their Coalition partners to weaken biodiversity protection. This has resulted in significant weakening of both native vegetation legislation and State Forest logging regulations. Both of these changes have had serious impacts on biodiversity - including on koalas.

Koalas have suffered from a range of impacts in recent years including climate induced drought and bushfires as well as dog attack, car strike and disease. But a major cause of their decline has been habitat loss. The NSW Nationals have had a big role in recent years in ensuring that habitat loss is accelerating.

In September we had the unedifying “dummy spit” drama where the Nationals threatened to withdraw from the Government because they objected to the Governments’ Koala SEPP (State Environmental Planning Policy) which had come into operation in March after being negotiated in late 2019. This SEPP was a slight improvement on the years-old model which had failed completely as a koala protective measure.

Chris Gulaptis was one of the prime movers in this melodrama.

Shortly after Premier Gladys Berejiklian called their bluff, the Nationals, many of whom did not want to lose their ministerial perks, backed down.

There was considerable speculation about why the Nationals had suddenly found the SEPP so intolerable after it they had had input to its development and it had already been on the books for around six months.

It seemed to boil down to lobbying by certain property developers, Nationals’ supporters who were worried they might have difficulty is pursuing their plans for rural subdivisions or residential development on urban outskirts because they would need to put in development applications to councils. This would then trigger the SEPP. So it appeared Nationals politicians like the prime mover Chris Gulaptis believed these interests should outweigh the protection of koalas which are on track to extinction in NSW by 2050 unless really effective measures are put in place to protect them and their habitat.

Following the Nationals’ backdown, there were behind the scenes negotiations between the Coalition partners that led to significant changes to the Koala SEPP. Unsurprisingly the Liberals caved in and the SEPP was watered down. For example the definition of core koala habitat became more restricted and developing a Koala Plan of Management was made more difficult for councils.

That was bad enough, but the extent of the Liberals’ spinelessness became more apparent with the appearance of the Local Land Services (LLS) Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2020. It further limits any opportunity to protect koala habitat.

This Bill has since been passed in the Legislative Assembly.

The Grafton Nannas held a knit-in protest outside Chris Gulaptis’ Grafton office on Thursday.

In a letter to Mr Gulaptis which was delivered to the office, we expressed our disgust with him and his party.

Below is the text of this letter:

LLS Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2020

When we wrote to you in September about your party’s koala protection dummy spit, we expressed our disgust at your determination to undermine koala protection at a time when it was urgently needed. At that time the Nannas thought it would have been impossible to be more disgusted with you and your party.

The changes to the Koala SEPP that followed the rapprochement of your party with the Liberals showed the Nannas just how weak was the Government commitment to ensuring koalas were protected and rescued from their slide towards extinction.

And then, just to show how unimportant biodiversity protection and the fate of koalas was, the Liberals pandered further to the Nationals with the LLS Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill which has now passed in the Legislative Assembly.

You and your boof-headed party, Mr Gulaptis, and the appalling anti-environment government which you are a part of, will be responsible for the extinction of koalas in our region, if not in all NSW.”


Leonie Blain

Grafton Knitting Nannas Against Gas and Greed

Sunday, 1 November 2020

Forests and Koalas: why the NSW Nationals are so willing to betray communities in the Northern Rivers region

Before the disastrous 2019-2020 bushfire season the NSW North Coast region comprised 9.7 million hectares of land, with 65 per cent of it forested. Over half (3.4 million hectares) of the region’s forests were in private ownership, spread across thousands of individual holdings, according to NSW Dept. of Primary Industries (DPI).

The north coast had a diverse array of forest types and most of the tree cover was estimated to be between >20 to <30 metres and >30 to <40 metres in height across an est. 20,706 square kilometres.

This is how the Berejiklian Government saw those forests within the Northern Rivers region before the mega bushfires came through:

Extent of forest cover in north-east New South Wales

Extent of harvestable timber on private land and operating timber mills

Again, according to the DPI in March 2019; Properties with native forests that generated ‘very high’ stumpage values (based on their yield association) were mainly located between Coffs Harbour and Casino. Properties with native forests with ‘high’ stumpage values were far more widespread extending in a broad band (50-100 kilometres wide) along the full length of the north coast.

Properties in early 2019 which had a ‘Very High’ suitability for timber production were located between 50km and 100km from the coast between Grafton and the Queensland Border, with ‘High’ suitability properties occupying a broader band that extended from Coffs Harbour to the Queensland border. At its widest point, west of Casino, this band is said to extend 130 kilometres inland.

Joint EPA-Dept. of Industry Forest Science Unit predictive mapping of remaining NSW koala habitat based on sighting records, vegetation, soils and climate

"Modelling koala habitat",  NSW EPA. July 2019

It is easy to see that most of the remaining Northern Rivers koala habitat falls within those areas with operating timber mills and land on which the NSW Forestry Corporation has cast its rapacious eye.

According to the NSW Forestry Corporation around 60 per cent of the net harvest area available for timber production in the Northern Rivers region was impacted by fires during the 2019-2020 bushfire season, but this corporation appears to view a coastal strip around 100kms wide and 216kms long - containing thousands of parcels of private  land - as able post-fires to supply it with commercial timber for years to come.

The forestry industry is actively lobbying government for access to more native timber citing increased employment as one benefit. 

Despite the fact that Australia-wide the forestry industry appears to only employ around 10,700 people in a potential 2020 workforce of est. 13.5 million (ABS September 2020) and, according to industry reports; The Forestry and Logging industry has performed poorly over the past five years. Industry output is projected to decline at an annualised 1.3% over the period, with downstream demand also weakening…..

Furthermore, lower demand from log sawmilling, and declines in residential building construction have contributed to several years of revenue declines. Industry revenue is expected to decline at an annualised 1.4% over the five years through 2020-21, to $4.7 billion.

What this all means is that stressed koala communities already competing with urban expansion, increased traffic, historical and recent habitat loss, are now being threatened by the business strategy of one of the largest forestry corporations in Australia, the financial self-interest of around 32 operating timber mills within the Northern Rivers region, as well as the political self-interest of 12 National Party members who sit in the NSW Legislative Assembly and 6 National Party members sitting in the Legislative Council.

This shared self-interest in encapsulated in the bill passed by the Assembly earlier this month and still to be voted on by the Council, the Local Land Services Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2020which extinguishes state koala habitat protection policy on most NSW land and seeks to (i) allow the commercial logging of native trees to continue unimpeded on private land by circumventing a government review of the private forestry system and (ii) to allow future clearing of native timber on farmland without the need for authorisation under other state legislationincluding the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016. 

If any North Coast Voices readers have concerns about the fate of forests and koalas on the NSW North Coast I suggest that they phone or email members of the NSW Legislative Council before Tuesday, 10 November 2020, using the link below which takes you straight to the parliamentary web page which lists the contact details for all 42 members:







Friday, 16 October 2020

For over 6 years the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison Government deliberately underspent funds earmarked to assist unemployed people 50 years of age & older


On 11 July 2014 then Australian Prime Minister & Liberal MP for Warringah Tony Abbott launched the Restart programme.

Restart is a financial incentive of up to $10,000 (GST inclusive) to encourage businesses to hire and retain mature age employees who are 50 years of age and over.

Payments are made by employment services providers to businesses over six months. Employers can negotiate how often they receive the payments.

Business may also be able to get up to $10,000 (GST inclusive) when they hire an eligible new employee who is either: 15 - 24 years of age or an Indigenous Australian.

To apply for this financial incentive businesses need to contact a job service provider on the federal Dept. of Education, Skills and Employment list of approved providers.

Employment services providers determine if a wage subsidy is offered and will enter into an agreement with the employer to make payments over six months.

All wage subsidy placements must average at least 20 hours per week over the 26 week wage subsidy period to be ongoing.

Restart has continued to operate under three successive Liberal-National federal governments.

On 14 October 2020 The Guardian reported that:

The federal government has spent less than half what it planned to help older Australians into work and more than 40% of those receiving wage subsidies were out of a job within three months.

Only $254m has been spent to help 51,190 mature-age people into work, despite the Coalition promising in 2014 to spend $520m to help up to 32,000 older Australians find a job every year.

Of the 51,190 people helped by the Restart wage subsidy, just 30,379 remained in employment for 13 weeks or more, with less than half (21,966) lasting more than six months.

The figures, provided by the employment department, cast new light on the effectiveness of the program cited by the Morrison government as evidence it is already helping older workers…..

In the budget, the treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, announced $4bn of wage subsidies for companies that hire workers aged 35 and under, prompting a backlash that the budget contained no new measures for older workers.

In response, Scott Morrison has said the Restart program, which provides $10,000 wage subsidies for those aged over 50 and unemployed for six months or more, had helped 50,000 Australians into a job.

In the 2014 budget, the Abbott government provided $520m for the Restart program…..

On Tuesday, the employment department revealed that, up to 31 August this year, just $254m had been spent on the program….

Monday, 12 October 2020

Morrison Government ignores the "Pink Recession" in Budget 2020-21


"Women drive on roads. They will benefit from our infrastructure spend" [in Budget 2020-21]. [Senator Michaelia Cash, Channel 10 clip in The Project program, 8 October 2020]

The Guardian, 8 October 2020:

The prime minister, Scott Morrison, is angry with women. Not all of us, just those making a fuss about the woeful lack of attention to women’s workforce participation, economic security and safety in the budget his treasurer handed down on Tuesday night.

After early childhood education advocate and journalist Georgie Dent published an article in Women’s Agenda pointing out that the biggest-spending budget in history had allocated roughly a third of 1% of its funds for women’s economic security (citing a figure I tweeted from the Per Capita account during the budget presentation on Tuesday night), she received a call from the PM’s office to complain that “no one credible” was making such a complaint, and that “nothing in the budget is gendered”.

To quote one famous working woman: big mistake. Big. Huge.

Within a couple of hours, the hashtag #CredibleWomen was born, and soon trending in Australia. Twenty-four hours later, more than 1,000 very angry, and highly credible, women and men had joined the fray, including prominent journalists and commentators, business leaders, former federal politicians, economists and sociologists, and even the family members of former prime ministers, both Labor and Liberal. So much for no one credible.

As for the claim that nothing in the budget was gendered – that’s the point. Proudly declaring that no gender analysis was done on the budget reveals a disturbing ignorance of the inherent bias in our economic system, and a fundamental confusion between the concepts of equality and equity. A budget that treats everyone equally, ignoring the fact that women start from a place of significant disadvantage on almost every meaningful economic measure, simply entrenches gender inequality and, in light of the disproportionate impact of the current recession on women, actually risks sending us backwards.

The fact is, the Covid-19 pandemic and subsequent economic collapse have hit women particularly hard. While previous recessions were typified by declining aggregate demand for manufactured goods and services, the current downturn is marked by a partial or total shutdown of many service industries, which are dominated by female workers.

Social distancing restrictions have resulted in an unparalleled collapse in demand, which has had an immediate impact on sectors of the market unused to bearing the brunt of economic shocks, with widespread jobs losses in retail, entertainment and hospitality. Universities, too, are shedding jobs at an alarming rate, and many of the jobs in research, teaching and administration that have been lost will not return even if and when international students do.

As a result, unemployment for women in this Covid-induced economic collapse is double that of the 1990s recession. While women suffered roughly 25% of all job losses in the early 1990s, they account for more than 50% of the newly unemployed today.

A budget that treats everyone equally ... simply entrenches gender inequality”

Yet the Morrison government seems to have failed to come to grips with the different nature of this recession compared to previous downturns, or to have grasped the significant changes in our labour market over the three decades since Australia last faced the task of rebuilding a shattered economy. The budget released on Tuesday night was a fine plan for recovery from the recession of the early 1990s, but not so much for the one we face today…..

The full article can be read here.


According to Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Labor Force original data, in December 2019 before the COVID-19 pandemic had entered the country, the female workforce participation rate was 61.6 per cent and total number of unemployed females was 295,100 individuals.

A Parliamentary Budget Report found that 56 per cent of those unemployed females were women aged 45 years and older.

By end of August 2020 the female workforce participation rate was 59.7 per cent - a 3 per cent participation fall. While the unemployment figure had grown to 418,600 females of working force age – a 29 per cent increase in unemployment.

In December 2019 the male workforce participation rate was 71.4 per cent and the total number of unemployed males was 371,600 individuals.

Of these unemployed males 45 per cent were men aged 45 years and older.

By end of August 2020 male workforce participation rate was 69.4 per cent a 3 per cent  participation fall. While the unemployment figure has risen to 503,000 males of working force age - a 26 per cent increase in unemployment. 

Comparing total females and males who considered themselves underemployed between December 2019 and August 2020:

  • Underemployed females totalled 690,200 workers in December 2019 and 753,200 workers in August 2020 - an est. 9 per cent increase in underemployment over the 9 month period; and
  • Underemployed males totalled 503,000 workers in December 2019 and 723,300 workers in August 2020 - an est. 31 per cent increase in underemployment.

Females in employment worked a combined total of 736,643,500 hours in December 2019 and a total of 702,547,200 hours in August 2020 - an est. 5 per cent fall in hours worked. 

Males in employment worked a combined total of 1,044,184,200 hours in December 2019 and a total of 980,844,400 hours in August 2020 - an est. 6 per cent fall.

When breaking that down further by looking at the percentage of females who had between 35-44 hours paid work a week it was 32.1% of all employed females, with another 19.8 per cent working less than 20 hours. While for males receiving 34-44 hours of paid work a week it was 42.1 per cent of all employed males, with another 11.1 per cent working under 20 hours a week.

Overall since the impact of the COVID-19 begun to be felt both males and females experienced swings and roundabouts when it came to employment. 

However, compared with men, over the last decade a higher proportion of unemployed women are now either older women, have a reduced capacity to work, are carers or sole parents. 

While the bottom line is that despite the JobKeeper subsidised wage program, at the end of the last 9 months there are still more females out of work than there are males in the same predicament and more employed females than males with less than a full week's work.

When it came to ABS records for industry sectors with the highest job losses year-to-year it was clear highest losses occurred in sectors with traditionally high female employment levels:

JUNE 2019 to JUNE 2020

Accommodation - jobs down 25.5 per cent

Cafes, restaurants and takeaway food services - jobs down 15.6 per cent

Clubs, pubs, taverns and bars - jobs down 15.6 per cent

Tourism - jobs down 15.1 per cent

Travel agency and information centre services - 17.9 per cent

Retail Trade - jobs down 9.0 per cent.

Tourism jobs peaked at 748,200 in December 2019 and in June 2020 were at the lowest level (611,700) since June 2014. More females work in tourism than males so there were more jobs lost by females with a reduction of 88,100 (-21.5%) jobs compared to a fall of 48,300 (-14.3%) for males.

The Australian Treasury is reportedly predicting that unemployment will remain high for several years, but that it will peak at 8% in the December quarter of 2020. However, indications are that unemployment will not fall below 5 per cent until sometime after 2024.  

It is statistics such as these which have led to political commentators dubbing the current economic recession In Australia, the "pink recession" or "shecession".

Terms with which Scott Morrison appears to take great exception. Women it seems are never to speak up on economic matters unless it is to agree with his world view.

According to Taylor Fry Consulting Actuaries' research, by 29 August 2020 in the Clarence Valley the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic was rated "Medium" for most of the valley but at the upper end of "High" was Maclean-Iluka-Yamba which are heavily dependent on tourism.

As it is for Byron Bay where the impact was also rated at the upper limit of "High", while the remainder of the Northern Rivers region was at the lower limit of "High" with the exception of Kyogle and Casino which were rated "Medium".

In 2019 the NSW Northern Rivers region had a resident population of est. 304,325 people with a high number of older residents. In fact at the last Census around 133,332 were aged between 50 and 100 years of age.

In 2020 the Northern New South Wales Local Health District data indicated that females made up 49.22 per cent of the regional population - with est. 30 per cent of that regional population being females of workforce age.

That's an awful lot of Northern Rivers women Scott Morrison & his Cabinet have chosen to brush aside in the worst recession in 30 years.