Tony Abbott MP: the man who lied about a carbon tax is preparing to lie to voters once again

The week former chief of staff to Tony Abbott, Peta Credlin, confirmed that he had deliberately lied when characterising the Gillard Government’s price on carbon as a "carbon tax", The Sydney Morning Herald reported this:

Tony Abbott has laid out a five-point plan for the Coalition to have a chance at the "winnable" next election, including cutting back immigration and scrapping the Human Rights Commission.

In a major speech in Sydney at the launch of a new book, Making Australia Right, on Thursday evening, Mr Abbott gave the clearest signal yet he believed the Turnbull government is failing to cut through with voters, and that the contest of ideas - and for the soul of the modern Liberal Party - between the current and former prime minister has a long way to run.

Mr Abbott noted nearly 40 per cent of Australians didn't vote for the Coalition or Labor in the 2016 election: "It's easy to see why".

In a sign a return to the leadership was on his radar, Mr Abbott set out ideas on how to take the fight to Labor and win back Coalition voters thinking of defecting to Pauline Hanson's One Nation.

"In short, why not say to the people of Australia: we'll cut the RET [renewable energy target] to help with your power bills; we'll cut immigration to make housing more affordable; we'll scrap the Human Rights Commission to stop official bullying; we'll stop all new spending to end ripping off our grandkids; and we'll reform the Senate to have government, not gridlock?"

He said the next election was winnable for the Coalition, however, "our challenge is to be worth voting for. It's to win back the people who are giving up on us". [my highlighting]

So let’s look at this jumble of potential three-word slogans being readied for the next Coalition federal election campaign.

RET –renewable energy target

In 2014 the Abbott Government ordered a review of RET. This review found that RET tends to lower wholesale electricity prices and that the RET would have almost no impact on consumer prices over the period 2015–2030.

Despite Abbott's downgrading of RET targets when he was prime minister, in 2017 the Turnbull Coalition Government (of which Abbott is a member) continues its support of these targets.

According to the Dept of Industry, Innovation and Science network costs are the biggest factor driving up the cost of electricity and  a large part of these higher costs has been the need to replace or upgrade ageing power infrastructure, as most electricity networks were built throughout the 1960s and 1970s.

Housing affordability

In December 2016 the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) recorded 11.3 million houses/units/flats purchased by investors for rent or resale by individuals and a further 1.3 million for rent or resale by others. [ABS 5609.0 Housing Finance]

The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) in June 2015 clearly indicated that purchase of housing stock by investors had increased to almost 23 per cent of all housing stock and, that increased investor activity and strong growth in housing prices were occurring along with an increase in negatively geared investment properties. [RBA, Submission to House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics Inquiry into Home Ownership]

The Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS) put the matter bluntly in Fuel on the fire: negative gearing, capital gains tax & housing affordability - The tax system at both the federal and state level inflates housing costs, undermines affordability, and distorts the operation of housing markets. Tax settings are not the main reason for excessive growth in home prices, but they are an important part of the problem. They inflate demand for existing properties when the supply of new housing is insufficient to meet demand. Ironically, many public policies that are claimed to improve affordability - such as negative gearing arrangements, Capital Gains Tax breaks for investors, and first home owner grants for purchasers – make the problem worse.

Competition between investor-developers recently saw $1.3 million added to the sale price of an older house at a Sydney metropolitan auction.

Although population growth is a factor in competition for housing stock, nowhere in reputable studies or reports can I find mention of immigration levels significantly contributing to this competition.  Which is not surprising, given that natural population increase and increase through migration do not occur uniformly within Australian states & territories and natural increase will outstrip migration in some states and territories in a given year.

Human Rights Commission

On 26 December 1976 the Fraser Coalition Government announced its intention to establish a Human Rights Commission which would provide orderly and systematic procedures for the promotion of human rights and for ensuring that Australian laws were maintained in conformity with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and in order that citizens who felt they had been discriminated against under specific Commonwealth laws such as laws relating to discrimination on grounds of race or sex (but excluding laws in the employment area) would be able to have their complaints examined.

The Commission was created in 1981 by an act of the Australian Parliament and later rebirthed as the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission in 1986 by another act of the Australian Parliament.

Whilst ever no Commonwealth statute exists which sets out the core rights of Australian citizenship the federal parliament continues to fail to guarantee protection against its own legislative or regulatory excesses.

The Human Rights Commission is one of the few points at which ordinary citizens without considerable financial means can seek redress of a wrong or harm done to them.

No new spending

I simply refer readers to Tony Abbott’s economic record in the slightly less than two years he spent as Australian prime minister, when on his watch economic growth was slowing and living standards were falling.

Senate reform

This is Section 57 of the Australian Constitution which would have to be amended and is required to be taken to a national referendum before reform can occur:

Disagreement between the Houses

                   If the House of Representatives passes any proposed law, and the Senate rejects or fails to pass it, or passes it with amendments to which the House of Representatives will not agree, and if after an interval of three months the House of Representatives, in the same or the next session, again passes the proposed law with or without any amendments which have been made, suggested, or agreed to by the Senate, and the Senate rejects or fails to pass it, or passes it with amendments to which the House of Representatives will not agree, the Governor-General may dissolve the Senate and the House of Representatives simultaneously. But such dissolution shall not take place within six months before the date of the expiry of the House of Representatives by effluxion of time.

                   If after such dissolution the House of Representatives again passes the proposed law, with or without any amendments which have been made, suggested, or agreed to by the Senate, and the Senate rejects or fails to pass it, or passes it with amendments to which the House of Representatives will not agree, the Governor-General may convene a joint sitting of the members of the Senate and of the House of Representatives.

                   The members present at the joint sitting may deliberate and shall vote together upon the proposed law as last proposed by the House of Representatives, and upon amendments, if any, which have been made therein by one House and not agreed to by the other, and any such amendments which are affirmed by an absolute majority of the total number of the members of the Senate and House of Representatives shall be taken to have been carried, and if the proposed law, with the amendments, if any, so carried is affirmed by an absolute majority of the total number of the members of the Senate and House of Representatives, it shall be taken to have been duly passed by both Houses of the Parliament, and shall be presented to the Governor-General for the Queen's assent.

The last national referendum held in Australia was in 1999 and cost $66,820,894 according to the Australian Electoral Commission for a vote on two questions.

Like 34 of the 44 referendum questions before them these two questions did not carry. In fact the last referendum questions to be carried were in 1977.

Prospect of successful right-wing reform of the Senate? 

Redfern Statement revisited in 2017

Secretariat of National Aboriginal and Islander Child Care (SNAICC) - National Voice for our Children, YouTube, 13 February 2017:

Media Release, 14 February 2017:

Australia’s leading Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peaks will today demand a new relationship with government as they deliver the historic Redfern Statement direct to the Prime Minister at Parliament House.

In the lead up to today’s 9th Closing the Gap Report to Parliament, the leaders will call on the Prime Minister to support the historic Redfern Statement, a road map to better address the appalling disadvantage gap between Australia’s First Peoples and non-Indigenous Australians by working with them as genuine partners.

National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples’s co-chair Mr Rod Little comments:

“After 25 years, eight Federal election cycles, seven Prime Ministers, eight Ministers for Indigenous Affairs, 400 recommendations, and countless policies, policy changes, reports, funding promises and funding cuts it’s time to draw a line in the sand.

“We need a new relationship that respects and harnesses our expertise, and guarantees us a seat at the table as equal partners when governments are making decisions about our lives.”

– Rod Little, National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples co-chair

The Redfern Statement was released during last year’s Federal Election campaign on 9 June by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders from health, justice, children and families, disability, and family violence prevention services.

The statement calls for changes across these sectors through structured engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and is supported by more than 30 major mainstream organisations including the Australian Medical Association and Law Council.

National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples’s co-chair Dr Jackie Huggins said Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations have worked with our people on the ground for decades and have shown they have solutions.

“Aboriginal community-controlled health organisations deliver 2.5 million episodes of care a year in their local communities – and are the only health and leadership models making inroads on Close the Gap targets.

“Our teachers, education professionals and family violence experts are delivering real results on the ground in their communities every single day – despite chronic underfunding and an ad hoc policy approach based on three-year election cycles.

“Today we are seeking a new relationship, a genuine partnership and a commitment to ongoing structured engagement.”

– Dr Jackie Huggins, National Congress of Australia’s First Peoples co-chair

Read the full Redfern Statement.

Redfern Statement

See also: Closing the Gap: Prime Minister’s Report 2017

The American Resistance has many faces - this is one of them (3)

Kirk W. Johnson ‏@KirkWJohnson 30 January 2017

@realDonaldTrump @POTUS

Click on image to enlarge

Trump to build The Wall and start roundup and gaoling of undocumented immigrants in the face of strong resistance

The Guardian, 26 January 2017:

An executive order on “sanctuary cities” signed by Donald Trump on Wednesday has placed in the crosshairs over 400 cities and counties that offer some form of safe haven to America’s 11 million undocumented migrants.

These localities include some of the largest, most progressive metropolises in the United States, many of which have already begun preparations to fight one of Trump’s most aggressive campaign pledges– to force compliance with federal immigration agencies in a bid to ramp up deportations. The beginnings of that pledge have now been formalised by executive action within Trump’s first week in office.

The order issued on Wednesday claims these jurisdictions “willfully violate federal law” causing “immeasurable harm to the American people”, and instructs the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the US Department of Justice (DoJ) to explore which cities could be in violation of federal law and ways of stripping sanctuary jurisdictions of federal grant money, which amounts to billions of dollars across many different federal departments.

The order also instructs the US attorney general to explore “appropriate enforcement action” against any local government agency it deems to be in violation of a broad federal law that encourages – but does not compel – communication between local authorities and the DHS.

Trump’s mandate also issues an extraordinary instruction to the DHS to publish a weekly list of so-called “criminal actions” committed by undocumented migrants and publicly announce which jurisdictions had previously “ignored or otherwise failed” to detain the accused individuals.

The City and County of San Francisco is suing President Trump, the Secretary of the Dept. of Homeland Security and the Acting Attorney General alleging that the Executive order of 25 January 2017 titled Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States violates the Tenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and that In blatant disregard of the law, the President of the United States seeks to coerce local authorities into abandoning what are known as “Sanctuary City” laws and policies.

On 31 January 2017 the City Attorney Dennis Herrera stated:

The president’s executive order is not only unconstitutional, it’s un-American…. That is why we must stand up and oppose it. We are a nation of immigrants and a land of laws. We must be the ‘guardians of our democracy’ that President Obama urged us all to be in his farewell address.....

This lawsuit is not a step I take lightly…..But it is one that is necessary to defend the people of this city, this state and this country from the wild overreach of a president whose words and actions have thus far shown little respect for our Constitution or the rule of law. This country was founded on the principle that the federal government cannot force state and local governments to do its job for it, like carrying out immigration policy.  I am defending that bedrock American principle today.....

The Trump administration falsely believes that sanctuary cities harbor criminals and make communities unsafe.  To the contrary, any persons who is booked in San Francisco has their fingerprints sent to the federal government. If the federal government has a criminal warrant for that person, San Francisco complies with that.  Moreover, sanctuary cities have less crime, fewer people in poverty and lower unemployment than other counties, according to a recent study by Tom K. Wong, an associate professor of political science at the University of California, San Diego. There are, on average, 35.5 fewer crimes committed per 10,000 people in sanctuary jurisdictions compared to non-sanctuary counties, according to Wong’s findings in a report for the Center for American Progress. 

On 3 February 2017 The Globe and Mail reported:

Tom Cochran, the chief executive of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, said he has never seen an atmosphere like this in his four decades at the organization, not even in the waning days of the Nixon administration. “It’s totally different from anything we’ve ever seen,” he said.

Mr. Cochran said his group is pushing back against Mr. Trump’s executive order on sanctuary cities, both in public and in private. He has requested a meeting with the new Secretary of Homeland Security, John Kelly, who has much of the responsibility for implementing the sanctuary cities order. Mr. Cochran intends to bring city police chiefs to the meeting to explain why they feel fostering trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement is important for public safety.

Some cities are disputing that the Trump definition of a "sanctuary city" applies to them.

BACKGROUND

Executive Order: Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States, 25 January 2017

Executive Order: Border Security and Immigration Enforcement Improvements, 25 January 2017

Trump's fifth executive order is challenged for the sixth time in seven days

On 27 January 2017 U.S. President Donald Trump issued Executive Order: Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States and on the basis of its provisions an est. 60,000-100,000 entry and stay visas were provisionally revoked immediately.

I do not think that Trump thought that resistance to his immigration policies would see at least fifty court filings to date and, in relation to this particular executive order would see six judges issue temporary restraining orders of varying lengths.

This is the latest:

State of Washington vs. Donald J. Trump, et al

Court: Western District of Washington

Subject Matter: Civil Rights

Case Summary: 17-CV-00141-JLR

The State of Washington (State) filed this action challenging the President’s Executive Order on immigration of January 27, 2017. The State seeks a finding that certain sections of the Executive Order are contrary to the Constitution and laws of the United States, and enjoining Defendants from implementing or enforcing those sections. The State further seeks entry of a nationwide temporary restraining order. The hearing on this matter was conducted on February 3, 2017.

Judge James L. Robart presiding

The State of Washington’s complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief is 14 pages long with supporting documentation which included the Donald J. Trump Statement on Preventing Muslim Immigration.

The complaint in part alleges that:

President Trump’s actions and that of the U.S. federal government were illegal and violated the equal protection guarantee of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution;

they were depriving individuals of their liberty interests without due process of law; 

the Immigration and Nationality Act  prohibits discrimination in the issuance of immigrant visas on the basis of race, nationality, place of 18 birth, or place of residence;

in violation of provision in the Immigration and Nationality Act the Executive Order suspends all immigrant and 7 non-immigrant entry into Washington by individuals from seven countries and forecloses their ability to apply for asylum and withholding of removal, as well as foreclosing their ability to apply for relief under the Convention Against Torture;

the Executive order was motivated by animus and a desire to hurt a particular group; and

it was Trump’s intention to ban immigration and/or travel based on an individual’s Islamic faith and prioritise immigration from Middle Eastern countries based on an individual’s Christian faith.

On 3 February federal judge James L. Robart issued a nation-wide restraining order (with no identified end date) which blocks enforcement of Trump’s 27 January 2017 Executive Order effective immediately.

Tro by zerohedge on Scribd

https://www.scribd.com/document/338362589/Tro

The White House response was typically indiscreet and was later amended to remove the description of the court’s judgment as “outrageous”.

The next court hearing date is yet to be set or Monday, 6 February 2017.

UPDATE

Trump's tweeted reaction to the Robart restraining order - commencing 11:59 PM on 4 Feb 2017:

Is living in aged care in Australia bad for your mental health?

An estimated 10–15% of older Australians who live in the community experience anxiety or depression (Haralambous et al. 2009). However, research has shown that certain sub-groups of the older population are at higher risk of experiencing poor mental health. For example, just over half (52% or 86,736) of all permanent aged care residents at 30 June 2012 had mild, moderate or major symptoms of depression when they were last appraised (AIHW 2013). [Australian Government, Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, Australia’s welfare 2015]

The Sydney Morning Herald, 7 January 2017:

Tens of thousands of elderly Australians are being  denied effective public health treatments because they live in nursing homes, with experts labelling it a "disgrace" and "blatantly discriminatory".

A Fairfax Media investigation has revealed the mental health of aged-care residents suffers as a result of widespread neglect that legal and health experts attribute in large part to a   "ridiculous" Medicare rule.

Under the rule almost all nursing home residents are denied GP mental health treatment plans and associated psychological therapies provided to other Australians under the Better Access Medicare program, because the government deems residents not to be patients "in the community".

Despite extreme rates of mental illness in nursing homes – with about 82,000 of 176,000 residents estimated to suffer a mental illness (excluding dementia) or significant mental distress – the Turnbull government reaffirmed the regulatory exclusion late last year.

While the government says its funding mechanism assesses depressed residents' care needs, a Fairfax Media investigation has discovered the homes almost never pay for clinical mental health treatments and experts say the government has neither legally compelled nor adequately funded them to do so.

Audits by Sydney and Deakin universities have repeatedly found that fewer than 2 per cent of residents suffering depression have received psychological treatments, such as cognitive-behavioural therapy,  that are clinically recommended for most depression experienced in the aged-care setting…..

Royal Australian College of GPs president and University of Tasmania clinical professor Bastian Seidel agreed the denial of treatment was "systematic" because "the data is out there" and he called for the removal of the Medicare exclusion.

Researchers have found only about half of all residents with depression receive treatment of any kind, whether from psychologists or other clinicians, and that almost all of those are put on antidepressants by GPs, despite their use in the elderly being linked to serious adverse effects, including falls and fractures.

Stigmatising attitudes and ignorance about mental healthcare have also been found to be widespread among nursing home staff, with unpublished Swinburne University survey data suggesting staff commonly dismiss depressed residents as "attention seeking" and lack basic knowledge about mental illness.

While many residents arrive in homes with depression or other mental disorders, others struggle mentally due to challenges experienced in care, such as chronic pain, disabling and terminal medical conditions, progressive loss of brain function and the loss of social role and sense of identity.

"There are commonly acute adjustment disorders … [involving] bereavement, grief, loss," said Adelaide older persons GP Johanna Kilmartin, who described the Medicare restriction as ridiculous.

"You lose your family home [for] … one tiny little room … so you've lost all your material possessions; you've lost your health, because that's why you've moved in; often you've lost your spouse as well.

"This is when you need [psychological help] … [but] we've got the opposite"……

A spokesman for the Department of Health said while Commonwealth-funded residents – understood to be all or almost all aged-care residents – were not eligible for Better Access services, the government's aged-care funding instrument "assesses residents' care needs, including in relation to depression".

He said approved homes were required to "facilitate … access" for residents to health practitioners of their choosing and gave as an example "arranging transport".

But the dean and head of the University of South Australia's law school Wendy Lacey slammed the "weasel words" of the Aged Care Act's care "principles", saying there was "a complete absence of any positive and mandatory legal obligation on the part of facilities to take proactive measures to promote mental health and wellbeing of their residents".

There was "no legal obligation on the residential care provider to pay" for mental health services, and the "current exemptions" –  arising from the Aged Care Act and Medicare regulation – were "a blatant denial of human rights involving discrimination on the basis of age and infirmity".

Australian Catholic University senior research fellow Tanya Davison, whose research has found that half of all clinical cases of depression received no treatment of any kind, cited funding "that runs out very quickly" as among contributing factors to the "critically low" psychological therapy levels…..

The Conversation, 28 July 2015:

More than half (52%) of aged care residents have symptoms of depression, compared with 10-15% of older people living in the community. As well as feelings of sadness and low mood, aged care residents with depression feel uninterested in activities, hopeless about the future, guilty about the past and may desire death.

Some actively contemplate taking their own lives. The prevalence rate of suicidal thoughts in residential aged care settings can be as high as 46%. This is more than three times the rate found in older adults who are housebound but in the community.

People entering residential aged care facilities are, on average, older than those living in the community. They have more complex care needs due to physical and cognitive difficulties. They may also have difficulties adjusting to their loss of independence and routine. These factors all increase their risk of depression and suicidal ideation.

However, mental illness often remains undetected among aged care residents.

There are several reasons for this. People living in residential aged care usually have complex care needs, making the identification of depression difficult, as the emotional symptoms become confused with those of other conditions. Older people are also less likely than younger people to recognise their own symptoms, often attributing them to normal ageing.

Further, although facility-based carers are in a position to act as informants, they often lack the training to detect symptoms of depression and do not routinely screen for suicide ideation.

Depression is a manageable condition and the symptoms can be improved or managed through therapy and medication. Medications are effective but are often associated with side effects, and for older adults may not be recommended alongside some other medications and conditions.

Yet, when residents are recognised to have symptoms of depression, they are often only prescribed medications (particularly antidepressants) despite the effectiveness of non-medication approaches. Research shows interventions such as cognitive behavioural therapy (a talk therapy that addresses how you think and act) are at least equally effective as anti-depressants for improving late-life depression.

BACKGROUND

National Ageing Research Institute, Depression in older age: A scoping study, Final Report, September 2009:

4.1 Depression and anxiety in older people

It is a common misconception that depression is a normal part of ageing, but the evidence shows that multiple health problems often account for any initial association between depression and older age (Baldwin, 2008; Baldwin, Chiu, Katona, & Graham, 2002). Depression is essentially the same disorder across the lifespan, although certain symptoms are accentuated and others are suppressed in older people. For example, older people with depression typically report more physical symptoms and less sadness compared to younger people with depression (Baldwin, 2008; Chiu, Tam & Chiu, 2008). Additionally, psychotic symptoms, melancholia, insomnia, hypochondriasis, and subjective memory complaints are more likely to occur in older people with depression compared to younger people with depression (Baldwin, 2008; Baldwin et al., 2002). A recent review found that when confounding variables are controlled (for example, age at study entry), remission rates of depression in patients in late-life are not different from those in midlife, although relapse rates appear higher in older people (Mitchell & Subramaniam, 2005).

Anxiety disorders are also common among older people. However, research in this area is less compared to research undertaken in other mental disorders in older people, such as depression (Wetherell, Maser, & van Balkom, 2005). Of the anxiety disorders, phobic disorders and generalised anxiety disorder (GAD) are the two most common in older people (Beyer, 2004; Bryant et al., 2008; Rodda, Boyce, & Walker, 2008). There has been a certain amount of clinical interest in post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), because the survivors of the Second World War and the Holocaust are now well into old age. Moreover, Vietnam Veterans are also approaching old age with well-documented high levels of psychopathology (Owens, Baker, Kasckow, Ciesla, & Mohamed, 2005) that can also have serious effects on the mental health of family members (Galovskia & Lyons, 2003). Prevalence data on PTSD, however, are very limited (Sadavoy, 1997). American studies of Holocaust survivors have found that up to 46% meet criteria for PTSD (Sadavoy, 1997). Weintraub and Ruskin (1999)’s review emphasises the similarities between PTSD in older and younger groups. Other authors have disputed this, and further research is required to establish how different the presentation of PTSD is in older adults from that in younger people.

A recent Australian study found that 11.6% of men and 8.6% of women aged over 65 reported re-experiencing symptoms associated with past events (DSM IV criteria), and concluded that quality of life may be significantly affected in this group (Creamer & Parslow, 2008). This study highlights some of the difficulties in the application of the DSM IV criteria to older adults.

Research on interventions for older people with PTSD is very limited indeed. A recent review of assessment and treatment of PTSD in older combat veterans identified only five studies of psychotherapeutic intervention (Owens et al., 2005). All of these were case studies. A literature search carried out for this review did not identify any randomised controlled trials of psychological intervention for older people diagnosed with PTSD.

Comorbidity of depression and anxiety disorders is highly prevalent (Beekman et al., 2000). A community-based study in the Netherlands found 47.5% of older people with major depressive disorders also met criteria for anxiety disorders, whereas 26.1% of those with anxiety disorders also met criteria for major depressive disorders (Beekman et al., 2000). Mixed anxiety and depressive disorders (where symptoms of both anxiety and depression do not reach diagnostic criteria for either disorder) also frequently occur in older people (Chiu et al., 2008; Rodda et al., 2008). Older people with depression have a 35% lifetime and 23% current prevalence of a co-morbid anxiety disorder (Beyer, 2004). Furthermore, when anxiety symptoms first occur in a person over 60 years of age with no history of anxiety, it generally suggests underlying depression (Baldwin, 2008; Chiu et al., 2008). Indeed, it is quite uncommon that people develop late-onset anxiety disorders for the first time in later life (Chiu et al., 2008), although there are researchers who disagree with this (Wetherell, Maser et al., 2005). Older people with co-morbid depression and anxiety typically have more severe depressive symptoms, an increased likelihood of suicide ideation, lower social functioning (Beyer, 2004; Rodda et al., 2008) and poorer outcome (Schoevers, Beekman, Deeg, Jonker, & van Tilburg, 2003)…..

The 2007 National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing found that the 12-month prevalence for depression and anxiety was 2% and 5%, respectively for older people living in private dwellings (Australian Bureau of beyondblue depression in older age: a scoping study. Final Report - National Ageing Research Institute (NARI), September 2009 - 13 - Statistics, 2008). Another Australian study found that the prevalence of depression was 8.2% among a sample of 22,252 community-dwelling older people (Pirkis et al., 2009). However, the prevalence rate is much higher in residential aged care facilities and a recent Australian study found that 34.7% of aged care residents suffered from depression (Snowdon & Fleming, 2008).

Remembering Australia's history

After my great grandparents were denied asylum in Aust they were murdered in Auschwitz. @TurnbullMalcolm please speak out against #MuslimBan pic.twitter.com/cr63PMJA1z

— Mireille Juchau (@MireilleJuchau) January 28, 2017

The national shame of 2-4 August 2014 should never ever be repeated

"It is profoundly disturbing to witness the appalling treatment of this young woman at the Lock-Up on 4 August 2014. In her final hours she was unable to have the comfort of the presence of her loved ones, and was in the care of a number of police officers who disregarded her welfare and her right to humane and dignified treatment." [Excerpt from Western Australia State Coroner, coronial finding, 16 December 2016]

WA Coronial Inquest into the Death of Ms. Dhu, 16 December 2016 by clarencegirl on Scribd

Will the Abbott-Turnbull policy horror stories never stop?

The Liberal and National parties blindly driven by ideology and riddled with far-right extremists have altered existing social policies (sometimes out of all recognition) or created new punitive policies, which are increasing the distress of the old, the disabled, the sick, low income earners, the unemployed and indigenous people.

Here is yet another bad news story about the effect of these policies……..

ABC News, 3 December 2016:

The Federal Government's remote work-for-the-dole scheme is devastating Indigenous communities, with financial penalties causing insurmountable debt and social division, a report has found.

The Australian National University researchers described Indigenous Affairs Minister Nigel Scullion's Community Development Programme (CDP) as a "policy disaster".

ANU researcher and co-author Dr Kirrily Jordan said financial penalties were being applied unfairly and an example of this could be found in the Ngaanyatjarra Lands in Western Australia.

"The rental arrears across the whole lands, across 12 communities, have gone up from $50,000 to $350,000, in the short space of time since CDP's been introduced," she said.

ANU researcher Dr Inge Kral said she had spent 30 years working in remote communities and the latest scheme had left people struggling to feed themselves.

"People with no money in families, there's no money for food, there's certainly no money for clothes — people are starving, people are begging," she said.

"The whole infrastructure around stores is collapsing because there isn't the reliable secure income coming in."

According to the ANU report, the Centrelink-based system is impractical and devised by Canberra bureaucrats who are out-of-touch with remote community life.

Ms Kral also said people in remote areas were not being properly assessed for the disability pension and could be on the phone to Centrelink for "days", with little regard for language barriers.

"We are not kidding. This is not made up. People sit there for days," she said.

"Someone told me a story the other day about a man who really should be on a disability pension.

"They're now without money, they're on an eight-week no-payment penalty, they haven't eaten for three days, they've got no money coming in and they can't effectively engage with Centrelink by themselves.".

The scheme applies to about 34,000 people, mostly Indigenous, across Australia and was introduced by Mr Scullion in July last year.

CDP increased the number of work hours required for welfare payments to 25 per week, for at least 46 weeks a year.

United Nations requests Governments of Sweden and United Kingdom to allow Julian Assange "freedom of movement"

U.N. Human Rights Council, Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, 30 November 2016:

The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has concluded its 77th regular session from 21 to 25 November in Geneva.

The Working Group has a mandate to investigate allegations of individuals being deprived of their liberty in an arbitrary way or inconsistently with international human rights standards, and to recommend remedies such as release from detention and compensation, when appropriate.

During the session, the Working Group adopted 18 opinions concerning 43 persons deprived of liberty. The adopted opinions will be transmitted to the Governments concerned and the sources. These opinions will also be published on the website of the Working Group.

The UN expert group also considered four requests for review* of previous opinions, submitted by the Arab Republic of Egypt, the State of Kuwait and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The Working Group concluded that the requests did not meet the threshold of a review as enshrined in paragraph 21 of its methods of work,** and that they were thus not admissible.

Excerpt from Opinion No. 54/2015 concerning Julian Assange (Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland)*:

Disposition

In the light of the foregoing, the Working Group renders the following opinion: The deprivation of liberty of Julian Assange is arbitrary and in contravention of articles 9 and 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and articles 7, 9 (1), (3) and (4), 10 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It falls within category III of the categories applicable to the consideration of the cases submitted to the Working Group.

Consequent upon the opinion rendered, the Working Group requests the Governments of Sweden and the United Kingdom to assess the situation of Mr. Assange, to ensure his safety and physical integrity, to facilitate the exercise of his right to freedom of movement in an expedient manner and to ensure the full enjoyment of his rights guaranteed by the international norms on detention.

The Working Group considers that, taking into account all the circumstances of the case, the adequate remedy would be to ensure the right of free movement of Mr. Assange and accord him an enforceable right to compensation, in accordance with article 9 (5) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. [Adopted on 4 December 2015]

America begins to gird for battle against Trump's ideological excesses

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) was founded in 1920 and by its own reckoning now is the “leading civil liberties advocate in the Supreme Court. With over 200 staff attorneys and an extensive network of cooperating attorneys, we handle thousands of cases each year on behalf of clients whose rights have been violated”.

On 11 November 2016 it threw down the gauntlet in what may become the biggest battle to retain the full gamut of civil liberties and human rights in America since the 1960s.

Click on image to enlarge

At 7:01 AM on 18 Nov 2016 ACLU tweeted this:

On  the same day the ACLU website displayed this banner.

The 7th Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage report released today

Australian Government, Productivity Commission, 17 November 2016:

In April 2002, the Council of Australian Governments commissioned the Steering Committee to produce a regular report against key indicators of Indigenous disadvantage. The Steering Committee is advised by a working group made up of representatives from all Australian governments, the National Congress of Australia's First Peoples, the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare.

The Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage report measures the wellbeing of Australia's Indigenous peoples. The report provides information about outcomes across a range of strategic areas such as early child development, education and training, healthy lives, economic participation, home environment, and safe and supportive communities. The report examines whether policies and programs are achieving positive outcomes for Indigenous Australians.

The most recent edition of the report is, Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2016, released on Thursday 17 November 2016.

ABC News, 17 November 2016:

The report points to a failure of policy and oversight, with the commission estimating only 34 of 1,000 Indigenous programs are been properly evaluated by authorities.

Productivity Commission deputy chair Karen Chester told the ABC's AM program the findings are a wake up call for all levels of government about the reality of Indigenous wellbeing and whether the $30 billion budget is being properly spent.

"You want to know that money is being spent not just in terms of bang for buck for taxpayers, but that we're not short-changing Indigenous Australians," Ms Chester said.

"Of over a thousand policies and programs, we could only identify 34 across the whole of Australia that have been robustly and transparently evaluated.

"At the end of the day, we can't feign surprise that we're not seeing improvement across all these wellbeing indicators if we're not lifting the bonnet and evaluating if the policies and programs are working or not."

The report is being billed by the commission as "compulsory reading" and the most comprehensive report on Indigenous wellbeing undertaken in Australia….

But Ms Chester says it was now up to state, territory and federal governments to take the report on board to determine what is working and what is failing.

"I think the clock has been ticking for a while already," Ms Chester said.

"We have the data, we have the analysis and we know what indicators are linked to the others."

While the report includes case studies of examples of "things that work", it says the small number available underscores the lack of Indigenous programs that are being rigorously evaluated for effectiveness.

Excerpt from Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2016:

Key points

 This report measures the wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, and was produced in consultation with governments and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. Around 3 per cent of the Australian population are estimated as being of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander origin (based on 2011 Census data).  Outcomes have improved in a number of areas, including some COAG targets. For indicators with new data for this report: – Mortality rates for children improved between 1998 and 2014, particularly for 0<1 year olds, whose mortality rates more than halved (from 14 to 6 deaths per 1000 live births). – Education improvements included increases in the proportion of 20–24 year olds completing year 12 or above (from 2008 to 2014-15) and the proportion of 20–64 year olds with or working towards post-school qualifications (from 2002 to 2014-15). – The proportion of adults whose main income was from employment increased from 32 per cent in 2002 to 43 per cent in 2014-15, with household income increasing over this period. – The proportion of adults that recognised traditional lands increased from 70 per cent in 2002 to 74 per cent in 2014-15.  However, there has been little or no change for some indicators. – Rates of family and community violence were unchanged between 2002 and 2014-15 (around 22 per cent), and risky long-term alcohol use in 2014-15 was similar to 2002 (though lower than 2008). – The proportions of people learning and speaking Indigenous languages remained unchanged from 2008 to 2014-15.  Outcomes have worsened in some areas. – The proportion of adults reporting high levels of psychological distress increased from 27 per cent in 2004-05 to 33 per cent in 2014-15, and hospitalisations for self-harm increased by 56 per cent over this period. – The proportion of adults reporting substance misuse in the previous 12 months increased from 23 per cent in 2002 to 31 per cent in 2014-15. – The adult imprisonment rate increased 77 per cent between 2000 and 2015, and whilst the juvenile detention rate has decreased it is still 24 times the rate for non-Indigenous youth.  Change over time cannot be assessed for all the indicators — some indicators have no trend data; some indicators report on service use, and change over time might be due to changing access rather than changes in the underlying outcome; and some indicators have related measures that moved in different directions.  Finally, data alone cannot tell the complete story about the wellbeing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians, nor can it fully tell us why outcomes improve (or not) in different areas. To support the indicator reporting, case studies of 'things that work' are included in this report (a subset in this Overview). However, the relatively small number of case studies included reflects a lack of rigorously evaluated programs in the Indigenous policy area.