Dystopian Australia: just the tip of the iceberg.....

 

In Australia it sometimes feels as though there has never been any hope of a genuine level playing field developing in a society whose institutions are hampered by a thick 18th century British-European exoskeleton.

That the notion of universal welfare has always been distorted by perceptions of class and a false narrative of the deserving and undeserving poor.

In modern Australia the following is just another example of what happens when instead of the creation of constructive social policy, poverty merely stops being an exploitive cottage industry for religious charities and instead expands into a gold mine for rapacious secular opportunists.

The Saturday Paper, 26 August 2023:

Outsourced employment service providers are funnelling millions of dollars in government funding earmarked for people on welfare through their own companies, related entities and labour-hire outfits, creating paper empires out of their impoverished clients.

Under the $6.3 billion, five-year Workforce Australia model, private and not-for-profit job service providers are able to receive “outcome” payments for placing jobseekers in “work” within their own organisation and receive funding to refer them to other services and training, which can also be delivered by subsidiaries or related parties.

In short, a provider can be paid to take on a welfare recipient by the federal government and then be paid to place them into training within their own organisation and then be paid again by placing the person into work somewhere else in that organisation’s network.

This comes at the same time as an increasing awareness that mutual obligations – the system by which people on welfare must apply for an arbitrary number of jobs, enrol in training or perform set activities each month under threat of payment suspension – is damaging and does not lead people to employment.

Data released under freedom of information laws and through budget estimates reveals that in the year to June 30 the Employment Fund made $33.6 million in commitments to job providers within their own organisation, for example for counselling services provided by an entity with the same ABN.

Excluding wage subsidies, which cannot be claimed in this way, the spending represents a quarter of the more than $100 million allocated from the Employment Fund in total. One provider alone made $5.5 million worth of claims via its own entities in a nine-month period to March 31.

While the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations has tallied the figures for organisations using the same ABN, it took longer to come up with a figure for how much providers were spending on related companies – such as those that shared a director or major shareholder – because providers self-report and the reports are often unreliable.

The Saturday Paper has been told the dollar value for related-party claims from the fund is $9.2 million in the year to June, bringing the total amount of money being recirculated within companies to $42.8 million…..

Read the full article here.

Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) issues media release in response to factual errors and misleading comments concerning national referendum voting instructions

 

Despite the legislation concerning national referenda being clear (as evidenced by the above interview with Antony Green), misinformation and at times deliberate disinformation is to be found in both mainstream and social media concerning the proposed 2023 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament referendum.

The level of factual inaccuracy has become a matter of concern.....

Australian Electoral Commission, AEC Newsroom, Media releases 2023

Media advice: Referendum voting instructions

Updated: 25 August 2023

Australian voters are rightly proud of their electoral system – one of the most transparent and robust voting systems in the world. As a result, there is an intense, and highly appropriate level of public interest in all aspects of that system, and associated commentary online and in mainstream media. Sometimes this commentary is immediate and based on emotion rather than the reality of the law which the AEC must administer.

There has been intense commentary online and in mainstream media regarding what will and will not be a formal vote for the 2023 referendum; specifically around whether or not a ‘tick’ or a ‘cross’ will be able to be counted. Much of that commentary is factually incorrect and ignores:

• the law surrounding ‘savings provisions’,

• the longstanding legal advice regarding the use of ticks and crosses, and

• the decades-long and multi-referendum history of the application of that law and advice.

The AEC completely and utterly rejects the suggestions by some that by transparently following the established, public and known legislative requirements we are undermining the impartiality and fairness of the referendum.

As has been the case at every electoral event, the AEC remains totally focussed on electoral integrity. Indeed, electoral integrity is a central part of the AEC’s published values; underpinned by, and supported through, complete adherence to all relevant laws and regulations.

How to cast a formal vote

The formal voting instructions for the referendum are to clearly write either ‘yes’ or ‘no’, in full, in English.

It is that easy: given the simplicity, the AEC expects the vast, vast majority of Australian voters to follow those instructions and cast a formal vote.

Previous levels of formality

It is important to keep scale, or a lack of it in this instance, and precedent in mind when discussing this matter.

More than 99% of votes cast at the 1999 federal referendum were formal. Even of the 0.86% of informal votes, many would have had no relevance to the use of ticks or crosses.

AEC communication

Instructions for casting a formal vote – to write either yes or no in full, in English, will be:

• part of the AEC’s advertising campaign,

• on the AEC website,

• in the guide delivered to all Australian households,

• an instruction by our polling officials when people are issued with their ballot paper,

• on posters in polling places, and

• on the ballot paper itself.

This is why the level of formal voting at previous referendums has been so high and why the AEC expects the vast, vast majority of voters to follow those instructions.

The law

Like an election, the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984 includes ‘savings provisions’ - the ability to count a vote where the instructions have not been followed but the voter’s intention is clear.

• The AEC cannot ignore the law and cannot ignore savings provisions.

The law regarding formality in a referendum is long-standing and unchanged through many governments, Parliaments, and multiple referendums. Legal advice from the Australian Government Solicitor, provided on multiple occasions during the previous three decades, regarding the application of savings provisions to ‘ticks’ and ’crosses’ has been consistent – for decades.

This is not new, nor a new AEC determination of any kind for the 2023 referendum. The law regarding savings provisions and the principle around a voter’s intent has been in place for at least 30 years and 6 referendum questions.

The longstanding legal advice provides that a cross can be open to interpretation as to whether it denotes approval or disapproval: many people use it daily to indicate approval in checkboxes on forms. The legal advice provides that for a single referendum question, a clear ‘tick’ should be counted as formal and a ‘cross’ should not.

Media resources:

AEC Newsroom

AEC YouTube (AECTV)

AEC imagery (AEC Flickr)

AEC media contacts

~~~~ENDS~~~~

BACKGROUND

The Guardian, 24 August 2023, excerpts:

Voters in the upcoming voice to parliament referendum are being urged to write “yes” or “no” on referendum ballot papers – and being warned that if they use a cross, their vote may not be counted.

The well-established and longstanding rule which will mean ticks are likely allowed but votes that use crosses are likely excluded has prompted criticism from the opposition leader, Peter Dutton, the former prime minister Tony Abbott and the no campaign, which claims the requirement will “stack the deck” against them.

The rule has been on the books, without controversy, for 30 years and six referendum questions, and when asked about ticks and crosses on Thursday, an Australian Electoral Commission spokesperson simply said: “Please don’t use them.”….

Fair Australia tweeted: “Looks like just another attempt to stack the deck against ‘no’ voting Australians.”

Abbott claimed on 2GB that “there’s a suspicion that officialdom is trying to make it easier for one side … This is the worry all along that there is a lot of official bias in this whole referendum process.”

Dutton, also speaking on 2GB, called it “completely outrageous” and claimed the situation “gives a very, very strong advantage to the ‘yes’ case”. The opposition leader said he would ask the government to draft legislation to change the rule.

The Coalition opposition did not propose amending this rule during debate on the Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act earlier this year, and supported the government’s legislation....

The Sydney Morning Herald, 25 August 2023, excerpt:

Despite Dutton’s insistence that an X should denote a No vote, in his 2022 election candidate nomination form he repeatedly placed an X in a box to indicate a Yes to questions about his citizenship and the country of his parents’ birth, for example.

Click on image to enlarge

In fact across the entire Dutton_Q47P document “x” was used interchangeably by Peter Dutton to denote Yes, No, and Not Applicable.

NOTE:

History of Referendum (Machinery Provisions) Act 1984 can be found at

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Series/C2004A02908

Cartoons of the Week

Cathy Wilcox

David Pope

Jeff Koterba

A brief explanation of the science of global warming

The science of global warming beautifully and simply explained by Dr. Carl Sagan, ca. 1985. pic.twitter.com/r85v5Vj5Kp

— Physics In History (@PhysInHistory) August 16, 2023

Blockade Australia August 2023: climate crisis activists court appearances update

 

BLOCKADE AUSTRALIA, media release, 23 August 2023:

Emma Dorge appeared before Magistrate Breton at Penrith Local Court today. Emma was found guilty to resisting arrest by plain clothes officers at Springwood train station.

The Magistrate did question why the initial arrest was even made for breaching bail, as police were unable to specify the breach or provide any evidence, and did not lay this charge. Police prosecution claimed that police were acting in good faith, despite concurrent bail breach accusations against Emma of not being allowed in NSW and not residing at a NSW address. In response to this, the Magistrate stated, "I suggest otherwise, it seems there was no breach of bail, meaning there would have been no power to arrest her at all".

"Despite the obvious lack of reason for my arrest, the magistrate still decided that me turning to get out my phone to contact help constitutes resisting arrest. The judicial system has once again protected police mis-use of power; over the rights of people affected by it."

"As we see increasing over-reach by the police and courts, we also see increasing extreme climate events around the world. We must match this with resistance." Emma Dorge

Blockade Australia is a growing network of people commitment to targeting the economic pinch points that materially disrupt the exportation and exploitation that this political system relies on. This was demonstrated in a simultaneous week of actions at Brisbane, Newcastle and Melbourne ports in June.

Blockade Australia acknowledges First Nations Peoples as the custodians and true owners of this land

Earlier Blockade Australia media news announcement, 23 August 2023:

Emma Dorge, who was arrested in June 2022 in a spree of arrests made by police to repress Blockade Australia's planned mobilisation in Sydney last year, is facing court today [Wednesday 23rd] at Penrith Local Court. Several other Blockade Australia activists have faced court or had charges dropped by police this past week - details below. Two of these people - Daniel Heggie and Emma Dorge will be available for comment at court today.

Emma Dorge is pleading not guilty to resisting arrest when being apprehended by two undercover officers at a train station in June last year. The police attempted and failed to bring a detention order on Emma. Emma has been living with `bail conditions for 14 months, including: not to associate with 25 others, including their partner, had to move house and leave NSW. These conditions, whilst extensive, have been used against various activists arrested in the period in association with Blockade Australia.

At the same time in June last year, Max Curmi and Daniel Heggie were being held in custody after the bungled Colo surveillance operation which led to the large scale raid. Both were given a significant list of charges each. Daniel was facing charges of aid and abet in the commission of a crime, for unloading a trailer at Colo, was subsequently on bail for over a year, only for all charges to be dropped the day before the court date. Max was charged with conspiracy and affray, for which he was held on remand for over 3 weeks, along with Tim Neville who was also arrested during the raid.

On these police tactics, Max wrote from prison in June last year, "I'm a political prisoner, I'm being held on prefabricated charges because I refuse to let this system continue destroying this continent, the climate and our right to a livable future".

Aunty Caroline Kirk, Ngemba Elder and Lily Bett were in Paramatta court last week for charges of obstruct and intimidate the police during the Colo raids in June last year. The intimidation and obstruct charges were laid on them for yelling at or standing in the path of, what they identified as armed intruders at a private residence.

Aunty Caroline was given $400 in fine and Lily a 6 month CRO. Both had no conviction recorded.

At the time of the charges in question, police were dressed in camouflage and black clothes, refused to identify themselves and hit several people in the process of leaving in a car. It was not until 100+ police, with dogs and helicopters made their way down the valley, smashing up the camp and holding everyone for hours, that it became clear it was a police operation.

"Over the past 18 months we have seen harsh bail conditions, surveillance and incarceration of climate activists, even when no legitimate charges end up being laid. These underhanded police tactics go hand in hand with the anti protest laws introduced early last year. Australia uses these repressive mechanisms to uphold this destructive profit-growth system and block meaningful climate action." - Emma Dorge

More than $847.25 million in wages are estimated to be underpaid each year, affecting 1.38 million workers - in June 2022 that included approx. 16,045 NSW Northern Rivers employees believed to be owed stolen wages of est. $4.8 million

 

“Australian workers are dealing with the rising cost

of living, housing market pressures, a rental crisis,

and stagnant wage growth.

Unpaid earnings harm people who worked in good faith for their pay packet and - right now - people are having to carefully count every dollar…

More than $847.25 million in wages are estimated to be underpaid each year, affecting 1.38 million workers, or

about 11.5 per cent of the employed Australian workforce”

[McKell Institute, “Unfinished Business: The Ongoing Battle Against Wage Theft”, August 2023]

Smart Company, 22 August 2023:

Wage theft is costing Australian workers $850 million a year, demonstrating an “ingrained culture” of deliberate underpayment and the need for criminalisation at the federal level, according to a damning new report from the McKell Institute.

A fresh analysis of Fair Work Ombudsman audits stretching back to 2009 shows more than a quarter of audited businesses failed to observe the monetary obligations set out by industry awards or enterprise agreements, according to the think tank.

Its calculations show nearly 27,000 businesses were found to have underpaid approximately 1.3 million Australian workers over that time frame.

The real level of wage underpayment is likely higher, McKell Institute CEO Ed Cavanough said, as the analysis did not cover the underpayment of penalty rates, or circumstances where payment under a different award would have been more appropriate.

“This is an extraordinary amount of money being stolen and it’s unacceptable,” Cavanough said in a statement.

Wage underpayment hits businesses big and small

The report arrives against a backdrop of high-profile wage underpayments claims, with Coles, Target, and Bunnings just a few of the major brands to have revealed significant wage underpayments in recent years.

Wage underpayment also stretches deep into the small business sector, with the Fair Work Ombudsman on Tuesday revealing it has levelled nearly $85,000 in penalties against two Victorian businesses accused of underpaying young workers, as a result of its latest investigation.

The Ombudsman recently launched a spate of undercover campaigns targeting small restaurants and food court vendors deemed to offer suspiciously low-cost fare.

The McKell Institute argues laws criminalising wage theft across the board are necessary to discourage employers from deliberately withholding earnings and entitlements.

The report throws its weight behind the federal government’s upcoming industrial relations reform package, which is expected to contain legislation making wage theft a criminal offence across the board….

Read the full article here.

In the NSW Northern Rivers region there are two federal electorates, Page and Richmond.

According to the McKell Institute 29-page analysis of the economic impact of wage theft in Australia, as of June 2022:

• In the electorate of Page there were est. 1,366 non-compliant business which between them were believed to have stolen wages from 7,023 employees with a total minimum value of $4,289,664.

• In the electorate of Richmond there were est. 1,754 non-compliant businesses which between them were believed to have stolen wages from 9,022 employees with a total minimum value of $5,510,65.

North Coast Voices will not be posting from Saturday 19 August to Wednesday 23 August 2023