Keep Calm & Carrying On Making The Tea!

Oh dear, this man may yet be Australia’s next Deputy-Prime Minister.

Former accountant and current Nationals MP for New England and 
Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources 
Barnaby Thomas Gerard Joyce

What could possibly go wrong?

Sharp rise in Green Power bills the fault of Federal Coalition Government

The Sydney Morning Herald, 4 January 2016:

Consumers want answers after energy providers have announced a price increase of up to 41 per cent for their green energy contribution to coincide with the new year.

In the days leading up to Christmas, Origin Energy customers were notified that "a rise in the market price of renewable energy" meant GreenPower electricity charges would increase from 3.61¢ per kilowatt hour (excluding GST) to 5.10¢ per kilowatt hour from January 1, 2016.

The increase was so steep, northern NSW resident Russell Mills was sure there had been a mistake.

"I did the maths very quickly and it came up as a 41 per cent increase. I thought that's substantial, am I missing something?" he said. 

"There was nothing in the letter explaining the rationale for it, so I rang them and I spoke to three different people who could tell me no more, just that it was due to changes in renewable energy prices."

In Mr Mills' case, the 41 per cent increase would equate to an extra $77 each year…..

Mr Mills lives with his wife and two children in a three-bedroom home in Clunes, where they spend between $450 and $550 per quarter on electricity.

For the past year, he has contributed to renewable energy through the 100 per cent GreenPower product. However, after being hit with the 41 per cent increase, he has made a "hip-pocket decision" to reduce his 100 per cent contribution to 50 per cent. 

"There's a huge disincentive here for average consumers to actually choose renewable energy. I'm not laying blame totally on Origin, I'm still with them, I just feel it's a bit depressing really," he said.

"We need more renewable energy and there's not really any incentive for us to choose it."

Significant price jumps in GreenPower charges can be linked to the large-scale generation certificates used for the product, which have experienced a steady increase of about $40 to upwards of $75 in the past six months.

All GreenPower providers have changed their prices to reflect the underlying cost increase.

So who is the real culprit in all this?

The fault apparently lies with the Coalition Federal Government and its attempt to dismantle the Renewable Energy Target (RET) scheme.

Energetics on 9 December 2015:

The protracted negotiations surrounding the review of the Renewable Energy Target (RET) scheme and the reduced energy target has had a significant effect on the price movement and volatility of Large-scale Generation Certificates (LGCs) throughout the third quarter of 2015. 

The negotiated changes to the RET can be summarised as follows:

* Reduction of the Large scale Renewable Energy Target from 41,000GWh to 33,000GWh

*Eligibility of the burning of native wood waste as a certificate generator

* Creation of a ‘wind commissioner’ to hear complaints surrounding wind developments.

Following the passing of the RET legislation by the Senate on 23 June 2015, LGC prices have increased to seven year highs, maintaining prices above $70 per certificate….

This unprecedented price movement has come on the back of significant trades in the spot market, as the market is concerned about the number of committed projects over the next 12 months. The protracted negotiations surrounding the revised RET target did effectively put any investment in large-scale renewable projects on hold, leading now to a short to medium term shortage of LGC certificates. 

Future price movements will depend on the quantity of approved large-scale renewable projects in the coming years. Policy certainty, combined with the high LGC price should serve to encourage increased levels investment in new projects and ultimately put downward pressure on the current high certificate prices.

ISIS called and heard this response: sorry, I have a life

Sky News reporting on ISIS response to increased air strikes, 27 December 2915:

The Islamic State group has released a new message purportedly from its reclusive leader, claiming his self-styled "caliphate" is doing well despite an unprecedented alliance against it.

In the 24-minute audio posted on Saturday, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi says air strikes by the international coalition only increase his group's determination and resolve.

He also mocks a recently announced Saudi-led Islamic alliance against "terrorism" and warns Israel that "we are getting closer to you" every day.

To Israeli Jews, he says that they "will hide behind trees and stones" from the IS.

Al-Baghdadi urges Muslims world over to join the fight, saying it is their Islamic duty to rise up everywhere.

The authenticity of the audio could not be independently confirmed but it was posted on IS-affiliated websites and Twitter as have past IS messages.

A selection of Twitter responses to this call to “rise up”:

Quote of the week

The federal ministry, personally chosen by Turnbull, seems disproportionately populated by gropers, leakers, fibbers, fools, frauds, dickheads and dopes. [Journalist Elizabeth Farrelly, The Sydney Morning Herald, 6 January 2016]

Special screening of documentary "Black Hole" at Dorrigo Old Gazette Theatre 7.30pm 15 January 2015

"Black Hole" explores the fight to stop the clearing of Leard State Forest.

Whitehaven Coal's controversial Maules Creek mine became fully operational in July 2015.

http://coalfacemagazine.com.au/maules-creek-celebrates-coal-for-christmas/

Just because it is beautiful.....

The Virgin Rainbow Opal

Release of the ALRC Freedoms Report is something to look forward to in March 2016

By early March 2016 the Turnbull Government is required to table and release the Australian Law Reform Commission report of the Freedoms Inquiry findings.

The Interim Report published in August 2015, Traditional Rights and Freedoms— Encroachments by Commonwealth Laws, can be found here.

This interim report states:

1.87 Throughout this paper, the ALRC highlights certain laws that may merit closer review. These are laws that have been criticised for unjustifiably limiting common law rights or principles. This report highlights some of these criticisms and some of the arguments that may be relevant to justification. However, for most of these laws, the ALRC would need more extensive consultation and evidence to justify making detailed recommendations for reform.108 1.88 Therefore, rather than make detailed recommendations for reform based on insufficient evidence, the ALRC has highlighted laws that seem to merit further review. These laws are identified in the conclusion to each chapter. The highlighted laws have been selected following consideration of a number of factors, including whether the law has been criticised in submissions or other literature for unjustifiably limiting one or more of the relevant rights and whether the law has recently been thoroughly reviewed. Laws that may be criticised for reasons other than interference with rights, for example because they do not achieve their objective, are not highlighted for that reason alone. The fact that a law limits multiple rights has also sometimes suggested the need for further review.109 1.89 The ALRC calls for submissions on which laws that limit traditional rights deserve further review.

And makes a welcome suggestion which, if implemented, would assist both parliamentarians and voters:

2.58 Additional procedures could be put in place to improve the rigour of statements of compatibility and explanatory memoranda to assist Parliament in understanding the impact of proposed legislation on fundamental rights, freedoms and privileges. The object of such procedures would be to ensure that statements of compatibility and explanatory memoranda provide sufficiently detailed and evidence-based rationales for encroachments on fundamental rights, freedoms and privileges to allow the parliamentary scrutiny committees to complete their review.

Politwoops is gathering Australian politicians' tweets once more

The Age 1 January 2016:

Politwoops will once again be able to collect and publish the deleted tweets of politicians around the world after Twitter announced that it reached a deal with the organisations that run the website.

Twitter revoked Politwoops' access to its API, the back-end code used by developers of other applications, earlier this year. Christopher Gates, the president of the Sunlight Foundation, a transparency group that runs the website in partnership with the Open State Foundation and Access Now, wrote at the time that Twitter's decision "truly mystified" him.

Politwoops has helped shine a light on apparent attempts by politicians to distance themselves from their remarks on Twitter. Perhaps the most notable case was when several politicians deleted tweets praising the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl by captors in Afghanistan after questions arose about the soldier's past actions.

Politwoops Australia can be found here.

NOTE: A word of warning – there is at least one Australian politician’s Twitter account which was comprehensively hacked and the tweets recorded as deleted did not originate from that person, so double check all tweets you may consider quoting.

Failure to maintain staffing numbers and nursing care levels in Australian aged care facilities is a disgrace

In June 1999, a little over a year into the first term of the Howard Coalition Government,  there were an estimated 132,420 older Australians in residential aged care facilities, with 61 per cent having “high care” dependency status.  

Between 1994 and 1999 there was a 13.9% decrease in the number of registered nurses and a 26.0% decrease in the number of enrolled nurses, so that by 1999 there were 19,517 registered nurses employed full-time in residential aged care facilities and 13,818 enrolled nurses.

A decade later and the percentage of registered nurses working in residential aged care facilities fell from 11 per cent (or 18,313 individuals) in 2003 to 8 per cent (or 16,431 individuals) in 2009 and the number of enrolled nurses fell from 29 per cent (or 12,933) to 21 per cent (or 10,030) in 2009.

In 2011 the number of permanent residents in aged care numbered an est. 165,032 people.

By 2012 the percentage of the residential aged care workforce being registered nurses or enrolled nurses working in residential aged care had only risen to 14.7 per cent (or 13,939 individuals) and 11.6 percent (or 10,999 individuals) respectively, which is an actual fall in total numbers of RNs & ENs in the aged care workforce.

During the course of the 2013–14 financial year 270,559 people were admitted to age care facilities either on a permanent or respite basis. Nationally in March 2014 registered nurses comprised 15.3% of the residential aged care workforce and enrolled nurses made up 21.9% [Aged and Community Services NSW & ACT].  By June 2014 the “high care” dependency level of aged care residents had risen to 83 percent.

However, in 2014 the Abbott Government changed the federal Aged Care Act 1997 in such a way that allowed residential aged care operators to reduce the number of registered nurses employed in their nursing homes, as well as deregulating fees charged and accommodation bonds levied. 

In response the NSW Government effectively grandfathers facilities subject to the current NSW Requirements for a period of 18 months in order to block any moves to reduce state legislated provision of a minimum of one registered nurse on duty 24/7 in nursing homes containing “high care” beds.  This reprieve appears to come to an end around February this year but the state government’s formal response to the NSW Legislative Council report it ordered is not due until 29 April.

Meanwhile The Sydney Morning Herald reported on 1 January 2016 that: The profits of aged care homes surged 40 per cent in the past year as operators cut hours of nursing care while claiming higher payments from the federal government for servicing more of the most frail patients. The earnings boom in the sector comes after the government introduced widespread reforms of aged care in 2014…Yet while nursing homes report they are looking after more needy residents, the time spent caring for them declined by 7 per cent over the past year. In 2015, hours by care staff (nurses, care assistants and therapists) fell from 42.71 hours per fortnight to 39.80 hours per fortnight. At 2.8 hours a day, the average is well below the minimum of 4.5 hours per day of nursing care mandated in the US, said Lynda Saltarelli from the Aged Care Crisis advocacy group."Australia has no recommended levels for staffing," she said. "Over half of all nursing homes in Australia have nursing levels so low that most residents suffer harm."

Australia currently has about 2,800 residential aged care facilities providing care to more than 160,000 elderly people. Over the next ten years, the number of residents is projected to reach more than 250,000 and the highest area of growth will be among residents aged 95 or over. During that same ten-year period the number of registered nurses and enrolled nurses employed in aged care facilities is expected to further decline, according to Health Workforce Australia.

Prime Minister Malcolm Bligh Turnbull and his Cabinet need to take a long hard look at this mess and use legislation and regulations to raise these staffing levels and hours of care received before the next federal election.

The issue is not going unnoticed by voters……

Letter to the Editor, The Age 3 January 2016:

Low nursing levels, low level of care

It is outrageous that nursing homes do not have recommended staffing levels. Elderly people with dementia or Alzheimer's disease – and who, in some cases, have paid bonds of hundreds of thousands of dollars as well as continuing monthly payments – deserve the best possible care. By law, childcare organisations have staff ratios yet children are able to learn and notify carers if they are in pain, hungry or need to be toileted. Dementia patients cannot do this and will only become more in need of care as their condition worsens. Thankfully my mother, who has late-stage Alzheimer's disease, is in a wonderful facility. However, in my search for a good home, I saw many where up to 15 dementia patients were cared for by one staff member. With an ageing society, the number of people entering nursing homes will increase, profits will continue to soar and our most vulnerable citizens will suffer. Staff ratios must be put in place.

Annie Jones, West Melbourne [my red bolding]

Twitter: no trolls, bullies, haters or racists allowed

Twitter has updated its abusive behaviour policy:

Abusive Behavior

We believe in freedom of expression and in speaking truth to power, but that means little as an underlying philosophy if voices are silenced because people are afraid to speak up. In order to ensure that people feel safe expressing diverse opinions and beliefs, we do not tolerate behavior that crosses the line into abuse, including behavior that harasses, intimidates, or uses fear to silence another user’s voice.

Any accounts and related accounts engaging in the activities specified below may be temporarily locked and/or subject to permanent suspension.

* Violent threats (direct or indirect): You may not make threats of violence or promote violence, including threatening or promoting terrorism. 

* Harassment: You may not incite or engage in the targeted abuse or harassment of others.

Some of the factors that we may consider when evaluating abusive behavior include:

o   if a primary purpose of the reported account is to harass or send abusive messages to others;

o   if the reported behavior is one-sided or includes threats;

o   if the reported account is inciting others to harass another account; and

o   if the reported account is sending harassing messages to an account from multiple accounts.

* Hateful conduct: You may not promote violence against or directly attack or threaten other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or disease. We also do not allow accounts whose primary purpose is inciting harm towards others on the basis of these categories. 

*Multiple account abuse: Creating multiple accounts with overlapping uses or in order to evade the temporary or permanent suspension of a separate account is not allowed.

* Private information: You may not publish or post other people's private and confidential information, such as credit card numbers, street address, or Social Security/National Identity numbers, without their express authorization and permission. In addition, you may not post intimate photos or videos that were taken or distributed without the subject's consent. Read more about our private information policy here.

* Impersonation: You may not impersonate others through the Twitter service in a manner that is intended to or does mislead, confuse, or deceive others. Read more about our impersonation policy here.