Finger pointed at local cricket officials who should lift their game

Local newspapers usually bend over backwards to give local organisations, including sport, publicity and the Clarence valley's Daily Examiner is no exception. Consequently, it's disappointing to see publicity officers provide newspapers with grossly inadequate information.

Over recent weeks the Examiner has endeavoured to keep its readers informed about cricket matches played on the lower Clarence. However, the paper has not been assisted by clubs (it seems one club in particular is a regular offender) - scoreboard details provided to to the paper have been scant in detail.

Examples of offending scoreboards published appear below.

Credit: The Daily Examiner

No credit for offending cricket club officials

Comparing the Rudd-Gillard Governments' Fair Work Act 2009 with the Abbott Government's Fair Work Amendment Bill 2014

This is not a comprehensive comparison of the Fair Work Act 2009 and changes to this act found in the Fair Work Amendment Bill 2014.

Rather it is a brief comparison of certain differences (including the fact that overtime rates, penalty rates, allowances and leave loading are now potentially part of any flexibility arrangement between employer and employee), which hopefully may encourage concerned citizens and employees to look closely at the Abbott Government’s amendments which are currently before the Australian Parliament.

* Untaken annual leave at time of employment termination

Rudd & Gillard Governments

Abbott Government

* Individual flexibility arrangements

Rudd & Gillard Governments

144 Flexibility terms

Abbott Government

Rudd & Gillard Governments

Abbott Government

* Mandatory terms of enterprise agreements

Rudd & Gillard Governments

Abbott Government

Rudd & Gillard Governments

Abbott Government

* Right of entry

Rudd & Gillard Governments

Abbott Government

* Unfair dismissal

Rudd & Gillard Governments

Abbott Government

Are the Institute of Public Affairs' resident wingnuts losing control of one of their puppets?

Really happening or wishful thinking?

The Sydney Morning Herald 12 March 2014:

A political fight is brewing between Attorney-General George Brandis and the Institute of Public Affairs.

Senator Brandis has angered the IPA and other powerful Liberal Party allies, who believe the Attorney-General is using tricky language to dilute his promise to repeal a controversial section of the race discrimination laws.

The Attorney-General has also been lobbied internally by marginal seat MPs representing multicultural electorates worried about losing protections against hate speech.

Free speech advocates say they have detected a change in Senator Brandis' tone recently, and they believe he has been persuaded by religious, ethnic and indigenous leaders, who have been lobbying against changing the race discrimination laws.

The dispute is likely to get worse, especially if Senator Brandis introduces, as some expect, a new criminal offence of racial vilification. IPA executive director John Roskam said he would rather there were no changes to the law than a new criminal ban on hate speech. He also said it had ''got back to me'' that Senator Brandis had been criticising the IPA in private conversations.

On ABC1's Q&A program on Monday, Senator Brandis said the Abbott government was determined to repeal section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act ''in its current form''. It is that phrase which angers the IPA.

''That was not the tone and intention of what Senator Brandis expressed before the election,'' Mr Roskam said. He said Senator Brandis had led him to believe he would repeal section 18C entirely. Senator Brandis condemned the law - which makes it unlawful to ''offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate'' someone because of their race or ethnicity - when columnist Andrew Bolt breached it for an article he wrote about ''white'' Aborigines.

So how is Kevin Hogan making the Australian Parliament aware of concerns held by local communities in his electorate in relation to coal seam/tight gas exploration & mining?

Kevin Hogan has been the Page electorate’s ‘man in Canberra’ for some months now.

Before his election he was aware of the level of opposition to coal seam gas/tight gas exploration and mining in his electorate and, heavily implied that he would progress these concerns if he became a member of the Australian Parliament.

Two days after he was elected, The Australian reported him as saying: "I'm very aligned to values of the Nationals and so the Coalition, but I stand for the interest of regional communities like mine first, and I will be doing that as strongly and forcefully as I can".

Since then Kevin Hogan has spoken about his own alleged concerns about the negative impacts the gas industry may have on the Northern Rivers region at the 23 November 2013 Kyogle Gasfield Free Celebration and, was also listed as a speaker at a Gasfield Free Northern Rivers public meeting on 8 March 2014 who was going to speak about what he can do politically for his constituents.

Details of the 8 March meeting are yet to get a mention on his website, Facebook page or Twitter account.

To date his official website does not mention coal seam gas/tight gas exploration and mining under the Local Issues tab and, the subject is conspicuous by its absence in his posted media releases as well.

There is also little evidence that he is actively lobbying behind the scenes in support of community concerns relating to the gas industry.

He has spoken in the House of Representatives on at least sixteen occasions, but only once in his first speech on 20 November 2013 did he make mention of coal seam gas mining and, even that passing mention did not acknowledge the concerns held by communities in his electorate:

Madam Speaker—I like to have you here and I acknowledge you on the job you have been given and the great poise that you bring to the role—mining and farming can be a delicate balancing act in certain regions. I acknowledge the work done by my coalition colleagues in the New South Wales parliament, tightening up farmer protection in relation to coal seam gas mining in New South Wales. I acknowledge my federal colleagues and our position. Our policy is that water and prime agricultural land, as well as built-up areas, need to be protected from CSG mining. I believe, and in my opinion, so does the majority of my community, that given current extraction techniques this policy currently rules out the electorate of Page from CSG mining.

Voters in the Page electorate have a right to be suspicious of both Mr. Hogan’s election campaign statements and his resolve to strongly and forcefully stand up for his electorate now he is faced with the reality of his own Federal Coalition industry minister’s commitment to furthering the interests of the gas industry.