For the sake of $16.41 billion the Abbott Government is going to start a class war?

In the 20 years since the last ­thorough review of the Commonwealth government, budget spending has more than tripled. [Chair of the National Commission of Audit Tony Shepherd writing in the Financial Review on 2 May 2014]

It seems Chairman of the Abbott Government’s National Commission of Audit, Tony Shepherd, likes to compare the last twenty years when explaining the recommendations of the 2014 national audit made public on 1 May.

So what is the actual comparison? Well it breaks down like this.

In 1994 the Australian population was an est. 17.93 million. By May 2014 the population grew by 23.62 per cent to an est. 23.47 million.

In May 1994 there were 8.71 million people in the Australian labour force. In 2014 this had risen to 12.26 million people.

In 1994-95 all industry multifactor productivity was 108.5. In June 2013 it was 104.9 - a 3.6 point difference.

In 1994 Australia’s nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP) was an est. $323.41 billion and is an est. $1,577 billion in 2014.

Australian Government net debt reached 24.2 per cent of GDP in December 1994. Net debt reached an est. 11.7 per cent of GDP in 2013-14.

In 1994-95 the Federal Government had receipts totalling $113.45 billion and in 2013-14 total receipts were an est. $392.59 billion.

In 1994-95 Australian Commonwealth government outlays totalled $128 billion and in 2013-14 government outlays totalled $409 billion, which represents a threefold increase over the two decades spanning the last half of the Keating Government, the Howard Government, the Rudd & Gillard Governments and the beginning of the Abbott Government.

In May 2014 the Australian Government total combined net debt and spending is an estimated 38 per cent of GDP.

Basically, Australia’s population has grown and so has federal government spending, while multifactor productivity is lower. However, the gross domestic product has also grown along with the amount of taxes paid and the number of people of workforce age, while net government debt has fallen. 

I honestly cannot see that the $16.41 billion shortfall between money coming in and money going out in 2013-14 is a valid reason for dismantling universal health care and forcing aged pensioners into a below the poverty line standard of living after 2016-17.

Especially if one looks at the numbers Mr. Hockey considers valid.  In 2013-14 Federal Government total payments (spending) are 25.93% of Australia’s Nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP). By 2023-24 total payments are projected to be 26.50% of GDP. That expenditure growth is less than 0.57% over a decade, while the GDP is projected to grow 5.1% annually over that period.

When one factors in the possibility that reducing corporate ‘welfare’ grants, rebates and concessions would over time reduce the $16.41 billion, it makes the government’s position incomprehensible  to say the least.

However, the Abbott Government attack on the welfare system apparently has less to do with economic reality and more to do with ideology and, no amount of media management by the government will be able to disguise this reality.

Note:

Dollar amounts and percentages are based on data found in Australian Bureau of Statistics tables, Australian Parliament briefing papers and Abbott Government documents and reports.

The Daily Examiner plays a dangerous game with readership loyalty

Once more The Daily Examiner allows an unknown person from an unidentified place to request that their name and the town they either live or work in be withheld when his/her letter is published

It is my understanding that the editor has been politely but firmly told by one Clarence Valley resident that his policy of printing anonymous letters is not agreed with – and that anonymous letters of this type are gutless.

I tend to agree with that sentiment and, for all I know the name supplied might be that of someone closely associated with coal seam/tight gas mining company, Metgasco Limited or with the pro-mining NSW Baird Government.

That suspicion has to remain when authorship is deliberately hidden by the editor.

What the approach to the editor last Monday signals is that a newspaper’s credibility is important to those living in its distribution area – without that credibility a newspaper withers.

Is it any wonder that this newspaper’s current Monday to Friday daily print circulation numbers for the twelve months ending December 2013 were still in the doldrums and its parent company APN News & Media Limited (which also puts advertisers rather than readers first) noted in the 2013 annual report that total circulation revenue across its media outlets is still in decline.

This despite the fact that print media is apparently read for news content by more people (14.7 million) across Australia than those who watch television for news content.

Because competition from global or national mainstream digital platforms was never the sole reason that APN newspaper mastheads like The Daily Examiner are struggling. 

Who is going to pay good money to read thinly disguised advertorials or anonymous comment like this below?

The Daily Examiner on 28 April 2014:

Just a rabble mob

RE: Saturdays Examiner "Protesters ordered out at Bentley".

Reading this article, and seeing the photo attached, made me remember the same sort of disgusting rabble that protested over logging in the Washpool and Chaelundi forests back in the 1980s.

Same look, same disregard for the common law of the land, same hippy music (presumably) and no jobs.

These people do nothing to help the cause of CSG opponents.

The truth is, these people are anti everything.

To think that good, decent, clean-cut, young men went from our country to die in wars all over the globe, so that this rabble can have the right to make a public nuisance of themselves.

It really does make my blood boil.

Name and address withheld

UPDATE

One local reader sent me an email this morning which began: I saw THAT letter on Monday and was really p*ssed off.

The Abbott Government's road map leading to the demise of a fair Australian society is revealed today

Depiction of food handouts Australia circa 1890
 "you got no charity [kindness] there" 
Professor Brian Dickey in 1987 quoting his grandmother 
Etching from Google Images

If ever one wanted proof that a federal government, led by a well-heeled, far-right god botherer and peopled at cabinet level by his fellow travellers, intends to send Australia back to late 19th Century inequitable economic and social conditions, this report is it – and make no mistake -  if the Abbott Government achieves a second term all of this will come to pass:

Australian Government National Commission of Audit 1 May 2014:

Towards Responsible Government

The Report of the National Commission of Audit

• Phase One – February 2014   HTML | PDF
• Phase Two – March 2014       HTML | PDF

Appendices to the Report of the National Commission of Audit

• Volume 1 – February 2014   HTML | PDF
• Volume 2 – February 2014   HTML | PDF
• Volume 3 – March 2014       HTML | PDF

What Metgasco Limited is telling the Australian Stock Exchange about Northern Rivers protesters at Bentley

Excerpt from Metgasco Limited Quarterly Activities Report 30 April 2014:

Metgasco goes on to say:

Australian Human Rights Commission submission on the proposal to repeal sections of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975

It is comforting to realise how little the far-right quisling, ‘Freedom Commissioner' Tim Wilson, actually counts when it comes to the Australian Human Rights Commission’s considered  response to proposed bad law.

His perspective did not prevail in the Commission's submission and he was reduced to writing his own brief submission to the Australian Attorney-General  who appointed him to his current position.

Australian Human Rights Commission 28 April 2014:

   1. The Australian Human Rights Commission makes this submission to the Attorney-General’s Department in relation to the exposure draft Bill on proposed changes to the racial hatred provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) (RDA).

  2. The Commission welcomes the opportunity for community consultation on this important and complex issue. The Commission encourages the Attorney-General’s Department to make information about the key issues identified through the consultation process publicly available to inform future public debate.

 3. The Commission’s general observations on the proposal to amend the RDA and its specific observations on the text of the draft Bill are as follows.

General observations on any proposal to change Part IIA

(1) The Commission considers that the exposure Bill as drafted should not proceed. This submission sets out concerns that any future draft Bill would need to appropriately address. The Commission looks forward to engaging with any future proposal.

(2) Any proposal to amend the law should involve extensive public consultation as it has the capacity to affect the human rights of all Australians, and particularly consultation with those communities whose members are most vulnerable to experiencing racial discrimination.

(3) Proposals to change the law are recent and it should be recognised that, in its current form, the Racial Discrimination Act as applied by the courts and administered by the Australian Human Rights Commission has successfully resolved hundreds of complaints about racial hatred over the past two decades. Any proposed change requires further justification.

(4) The Commission considers that the legislation could be clarified so that it more plainly reflects the way in which it has been interpreted in practice by the courts. That is, to confirm that Part IIA deals with ‘profound and serious effects, not to be likened to mere slights’.

(5) It is also important to recognise that racial vilification cannot be addressed only by legal prohibitions. Complementary education and awareness raising measures are also required to promote a culture of respect for human rights and responsibilities. The Commission will continue to play a key role in this regard.

Particular observations on the draft Bill

The Commission has a number of particular concerns about the exposure Bill as drafted. If, following the consultation described above, the Government were to proceed with the draft Bill, the Commission considers that each of the following amendments would be necessary.

(6) The Commission is concerned about the narrow definition given to ‘vilify’. It considers that if there is a change to Part IIA that includes a prohibition on ‘vilification’ then this term should be given its ordinary meaning, including conduct that is degrading.

(7) The Commission is concerned about the narrow definition given to ‘intimidate’. It considers that if there is a change to Part IIA that includes a prohibition on ‘intimidation’ then this term should be given its ordinary meaning, which recognises that intimidation is not limited to causing fear of physical harm but includes conduct causing emotional or psychological harm.

(8) The Commission considers that an assessment of whether an act is reasonably likely to contravene the law must be made ‘in all the circumstances’. The Commission considers that the words ‘in all the circumstances’ should be inserted into subsection 1(a) of the draft Bill following the words ‘is reasonably likely’. On the basis that the legislation and any extrinsic material make clear that all the circumstances of the act including the likely impact on the target person or group must be considered, the Commission does not express any other concerns about the proposed community standards test.

(9) The Commission considers that the exemption for artistic works should be retained. This could be effected by inserting the words ‘the performance, exhibition or distribution of an artistic work, or’ after ‘in the course of’ in subsection (4) of the draft Bill.

(10) The Commission is concerned about the breadth of the exemption in subsection (4) of the draft Bill. The subsection removes the requirement that acts be done reasonably and in good faith. At the very least, including a requirement of ‘good faith’ as a minimum would prevent racist abuse offered up in the course of public discussion being permitted.

(11) The Commission considers that employers are well placed to address the risk of racial vilification by putting in place programs including training and codes of conduct for employees. The Commission considers that existing section 18E, which provides for vicarious liability for racial vilification, should be retained.

(12) The Commission considers that a person who engages in racial vilification should not be able to avoid liability by arguing that the act was also done for another reason. Section 18B provides that if an act is done for two or more reasons and one of those reasons is the race of a person, then the act is taken to be done because of race. Each of the federal discrimination Acts contains a provision equivalent to section 18B and its removal would make Part IIA inconsistent with all other federal anti-discrimination law. The Commission considers that this provision should be retained.

     4.   The right to freedom of expression is of fundamental importance, and extends to expression that may be regarded as deeply offensive. It is not, however, an absolute or unfettered right and carries with it special duties and responsibilities.

      5.    Racial vilification can also harm the freedom of those who are its targets. It can have a silencing effect and harm the ability of victims to exercise their freedom of speech, among other freedoms.

      6.    It is important to retain strong and effective legal protections against racial vilification. Such laws send an important message about civility and tolerance in a multicultural society, and ensure those who experience the harms of racial vilification have access to a legal remedy.

      7.    Throughout this submission, the Commission has been particularly concerned to ensure that it strikes the appropriate balance between freedom of expression and freedom from racial vilification.

     8.    In this submission, the Commission reflects on three areas of particular expertise relating to the draft Bill:

      o    how the draft Bill relates to Australia’s international human rights obligations;

      o    how the draft Bill would alter the existing level of protection of both freedom of expression and freedom from racial hatred; and

      o   the social harm that can result from racial vilification.

      9.   The Commission is uniquely placed to comment on these issues given our legislative mandate under the RDA and Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth),^[1] and our role in investigating and conciliating complaints alleging breaches of section 18C of the RDA.

      10.  In the submission, we use case studies of matters dealt with under the legislation to provide concrete examples of how the proposed changes would alter the level of protection that currently exists.

     11.  This submission addresses the following issues in turn:

a.    Australia’s international obligations to provide for freedom of expression while also protecting people from racial hatred;

b.   the background to the enactment of Part IIA of the RDA, and how it currently operates;

c.     in particular, a description of the seriousness of the conduct caught by Part IIA in the context of the recent public debate;

d.    the Commission’s concerns about aspects of the draft Bill;

e.    other measures to combat racial hatred in Australia.

      12.  In addition to this submission, the Human Rights Commissioner has also prepared an additional letter. It contains comments that are intended to complements this submission, and provide further elaboration on the key points of concern to the Human Rights Commissioner.

Read the rest of the submission here.

There hasn't been an incorruptible administration or government in New South Wales since the First Fleet sailed into Sydney Harbour.....

And here is more proof of that:

Wran, The Balmain Boy Gone Bad

By Wendy Bacon

….Much has been said in recent days about the achievements of Neville Wran, NSW Premier from 1976 until 1986, who died last weekend. Much of the praise is deserved.

His government did pass anti-discrimination laws, environmental legislation and other progressive reforms. But there has also been some nonsense written, including ALP leader Bill Shorten’s statement that Wran was a man of the "utmost integrity".

From reading the obituaries, you would have no idea what it was like to be in Sydney at the time. Wran presided over a state in which hundreds of prisoners paid their way out of prison. The police force was routinely corrupt and included detectives who killed people. Court cases were fixed, key judicial figures mixed with organised crime, and corruption in the property, racing and gambling industries was rife and backed by heavies.

At best, Wran resisted reform in these areas. At times, he actively conspired to cover it up. By the time he retired in 1986, his government had an appalling reputation for corruption in the administration of justice, which is why Liberal leader Nick Greiner was in the position to win victory in 1988 on an anti-corruption platform, including the establishment of the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption.

Wran’s own worst moment was undoubtedly in 1983, when the Street Royal Commission was set up after the ABC Four Corners report, The Big League. The story told how NSW Rugby League's President, Kevin Humphreys, had misappropriated funds from the Balmain Leagues Club and was charged by police.

It alleged that NSW's Chief Stipendiary Magistrate, Murray Farquhar, had intervened to have those charges dismissed and had told another magistrate that he was acting at the request of Wran. Wran refused to be interviewed by Four Corners and after legal advice and the approval of the ABC Board, it went to air.

The report created a political storm. Eleven days later a Royal Commission was set up and Wran stepped aside as Premier. Laurence Street, who was then the Chief Justice, found that Farquar had intervened — but not at the request of Wran, who denied he had been involved.

Farquar was later sentenced to four years imprisonment. But the Street Royal Commission did not really lay the matters to rest, as Wran himself knew. Evan Whitton, who was awarded Journalist of the Year in 1983 for for his "courage and innovation" in reporting of the Commission, regarded the terms of reference to be very narrow. The approach was "technical" rather than one of following up relevant questions as they arose. Whitton’s sketches and a diary of the commission that were published in the Sydney Morning Herald highlighted many of these flaws.

An underlying issue was the relationship between Farquar and organised crime figure George Freeman. This relationship had been revealed by The National Times in 1977. Instead of properly investigating these allegations, Wran, against the advice of others, supported extending Farquar’s appointment until 1979….

Read the rest of the article at New Matilda, 24 April 2014.

Welcome to the world of Hockeynomics - Part Two

This was Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey reported on ABC News, 24 April 2014:

The Treasurer Joe Hockey is talking tough on welfare measures in the lead up to the Federal Budget, saying means testing will become more important into the future, and Australians should keep working for as long as they can.

He's revealed some of the findings of the Commission of Audit, which shows that at $39.5 billion, Australia spends more on the age pension each year than it does on defence, hospitals, or schools.

"It is our single biggest spending program," Mr Hockey said.

"So the policies must be changed, either now or more dramatically in the future." [my red bolding]

According to Mr. Hockey in less than twelve months the Age Pension has gone from being the Federal Government’s third highest single recurrent expenditure item (approximately 10% of the Commonwealth Budget) to the highest at $39.5 billion.

Up an est. $2.5 billion since June 2013 and leaving Health expenditure at $62 billion and Goods and Services Tax transfers to the states at $48 billion miraculously way behind Age Pension costs using that mysterious method of accounting - hockeynomics.

Commonwealth government recurrent expenditure, 2012-13 

Grattan Institute analysis of Commonwealth budget papers

Grattan Institute 24 January 2014

In 2012-13 Defence as a recurrent expense was estimated to cost the federal government $30.8 billion and Education (minus the research component) was estimated at $27.16 billion, according to the Grattan Institute’s Budget Pressures on Australian Governments.

This is what Treasurer Hockey was waving in front of Spectator Magazine on 23 April 2014:

Again using hockeynomics, it appears that Defence as a recurrent expense has reduced in size by an est. $5.5 billion in less than ten months -  and this despite the Abbott Government spending many millions searching for the missing Malaysia Airlines plane since early March 2014 and increasing naval border surveillance since September 2013.

While Health expenditure is only shown as three discrete items in his Commission of Audit data and, is therefore reduced by $19.7 billion in under 10 months to make it appear as though the Age Pension is by far and away the largest contributor to the federal government's recurrent expenditure.

Education expenditure has $7.16 billion off its bottom line in less than 10 months in order for it to also fit into Hockey's universal-safety-nets-are-bad narrative.

If one looks at Mr. Hockey's chart; in 2013-14 Federal Government total payments (spending) are 25.93% of Australia’s Nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP). By 2023-24 total payments are projected to be 26.50% of GDP. That expenditure growth is less than 0.57% over a decade, while the GDP is projected to grow 5.1% annually over that period.

Whereas, by comparison, in the United Kingdom (which also has a universal safety net policy covering health, education, employment, pensions and welfare payments) public sector spending was 42.2% of its GDP in 2013-14.

As for Australia's national public debt which is often quoted by the Abbott Government as a reason for taking the razor to government programs - the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in 2013 clearly stated that: Australian general government gross debt is expected to peak at around 32 percent of GDP in 2015 and is among the lowest in advanced nations.[International Monetary Fund. Asia and Pacific Department, Australia: Staff Report for 2013 Article IV Consultation-Staff Report]

While Mr. Hockey is trying to talk up his budget 'emergency' and demonise age pensioners (despite the fact that only seven per cent of Australia’s recent increase in health-care costs is due to aging, only 5% of people over 65 years require residential care as they age and more older people are already chosing to remain in the workforce longer), he remains almost mute on the subject of the new Abbott version of the Paid Parental Leave scheme.

This scheme will cost $14 billion in the first three years, or $4.66 billion a year. Costing taxpayers over $1 billion to meet the employer levy shortfall in its first year alone - in order to pay out up to $75,000 $50,000 (plus superannuation component) per non-means tested 6 month leave application granted.

The motivation behind this new scheme is not hard to find as it is based on feathering the nests of right-wing politicians' families and presumably the families of their political donors.

Here is Prime Minister Tony Abbott reported in The Sydney Morning Herald on 5 March 2014:

Mr Abbott said he opposed paid parental leave as a minister in the Howard government, but his views changed after considering what would be best for his daughters.

NOTE:

On 1 May 2014 at 2pm. the Abbott Government is finally releasing its first National Commission of Audit report. On May 13 full details of the Abbott Government's first federal budget are due to be released.