Shorter George Brandis: Don't waste your time contacting me, I'm not interested if you live in the Clarence Valley

For years accessing no-cost legal advice, mediation and support in the Clarence Valley has been a lottery to say the least.

Name any problem (tenancy issue, dispute with a neighbour, companion animal problems, family breakdown etc.) that is not actively before the courts and the individual concerned will only have telephone numbers for services situated a hundred, sometimes many hundreds of, kilometres away.

This sad little article in The Daily Examiner on 4 February 2015 clearly indicates why it is about to become even harder in Abbott's Australia:

The Northern Rivers Community Legal Centre (NRCLC) is left in limbo as it waits for the finalisation of funding cuts.

The NRCLC is the main provider of legal support in domestic violence, employment, credit debt and other areas to the Clarence Valley. It was set to open an office in the Richmond Valley which would have provided better access to Clarence Valley residents, however, funding cuts meant it could no longer go ahead.

"A lot of people suffering domestic violence would have been helped by that office," centre manager Angela Pollard said.

"At the moment everyone is flailing. We still don't know what is happening."

She said they kept receiving funding extensions to continue operating, however, that left them in suspense while they waited for the axe to fall.

Ms Pollard tried to lobby Federal Attorney-General George Brandis to not cut the funding for the office, but he replied by letter not to waste taxpayer dollars on lobbying.

Ms Pollard said she was pleased Australian of the Year Rosie Batty highlighted Prime Minister Tony Abbott's contradictory national scheme for domestic violence orders while funding to legal services were cut.

Australian of the Year 2015 politely calls out the 'Prime Minister for Women' on his hypocrisy with regard to domestic violence

On or about 17 September 2013 then Prime Minister-elect Tony Abbott announced that he would hold portfolio responsibility for policies and programs targeting women.

He was sworn in as Prime Minister on 18 September that year.

Sixteen months later and his ongoing poor record in this area is there for all to see.

Women’s Agenda 2 February 2015:

Australian of the Year Rosie Batty has criticised Tony Abbott for promising to take real action to tackle family violence while at the same time slashing funding to family violence services.

After Batty was appointed Australian of the Year last Sunday, the prime minister announced he would be implementing new measures to fight domestic and family violence. 

On Tuesday he announced he would create a new national advisory panel on domestic violence and appointed Batty and retiring Victorian Police Commissioner Ken Lay as its founding members.

He also announced he would elevate domestic and family violence to an urgent agenda item for the Council of Australian Governments. He said he would urge the Council to agree on a framework for a national domestic violence scheme. 

But Batty has said that these announcements are meaningless unless Abbott takes action to reverse the cuts he has already made to crucial domestic violence services. 

She said it is hypocritical for him to make announcements about new frameworks and approaches when the cuts already in place are so damaging to domestic violence victims.

She said when compared with Abbott’s newfound public stance on family violence, the existing cuts are “contradictory”.

"It is a double standard, it is contradictory and totally undervaluing the part that these workers play in our front line services," she said to the Prime Minister’s office on Friday.

The cuts she refers to are to family violence services as well as homelessness and crisis accommodation services across the country. Altogether, the cuts are worth $300 million. Several services across the country will be forced to close after having their federal funding slashed or even removed in its entirety.

Coal seam gas explorer Metgasco Limited's small shareholders are talking to the Australian Stock Exchange?

HotCopper MEL thread, 27 January 2015:

I have just sent my email to ASX (Elvis) as suggested by previous posters.

My concern has been increasing as I watch my other Oil Co investments slowly dribble down the toilet and I really have no interest in having more capital tied to the oil industry at present (Gas & Iron Ore are bad enough).

The text of my email is below.

"Dear Sir,

I have recently become aware that MEL intends to become involved with a US based oil company ELK Petroleum Ltd, by way of a merger of script. There has been significant disquiet amongst shareholders of MEL, as the MEL Board has determined that the transaction need not be put to shareholders for approval.

A number of shareholders (via HotCopper shareholder site) have suggested that the ASX should be requested to use their discretion under Section 11.1.2 of the Listing Rules to consider whether to call upon MEL to seek shareholder approval via a vote on the proposed MEL/ELK merger.

I believe that you may have received emails from some of MEL's shareholders and I would like to add my voice to their request for your consideration of a review of the proposed transaction, or at a minimum request MEL to explain why they have decided to exclude shareholders in the making of this significant move into the US shale oil industry away from domestic gas.

Yours faithfully

(Name included)
Concerned shareholder"

English peer Lord Michael Ashcroft helped fund the Liberal Party's war chest to the tune of $1.5 million over the last three Australian federal elections

Sixteen days before the 2004 federal election English peer, Michael Anthony Ashcroft, the Rt Hon. the Lord Ashcroft KCMG  (left), donated $1 million to the federal arm of the Liberal Party of Australia.

Twenty-four days before the 2010 federal election this peer contributed $250,000 to that same federal political party.

Six days before the 2013 federal election he again donated $250,000 to the federal Liberal Party - this time from an address in that well-known tax haven Belize where he is said to hold dual citizenship.

Of his first sizable donation to the Liberal Party, Lord Ashcroft stated in his book Dirty Politics, Dirty Times:

The donation of Australian $1 million – £410,000 – was believed to have been the largest single political donation in the country’s history. I made it prior to the 2004 general election as a show of support for John Howard, the country’s Prime Minister and leader of the International Democratic Union. I have long been a great admirer of John and he was struggling against the Labour Party, which seemed poised to take power. In fact, in October 2004, John secured a fourth term and, if my donation helped him to victory at the polls, then I am delighted. 

One has to wonder if he feels the same way about the money he has outlaid on Tony Abbott, now that the Liberal Party Leader’s prime ministership has become a slow-motion political train wreck .

BRIEF BACKGROUND

Lord Ashcroft writing about himself on his website:

After more than 40 years as an entrepreneur working in both the UK and overseas, particularly the US, I am an active investor in new companies and ideas. At various points in my business career, I have headed companies employing more than 100,000 people. Over the years, I have negotiated countless major deals, including the sale of ADT to Tyco International for more than $6.7 billion (£3.7 billion) in 1997. See my Business page for more details.

I am a lifelong supporter of the Conservative Party. In 2000, I was knighted and became a member of the House of Lords (Lord Ashcroft of Chichester, KCMG).  I served as Treasurer of the Conservative Party, under William Hague’s leadership, from 1998 to 2001. I continue to be Treasurer of the International Democrat Union.

The peer’s register of interests recorded by the U.K. Parliament:

Information found at Linked In:

Group Mayfair Limited (UK) in Australia which includes Anne Street Partners Financial Services Pty Limited, QNV Constructions Pty Limited and a number of related subsidiary companies owned by interests associated with UK businessman and philanthropist billionaire The Right Honourable Lord Ashcroft PC KCMG….

Impellam Group plc (traded on AIM Board London Stock Exchange IPEL) Group conducts business primarily in the UK and North America, with smaller operations in Australia, Ireland, New Zealand and mainland Europe. The Group employs nearly 6,000 people, including 2,200 managers and consultants and more than 3,500 support services workers, across a network of 230 branch and regional offices. The Group operates more than 17 speciality brands across a broad range of staffing sectors which are complemented by businesses in the outsourced support services sector. Impellam Group is ranked 2nd largest in the UK and 12th largest in the world…..

Medacs Healthcare Group commenced operations in 1990 in the UK and is part of the listed Impellam Group, a global brand of specialist recruitment agencies…..history of service provided to Qld Health dates back to the commencement of the acquired firms.....Qld Health from 2005 to 2010 was the Group’s largest customer in terms of placement services and revenue generated in Australia. [my red bolding]

Former Chief Minister of the Northern Territory and chairman & director of a number of companies in which Lord Ashcroft’s has an interest, Shane Stone, is currently the chairman of Australian PM Tony Abbott’s Northern Australia Advisory Group.

QNV Constructions Pty Ltd currently lists residential housing projects in NSW, VIC, SA and Tasmania, with a number of completed projects in Queensland.

Staffing Industry Analysts December 2014:

Lord Michael Ashcroft, KCMG PC, has been appointed Non-Executive Chairman of recruitment firm Impellam Group (IPEL: AIM), the second largest staffing firm in the UK, with immediate effect.

Impellam Group is one of Lord Ashcroft’s many business interests in the UK. According to the company’s most recent financial results, the Group achieved revenue of £612.3 million in the six months to 27 June 2014, an increase of +3.5% compared with the same period in 2013.

In 2010, his 57% holding in the Group was transferred to his children and “remoter issue”. The transfer occurred one day before a new law forcing members of the House of Lords to pay tax on their worldwide income and assets came into effect. Tax lawyer, Richard Frimston, subsequently told the BBC’s Panorama programme that Lord Ashcroft would have faced a hefty inheritance tax bill under the new legislation if he had made the change one day later. Lord Ashcroft's lawyers denied any impropriety or wrongdoing….

Excerpt from Press Complaints Commission (U.K.) ruling:

Lord Ashcroft complained to the Press Complaints Commission that an article headlined “Tory treasurer sued in US court” published in The Observer on 8 April 2001 was inaccurate in breach of Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Code of Practice.

The complaint was rejected.

The article claimed that the complainant, the former treasurer of the Conservative Party, had, along with four other directors of a company called Tyco, been accused of making ‘false and misleading statements’ to the public and using deceptive accounting to boost the share price falsely. The piece made clear that the allegations were yet to be tested in court and that a Tyco spokesman had made clear that they were ‘totally without any foundation’. In addition, a spokesman for Lord Ashcroft was quoted denying the allegations and the article made clear that such lawsuits were common in America…..

While the Commission noted the complainant’s objection to what he saw as the staleness of the story it considered that the selection of material for publication is a matter for editorial discretion. Turning to the specific complaints of inaccuracy, the Commission noted that, while the complainant may have disputed the worth or chances of success of the legal proceedings, they were nonetheless still active as reported in the paper. There was no dispute that the complainant was a director of the company or that he had been mentioned in legal documents, some of which the Commission noted had been quoted in the piece. Regarding whether or not readers might erroneously have thought that the complainant was personally being sued in the US, the Commission highlighted the fact that it considers headlines in conjunction with the text of a piece and, examining the context of the article as a whole it did not conclude that readers would have been misled as to who was the subject of the legal action. The Commission considered that the piece made clear that the claims were untested allegations and considered that the phrase ‘corporate scandal’ would have been seen in this context. The Commission did not find any material discrepancy between the complainant’s account of the involvement of the SEC and how it was reported in the article. Given that there had been an SEC investigation and given that the company had contemporaneously restated some of its results – albeit before the conclusion of the investigation – the Commission did not consider that there was any significant inaccuracy in the article’s claim that the ‘SEC did force Tyco to redo its financial results’. The Commission noted that some of the allegations were still to be tested in court or struck out and it considered that the newspaper’s offer to report the outcome was a sensible one in the circumstances.

The Commission noted the complainant’s objections that the newspaper had initially approached his spokesman for a comment only a few hours before publication. In some cases this might be a factor that the Commission would take into account – usually if the approach was so late that somebody had no reasonable opportunity to comment on a story that, by omitting their comments, would be inaccurate or misleading in breach of the Code if published. In this case, however, the Commission noted that the article had used the comments of the complainant’s spokesman and lawyer to make the complainant’s point of view very clear. Readers could have been in no doubt that the complainant vigorously disputed the allegations. The Commission also noted that the article had explained that such lawsuits were common in America and that the company believed that lawyers were attempting to blackmail the firm. In all these circumstances the Commission could find no breach of the Code. 

The Guardian 8 April 2001:

Lord Ashcroft the Conservative Party treasurer, is being sued in the United States over his alleged role in a corporate scandal that is said to have cost shareholders millions of dollars.

The allegations will again raise awkward questions about Ashcroft's business affairs and William Hague's judgment in appointing him party treasurer.

Documents filed in the US courts - and obtained by The Observer - claim Ashcroft, along with four fellow directors of a company called Tyco International, made 'false and misleading' statements to the public and used deceptive accounting to boost falsely the firm's share price. The allegations, made by disgruntled shareholders, have yet to be tested in court.

They claim the directors have 'profited handsomely' by selling more than $242 million of shares they owned in their company.

Ashcroft, who has donated millions to the Tory party, is personally named in the lawsuit. He is accused of selling nearly 830,000 shares in the company at 'artificially inflated' prices for more than $37m.

The documents filed in the Court of New Hampshire in November allege that Ashcroft took part in a 'fraudulent scheme' to 'cover up and conceal Tyco's real business prospects and artificially to inflate the price of Tyco's stock so that it would be attractive... and to personally benefit by selling a substantial portion of their holdings'.

One claim is 'specifically, Ashcroft sold 827,400 shares of Tyco common stock at artificially inflated prices for proceeds of $37,472,947.'

Ashcroft still has almost $300m of shares in Tyco, a Bermudan-based manufacturing company which bought Ashcroft's ADT security firm in 1997 for $6 billion. It was as a result of this deal that Ashcroft became a non-executive board director of Tyco and a major shareholder of the company, whose products range from bandages to burglar alarms.

A Tyco spokesman has insisted that all the allegations - which are contained in the 56-page document lodged on behalf of Tyco shareholders - are 'totally without any foundation' and says the directors will 'vigorously defend' themselves…..

On 2 November 2007 the matter of Meran v Tyco International Ltd, Michael A Ashcroft, Mark A Belnick and Price Waterhouse Coopers LLP - and other associated matters - were finally concluded when the defendants entered into a $3.4 billion agreement which compensated all shareholders (listed from 13 December 1999 to 7 June 2006) with the exception of the defendants and certain others.

* Photograph from The Daily Mail

Here it comes - an Australian national identity card in disguise

The Sydney Morning Herald 23 January 2015:

Prime Minister Tony Abbott has bolstered Malcolm Turnbull's ministerial duties, handing him greater responsibility for e-government in a push to expand the use of a single digital identity for Australians….

The Communications Minister also moved to allay privacy concerns about, for example, different levels of government having access to information they haven't had access to before…..

"It would be opt in. The aim is to make digital modes of engagement so compelling that people want to use it," he said…

An analysis of the first attempt to impose a national identity card in 1987:

Every person in Australia will be required to obtain a Card, including children. The Bill does not make it legally compulsory: it simply makes it impossible for anyone to exist in Australian society without it, because they will be unable to carry out normal activites such [as] the receipt of their pay taxed at the normal rate, operation of bank accounts, or the receipt of social security or health insurance benefits.

Abbott states that the people elected him prime minister. No they didn't, Tony.

It's the people that hire, and frankly it's the people that should fire

[Prime Minister Tony Abbott spinning a line at the National Press Club, 2 February 2015]

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott has gone all presidential again. 

Trying to convince everyone that the nation directly elected him as prime minister, when both he and every voter in the country knows that a prime ministership is exclusively within the gift of the political party which wins the right to form government at a federal general election.

The people have no say.

Perhaps he is laying the groundwork for one of the arguments he will continue to use this week in the hope of stopping a leadership spill in the near future.

A spill is reportedly being discussed as ‘Team Abbott’ is not happy with its wayward captain……..

The Sydney Morning Herald 1 February 2015:

Prime Minister Tony Abbott has called a crunch two-day meeting of his federal cabinet designed to thrash out a policy agenda for 2015 and confront the political issues dogging his government.

News of the meeting comes as a government backbencher said Mr Abbott should not be challenged for the leadership, warning any change should occur without the party room having to knife a first-term prime minister and that "mature, careful and selfless consideration" was now needed about the Coalition's future.

The comments suggest the backbench could push for Mr Abbott to stand down as Prime Minister to avoid a damaging leadership spill…..

Mr Abbott is expected to begin the meeting by giving a "state of play" address. That will be followed by each cabinet minister setting out their policy priorities and plans for the next 12 months.

Time has also been set aside for a political discussion, and it is in this portion of the meeting that Mr Abbott is expected to hear the frank views of colleagues dismayed at the precipitous drop in the government's fortunes.

One cabinet minister told Fairfax Media on the condition of anonymity that Mr Abbott's fortunes had moved "dramatically" in recent weeks and confirmed the government's political fortunes would now effectively feature as the top agenda item.

But that same minister stressed that no one was "stalking" Mr Abbott and that it was up to the Prime Minister to turn around his fortunes.

"The question is does he have the confidence of the party room?" the minister asked.

Liberals MPs are openly discussing Mr Abbott's future in the wake of the LNP's devastating rout in the Queensland state election…..

Mr Abbott on Sunday reminded voters he had been elected Prime Minister and said leadership was not a popularity contest.

"The people of Australia elected me as Prime Minister … but in the end government is not a popularity contest it's a competence contest," he said.

Perth Now 1 February 2015:

It is understood more than 30 backbenchers are open to removing Mr Abbott as Prime Minister.

“It’s certainly more than 30,” one MP who asked not to be named said.

“Queenslanders are leading the push now”.

Another MP, who also asked not to be named, said that there could be a special meeting of the party room as early as Tuesday.

The Sydney Morning Herald 1 February 2014:

Liberal Prime Minister Tony Abbott's missteps have begun eroding the party's standing in NSW, eight weeks before Premier Mike Baird faces the electorate and after a dramatic rout in Queensland.

A well-placed source has told Fairfax the party's primary vote in NSW lost two percentage points in the week after Mr Abbott's decision to grant a knighthood to Prince Philip, according to internal polling.

The revelation comes as local Liberal party figures question the extent to which the electoral contagion which routed the Queensland Liberals will spread to NSW…..

Party figures are understood to be considering asking Mr Abbott to avoid campaigning at all in his home state ahead of the March 28 poll.

"You won't be seeing much of Tony Abbott in the NSW campaign, you can be sure of that," said the ABC's election analyst, Antony Green. "That's if he's still Prime Minister"…..

The Sydney Morning Herald 7:10pm 2 February 2015:

Abbott Government is bidding for a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council in 2018? *cue cynical laughter*

Australia is reportedly bidding for a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council when an Asia-Pacific seat becomes vacant in 2018.

This is what the Human Rights Watch organization is telling the world about Australia’s human rights record in its 25th annual review, World Report 2015: Events of 2014:

Australia

Australia has a solid record of protecting civil and political rights, with robust institutions and a vibrant press and civil society that act as a check on government power. The government’s failure to respect international standards protecting asylum seekers and refugees, however, continues to take a heavy human toll and undermines Australia’s ability to call for stronger human rights protections abroad. In 2014, Australia introduced new overbroad counterterrorism measures that would infringe on freedoms of expression and movement. The government has also done too little to address indigenous rights and disability rights.

Asylum Seekers and Refugees

To deter boat arrivals of unauthorized migrants, the government has continued its harsh policy of transferring all asylum seekers who arrive by boat to other countries for processing and resettlement. In 2014, the government concluded negotiations with Cambodia to accept refugees from Nauru for resettlement, ignoring concerns about safety and the lack of capacity of the Cambodian government. As of October 31, 2014, 1,056 men were detained on Manus Island, Papua New Guinea, and 1,095 men, women, and children were detained on Nauru. At time of writing, only 10 of the Manus Island detainees had received final refugee status determinations. As of October 31, 2014, 261 of the Nauru detainees had been determined to be refugees and released into the community; 72 were denied refugee status. The United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) has criticized Australia’s offshore detention policy as “return-oriented.” The detention centers are overcrowded and dirty. Asylum claims are not processed in a fair, transparent, or expedient manner, with significant cost to detainees’ physical and mental health. According to media reports, gay asylum seekers detained on Manus Island fear persecution and sexual assault. They also fear resettlement in Papua New Guinea, where consensual adult same-sex relations are criminalized. The government has offered cash payments of thousands of dollars to entice asylum seekers to return home.

In February 2014, the Australian Human Rights Commission launched a national inquiry into the approximately 1,000 children in immigration detention. Staff working at detention centers gave evidence that conditions were substandard, unsafe, and inappropriate. As of October 31, 2014, 2,693 people were in immigration detention on Australian territory. About 50 refugees are being detained indefinitely based on adverse security assessments and many have been in detention for over four years. In May, the government passed the Migration Amendment Bill, further strengthening Australian Secret Intelligence Organization’s (ASIO) power to administer adverse security assessments through a secretive process that is not subject to judicial review. Immigration authorities use “enhanced screening” techniques whereby immigration officials conduct cursory interviews to determine asylum claims. More than 3,500 asylum seekers, over 99 percent of whom are from Sri Lanka, have been screened under this procedure, with no access to legal representation or right to appeal. Of the Sri Lankan asylum seekers, 42 percent were screened out and 32 percent were screened in, but no outcome was given in the remainder of the cases. In June 2014, Australian custom officials separately intercepted two vessels in the Indian Ocean carrying Sri Lankans bound for Australia. After cursory screening interviews at sea, customs officials handed over all 41 asylum seekers aboard the first vessel to the Sri Lankan navy who returned them to Sri Lanka. The High Court issued an interim injunction to prevent the return of the second vessel. After almost a month of detention at sea and failed attempts to send the asylum seekers to India, the Immigration department eventually sent all 157 Sri Lankan Tamil asylum seekers to Nauru for processing. In September 2014, incoming UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al-Hussein stated that Australia’s policies are “leading to a chain of human rights violations, including arbitrary detention and possible torture following return to home countries.”

Indigenous People’s Rights

The government controversially established an indigenous advisory council while defunding the Congress of Australia’s First Peoples. The government has taken some steps towards a possible referendum on changing the constitution to recognize indigenous Australians. While indigenous Australians account for only 3 percent of Australia’s population, they account for 27 percent of Australia’s prison population. In part because they are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system, indigenous Australians are more likely to face stigma and discrimination in employment. While some health and socioeconomic indicators are improving for indigenous Australians, they still on average live 10-12 years less than non-indigenous Australians, have an infant mortality rate almost two times higher, and continue to die at alarmingly high rates from treatable and preventable conditions such as diabetes and respiratory illnesses.

Disability Rights

In April, the Australian Human Rights Commission found that inadequate safeguards and poor access to support services leave many people with disabilities without adequate legal or social protection when they come into contact with the criminal justice system. Forty-five percent of people with disabilities live near or below the poverty line. People with disabilities are also disproportionately at risk of violence in the community and in institutional settings, and are more likely to be jailed. Some are deemed unfit to stand trial based on prejudicial assessments of their competency to give evidence and then indefinitely detained in prisons, psychiatric facilities, or other highly restrictive places of detention without appropriate review mechanisms. In its 2014 Federal Budget, the government committed to fully funding the rollout of the new National Disability Insurance Scheme but announced changes to the Disability Support Pension which will likely result in many people with disabilities being moved to significantly lower welfare payments. The government also effectively abolished the disability discrimination commissioner position at the Human Rights Commission, leaving people with disabilities without a fulltime advocate.

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

Despite increasing public support for same-sex marriage in Australia, marriage remains restricted to heterosexual relationships in accordance with the federal Marriage Act. Some states or territories have moved to develop laws recognizing same-sex marriage, but only one territory actually enacted laws. In December 2013 the High Court ruled that the laws recognizing same-sex marriage were inconsistent with federal legislation and were therefore invalid.

Freedom of Expression

In July 2014, the government revised its agreements with community legal centers to prohibit such centers from using federal funds for law reform or advocacy efforts. In August, bowing to pressure from ethnic and community groups, the government dropped its proposed repeal of section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act, which makes it unlawful for a person to commit an act that is likely to offend, insult, humiliate, or intimidate someone on the basis of race, color, or national or ethnic origin. Also in August, the government announced the introduction of a range of new counterterrorism provisions in response to the threat of “home-grown terrorism.” The law introduces an overly broad new offense of “advocating terrorism” and extends use of control orders and preventative detention. It also makes it a criminal offense to travel to “declared areas” abroad unless the travel is for a legitimate reason, which overly restricts freedom of movement. The government has also proposed additional measures that would force telecommunications companies to retain metadata for a period of two years so Australian intelligence organizations can access the data. The National Security Legislation Amendment Act, passed in October 2014, grants Australian Security Intelligence Organization officials immunity from civil and criminal prosecution for acts committed in the course of security operations. The legislation also makes it an offense for intelligence staff or contractors to disclose information relating to “special intelligence operations.” Journalists who disclose information relating to a “special intelligence operation” face penalties of up to 10 years prison. The legislation does not provide any “public interest” exception to this offense.

Foreign Policy

Australia held a two-year rotating seat on the UN Security Council starting in 2013. In 2014, it used its seat to press for resolutions on Syria, call for the provision of humanitarian aid, and call for unfettered access to the MH17 Malaysian Air crash site in Ukraine. In January 2014, the government announced that it was cutting its foreign aid budget by more than $A600 million (US$526 million). Its foreign aid priorities are the Asia-Pacific Region, economic empowerment, and private sector partnerships. Indonesia and Papua New Guinea remain the top two aid recipients. The government held closed-door human rights dialogues with China and Vietnam in 2014 but failed to back up these dialogues with public statements on rights in high-level visits. Besides trade and security, a large driver of the Australian government’s foreign policy is its single-minded focus on ensuring that all asylum seekers or refugees are processed at offshore facilities. The government has muted its criticism of authoritarian governments in Sri Lanka and Cambodia in recent years, apparently in hopes of winning the support of such governments for its refugee policies. In March 2014, the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva voted overwhelmingly in favor of a resolution establishing an international inquiry into human rights abuses in Sri Lanka. Australia did not co-sponsor the resolution as it had done in previous years. Instead, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said that she was not convinced that a resolution calling for “a separate, internationally-led investigation without the cooperation of the Sri Lankan government is the best way forward” and that the resolution did not adequately recognize the “significant progress taken by the Sri Lankan government to promote economic growth.” Australia is bidding for a seat on the Human Rights Council in 2018.

The next U.N. Human Rights Council Universal Periodic Review report deadline for Australia is 20 June 2015.