Thursday, 15 September 2016
Australia's 45th Parliament in action
“But before talking about what happened during the election campaign, I want to touch on something that is very close to my heart, and that is the national flag of Australia—our flag.” [Senator McGrath (Queensland) Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister]
“—particularly to you, Senator Cameron, who share my love of chocolates” [Senator Fierravanti-Wells (NSW)]
The New Daily, 12 September 2016:
The government began the second week of the new Parliament the same way it ended the first – amid high farce.
Little more than a week after being the first majority government in 50 years to lose a vote in the House of Representatives (it lost three) because Coalition MPs decided to go home early, it was the Senate’s turn to show the level of disorganisation within government ranks.
Soon after the Senate opened for business on Monday, the Coalition had no business to discuss.
And after another embarrassing session of Parliament ended, ABC’s Lateline revealed that Federal Cabinet had confidentially signed off on the mechanics of the same-sex marriage plebiscite, only for the details to leak almost immediately.
In the morning session of the Senate, a filibuster of Monty Python proportions ensued, leaving no one with any doubt the government was desperately trying to mark time until lunch.
With no legislation to debate, Coalition senators rose to talk for hours about their love of chocolates, love of the Australian flag, respect for roads, respect for a defeated candidate whose name they got wrong and other inane conversation.
It all led to Opposition Senate leader Penny Wong to chime in that the government had “no plans and no ideas”.
“They’ve got literally nothing to talk about,” Senator Wong said.
Meanwhile, manager of government business in the Senate Mitch Fifield put the word out that Labor was delaying passage of non-controversial bills in the House, therefore leaving the Senate with nothing to debate.
But the Senate scenes exposed further signs of chaos and weakness from the government, leaving Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull appearing besieged from all sides…..
No Plebiscite, You Cowards in Canberra!
In August 2004 the Australian Parliament changed the federal Marriage Act 1961 to deliberately exclude LGBTIQ couples from legally marrying, so it’s up to the Australian Parliament to rectify its own mistake.
“Two
thirds of the Australian people, a majority of the parliament and leaders of
all major parties support every Australian being treated fairly and equally
through the Marriage Act. It is time for the Parliament to deliver marriage
equality. We call on our parliamentary supporters to start working together on
a pathway that delivers marriage equality in this parliament without delay.” [Australian Marriage
Equality (AME) Chair, Alex Greenwich in media release, 14 September 2016]
Click on image to enlarge
The unashamed public vitriol begins....
While misguided attempts to entrench discrimination in legislation continue in the federal parliament:
Senator Leyonhjelm says he has been actively lobbying Senator Brandis to consider and adopt aspects of the Liberal Democrats bill on the matter.
Senator Leyonhjelm says he has been actively lobbying Senator Brandis to consider and adopt aspects of the Liberal Democrats bill on the matter.
And even though its plebiscite question simply states “Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples to marry?”, the Turnbull Government seriously contemplates creating two separate forms of legal marriage - one of which fails to allow the full protection of federal anti-discrimination law to LGBTIQ couples.
The
Guardian, 14 September
2016:
The government will
propose new protections for “conscientious objectors” to same-sex marriage
which marriage equality advocates fear could allow civil celebrants, registrars
and even bakers and florists to refuse to serve same-sex weddings.
According to briefing
notes on the plebiscite prepared for the Coalition party room, seen
by Guardian Australia, the legislation would allow “conscientious objectors” to
reject same-sex weddings, an exemption more extensive than merely allowing
religious leaders to refuse to conduct them…..
The note said the
government will introduce proposed amendments to the Marriage Act and other
relevant legislation to give effect to the decision of the plebiscite “well in
advance” of the popular vote.
“Those amendments will
also include appropriate protections for religious freedom and conscientious
objections,” it said.
Labels:
Australian society,
discrimination,
human rights,
marriage
Wednesday, 14 September 2016
Clarence Valley Local Government Elections Vote Tally: state of play on Tuesday night, 13 September 2016
Processing votes cast in the 2016 Clarence Valley local government election is moving at a glacial pace due to the need for accuracy.
Hopefully later today will reveal if any individual within the second tier of candidates moves into the top nine at the expense of candidates currently situated in that first ranking set out below.
CLARENCE VALLEY LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA ELECTION RESULTS
The electoral state of play* at 1:25pm when tally updating ceased for Tuesday 13 September looked like this…….
First 9 candidates ranked in order of first preference votes received:
Richie Williamson (9,223) (4,966), Andrew Baker (3,075) (2,915), Karen Toms (1,252) (2,307), Debrah Novak (2,045), Jim Simmons (1,668) (1,980), Jason Kingsley (2,145) (1,970), Peter Ellem (1,965), Greg Clancy (1,275) (1,649), Brett Tibbett (1,276).
Second 9 candidates ranked in order of first preference votes received:
Arthur Lysault (1,122), Margaret McKenna (1,224) (1,074), John Hagger (1,072), Sue Hughes (1,764) (997), Trevor Ellem (962), Peta Rogers (948), Ian Saunders (926), Joy De Roos (478), John Riggall (461).
Final three candidates ranked in order of first preference votes received:
Marty Wells (295), Ursula Tunks (540) (289), Keith Bates (159).
* First preference votes in 2012 Clarence Valley LGA election marked in red and first preference votes in 2016 LGA election in black.
NSW ELECTORAL COMMISSION VIRTUAL TALLY ROOM
1:35pm 13 September 2016
There are 9 Councillors to be elected from 21 candidates
Total Number of Electors enrolled in this Council area on 1 August 2016: 39,070
Percentage of all enrolled voters counted: 81.02%
Data Entry commenced: 8:32am 12 September 2016
Progressive Quota: 2,986
Informal Rate: 5.69%
Summary of First Preference Votes
| |||||||||||
Candidate
|
Party/IND
|
FP Votes
|
Quota
Ratio |
% Formal Votes
| |||||||
NOVAK Debrah
|
IND
|
2,045
|
0.68
|
6.85%
| |||||||
SAUNDERS Ian
|
IND
|
926
|
0.31
|
3.10%
| |||||||
CLANCY Greg
|
GRN
|
1,649
|
0.55
|
5.52%
| |||||||
ROGERS Peta
|
IND
|
948
|
0.32
|
3.18%
| |||||||
TIBBETT Brett
|
IND
|
1,276
|
0.43
|
4.27%
| |||||||
TOMS Karen
|
IND
|
2,307
|
0.77
|
7.73%
| |||||||
TUNKS Ursula
|
IND
|
289
|
0.1
|
0.97%
| |||||||
KINGSLEY Jason
|
IND
|
1,970
|
0.66
|
6.60%
| |||||||
HAGGER John
|
IND
|
1,072
|
0.36
|
3.59%
| |||||||
ELLEM Peter
|
IND
|
1,965
|
0.66
|
6.58%
| |||||||
WILLIAMSON Richie
|
4,966
|
1.66
|
16.63%
| ||||||||
WELLS Marty
|
IND
|
295
|
0.1
|
0.99%
| |||||||
ELLEM Trevor
|
IND
|
962
|
0.32
|
3.22%
| |||||||
DE ROOS Joy
|
478
|
0.16
|
1.60%
| ||||||||
BATES Keith
|
159
|
0.05
|
0.53%
| ||||||||
HUGHES Sue
|
IND
|
997
|
0.33
|
3.34%
| |||||||
SIMMONS Jim
|
IND
|
1,980
|
0.66
|
6.63%
| |||||||
RIGGALL John
|
IND
|
461
|
0.15
|
1.54%
| |||||||
LYSAUGHT Arthur
|
IND
|
1,122
|
0.38
|
3.76%
| |||||||
McKENNA Margaret
|
IND
|
1,074
|
0.36
|
3.60%
| |||||||
BAKER Andrew
|
IND
|
2,915
|
0.98
|
9.76%
| |||||||
Total Formal Votes Counted
|
29,856
|
100%
| |||||||||
Total Informal/Other Votes
|
1,800
|
5.69%
| |||||||||
Progressive Total Votes
|
31,656
| ||||||||||
All second preference distributions should be included in the final ballot tally by Thursday night, 15 September and the election results announced by 16 September 2016.
Government Data Retention: think this won't happen again?
Think the situation set out below won't happen again in some shape or form?
What about when government outsourcing to the private sector means access to those government databases quietly collating personal and sensitive information on all individuals living in Australia?
Victorian Ombudsman, media release, 12 September 2016:
What about when government outsourcing to the private sector means access to those government databases quietly collating personal and sensitive information on all individuals living in Australia?
Victorian Ombudsman, media release, 12 September 2016:
WorkSafe:
complex claims process needs fixing
Victoria’s workers
compensation scheme must be recalibrated to ensure that complex claims are
resolved in a fair and timely manner, a Victorian Ombudsman investigation has
found.
Tabling the Investigation
into the management of complex workers compensation claims and WorkSafe
oversight today, Victorian Ombudsman Deborah Glass said that while the workers
compensation scheme is operating well in the vast majority of cases, the current
system fails some particularly vulnerable people.
“The overall system is
not broken, but the problems we identified in complex cases – some 20 per cent
of the overall claims – go beyond a few isolated examples of bad behaviour.
They cannot simply be explained away as a few bad apples spoiling the barrel,”
said Ms Glass.
WorkSafe underwrites the
Victorian workers compensation scheme with claims management functions
outsourced to private insurers. During the investigation period the agent
insurers for Worksafe were Allianz, CGU, Gallagher Bassett, Xchanging and QBE.
The system currently incorporates a series of financial incentives for agents,
including when claims are terminated or workers return to employment.
The investigation
examined complex and often extended claims across different industries, roles
and injuries (both mental and physical) to assess whether:
- agents unreasonably denied liability or terminated claims
- agents took such actions in order to obtain financial rewards available under the contract with Worksafe
- Worksafe provides effective oversight of the agents and their claims management processes.
Key recommendations from
the investigation call for a review of dispute resolution processes within the
system and improvements in oversight of complex claims by WorkSafe.
“We found agents
cherry-picking evidence to support a decision to reject or terminate a claim –
as little as one line in a medical report – while disregarding overwhelming
evidence to the contrary. We found Independent Medical Examiners (IMEs) – whose
opinions agents use to support their decision making on compensation –
receiving selective, incomplete or inaccurate information. We also saw evidence
of decisions being influenced by financial incentives to terminate claims.
“In effect, we found
cases in which agents were working the system to delay and deny seriously
injured workers the financial compensation to which they were entitled – and
which they eventually received if they had the support, stamina and means to
pursue their cases through the dispute process,” said Ms Glass.
The investigation
attracted significant public interest after it was launched, with dozens of
workers and others involved in the system contacting the Victorian Ombudsman to
offer assistance or make submissions.
The investigation
involved detailed reviews of claims across all five agents. A random sample of
agent email records was examined and interviews conducted with injured workers
and their families, executives from the five agents and former agent staff.
Stakeholders including the Accident Compensation Conciliation Service, the
Australian Medical Association, the Police Association of Victoria and the Community
and Public Sector Union made submissions.
“Action must be taken to
address the complex end of the system where terminations are rewarded. WorkSafe
needs to examine its incentives – and the use of IMEs – to ensure the system
rewards sustainable decisions and to target its oversight accordingly. The
process for resolving disputes also demands careful reconsideration – it is in
the interests of workers, employers and the public at large that the resolution
of claims should be both timely and fair.
“WorkSafe has begun
addressing many of these issues, and we have already seen improvements since my
investigation began in 2015, but this work must go on. The cases we
investigated are not merely files, numbers or claims; they involved people’s
lives, and the human cost should never be forgotten,” said Ms Glass.
Notes to editors
- The Victorian workers compensation scheme is funded by a compulsory system of insurance that covers employers for the cost of providing compensation to injured workers.
- Worksafe manages around 90,000 workers compensation claims a year.
- The Victorian Ombudsman investigation conducted a detailed review of 65 complex workers compensation claims; most claims involved decisions made in 2014 – 2015.
- Insurers acting as Worksafe agents at the time of the investigation were: Allianz, CGU, Gallagher Basset, QBE and Xchanging. The Victorian Government decided in April 2016 not to renew QBE’s contract and QBE ceased acting as a Worksafe agent on June 30 2016. EML replaced QBE on the panel of agents. EML decisions and actions have not been examined during this investigation
A data breach in the making.......
Computer
World, 13
September 2016:
The National
Cancer Screening Register Bill 2016 and the National Cancer Screening
Register (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2016 are
currently before the House of Representatives. The bills will create the
National Cancer Screening Register, which will replace nine existing registers
including the states’ cervical cancer register.
In May
the Department of Health announced it had awarded
the contract to establish and operate the register to Telstra. The $220
million contract has an initial term of five years with an option for a 10-year
extension……
Labor
“strongly supports” the move to establish a national register, King said today.
However,
the MP said that the bills have been “rushed” into parliament because the
government had decided to award the contract to Telstra before any debate on
the register’s merits and associated privacy and data protections.
There
was no debate over “whether it is even appropriate for such sensitive data to
be placed into the hands for the first time of a for-profit provider,” King
said……
The
decision will “put some of the most sensitive data into the hands of a private
telecommunications company.” “It’s a big question and a big call,” she said. “Not
one that we, frankly, support”.
The new
national register will hold information about every Australian eligible for
cancer screening programs. “The register is not opt-in and an individual will
only be able to opt out… of the register once it’s actually implemented,” King
said.
Data
held in the register will include individuals’ names, addresses, dates of
birth, contact details, gender and sex, as well as Medicare item number,
Medicare claims information and preferred GP or other health providers.
The
register will also contain “extremely private and intimate health data” usually
only disclosed to an individual’s GP, King said.
“Labor
accepts that this information is necessary for the operation of the register,
but we do not accept that Telstra – frankly with a questionable record of
privacy breaches – should have Australians’ most private and sensitive health
data.”
Australian and foreign-owned companies who are laughing all the way to the bank
QANTAS AIRWAYS LIMITED with an income of $14.90 billion stated it had no taxable income in in 2013-14 so paid no tax. Hmmmm…..
ENERGYAUSTRALIA HOLDINGS LTD earning 8.84 billion and EXXONMOBIL AUSTRALIA PTY LTD bringing in $9.94 billion in that same financial year also had no tax to pay.
News Corp’s APN NEWS & MEDIA (owner of most of the regional newspapers in Northern NSW ) with a taxable income of $21.29 million in 2013-14 also paid no tax.
They are among the hundreds of Australian and foreign-owned companies with incomes of over $100 million a year which the Australian Tax Office (ATO) lists as paying no tax.
ATO Corporate Tax Transparency - 2013-14 Report of Entity Tax Information
Labels:
Australian society,
economy,
multinationals,
taxation
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)