Wednesday, 19 December 2018

Climate Change: the power of one, the power of many


By 2012 over half the world's population was estimated to be under thirty years of age, with around 16 per cent being under 15 years old.

All around the world those who govern are considerably older on average.

Yet it is thee yound people who willl be forced to endure the worst impacts - the life changing, life threatening impacts - of climate change.

The young have begun to speak up in defence of their future.

This is Greta, she is fifteen years old...........



TRANSCRIPT: Greta Thunberg’s Speech to COP24 UN Climate Summit, Katowice, Poland, December 2018

GRETA THUNBERG: My name is Greta Thunberg. I am 15 years old, and I’m from Sweden. I speak on behalf of Climate Justice Now!

Many people say that Sweden is just a small country, and it doesn’t matter what we do. But I’ve learned that you are never too small to make a difference. And if a few children can get headlines all over the world just by not going to school, then imagine what we could all do together if we really wanted to.

But to do that, we have to speak clearly, no matter how uncomfortable that may be.

You only speak of green eternal economic growth because you are too scared of being unpopular. You only talk about moving forward with the same bad ideas that got us into this mess, even when the only sensible thing to do is pull the emergency brake. 

You are not mature enough to tell it like it is. Even that burden you leave to us children.

But I don’t care about being popular. I care about climate justice and the living planet. 

Our civilization is being sacrificed for the opportunity of a very small number of people to continue making enormous amounts of money. Our biosphere is being sacrificed so that rich people in countries like mine can live in luxury. It is the sufferings of the many which pay for the luxuries of the few.

The year 2078, I will celebrate my 75th birthday. If I have children, maybe they will spend that day with me. Maybe they will ask me about you. Maybe they will ask why you didn’t do anything while there still was time to act. 

You say you love your children above all else, and yet you are stealing their future in front of their very eyes.

Until you start focusing on what needs to be done, rather than what is politically possible, there is no hope. We cannot solve a crisis without treating it as a crisis. We need to keep the fossil fuels in the ground, and we need to focus on equity. And if solutions within the system are so impossible to find, then maybe we should change the system itself.

We have not come here to beg world leaders to care. You have ignored us in the past, and you will ignore us again. 

We have run out of excuses, and we are running out of time. 

We have come here to let you know that change is coming, whether you like it or not. The real power belongs to the people. 

Thank you. 

Facebook Inc still getting caught out spreading fake news and breaching users' privacy



The Guardian, 13 December 2018:

Journalists working as factcheckers for Facebook have pushed to end a controversial media partnership with the social network, saying the company has ignored their concerns and failed to use their expertise to combat misinformation.
Current and former Facebook factcheckers told the Guardian that the tech platform’s collaboration with outside reporters has produced minimal results and that they’ve lost trust in Facebook, which has repeatedly refused to release meaningful data about the impacts of their work. Some said Facebook’s hiring of a PR firm that used an antisemitic narrative to discredit critics – fueling the same kind of propaganda factcheckers regularly debunk – should be a deal-breaker.

“They’ve essentially used us for crisis PR,” said Brooke Binkowski, former managing editor of Snopes, a factchecking site that has partnered with Facebook for two years. “They’re not taking anything seriously. They are more interested in making themselves look good and passing the buck … They clearly don’t care.”….

“Why should we trust Facebook when it’s pushing the same rumors that its own factcheckers are calling fake news?” said a current Facebook factchecker who was not authorized to speak publicly about their news outlet’s partnership….

 “Working with Facebook makes us look bad,” added the journalist, who has advocated for an end to the partnership…..

ABC News, 15 December 2018:

Facebook said a bug had exposed private photos of up to 6.8 million users, the latest in a string of glitches that have caused regulators around the world to investigate the social media giant's privacy practices.

The bug allowed some 1,500 applications to access private photos for 12 days ending September 25, Facebook said.

"We're sorry this happened," it said in a blog targeted at developers who build apps for its platform.

Facebook said the bug was now fixed.

The problem is the latest in a string of security and privacy issues that have caused complaints from users and led to investigations by regulators and politicians.

The company said it would send an alert through Facebook to notify users whose photos may have been exposed by the latest issue.

The alert will direct them to a link where they will be able to see if they have used any apps that the bug allowed to access private photos.

Facebook shares fell 1.2 per cent early trading, compared to a 0.9 per cent decline in the Nasdaq composite index......

Tuesday, 18 December 2018

Morrison's election campaign battle plan 2019


Apparently Australia's interim prime minister, Liberal MP for Cook Scott Morrison has a prepared 'battle' plan for the May 2019.

* Ministers need to portray gravitas and confidence.

*Don't let backbench MPs open their mouths without a central office minder. 

*Give prepared statements and don't answer journalists questions about said statements.

*Freeze out mainstream news outlets other than News Corp, Sky News, 2GB Radio and its Macquarie Media stablemates.

* Stay on message and repeat, repeat, repeat - Liberal Good, Labor Bad!

* Praise Supreme Leader Scott Morrison.

The Plan...........




https://www.scribd.com/document/395739415/Liberal-Party-of-Australia-Election-Campaign-Planning-Document

* Document found on Twitter @bamboozled3

Scott Morrison's secretive new public sector corruption division with no teeth - not even a set of badly fitting dentures


Alan Moir Cartoon

A federal statutory body, the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (ACLEI) has been in existence since December 2006 and is headed by the Integrity Commissioner. The current Integrity Commissioner is Michael Griffin AM.

There is also a Parliamentary Joint Committee on the ACLEI.

The Morrison plan for a new Commonwealth Integrity Commission (CIC) intends to retain the ACLEI as one of two divisions within the CIC and expand the number of government agencies within this first division’s jurisdiction from twelve (12) to sixteen (16) – otherwise it is business as usual for the multi-agency ACLEI.

At the same time the Morrison Government intends the over-arching CIC to have a second division – the Public Sector Division - without the full powers of statutory anti-corruption commissions.

It is this division which will be charged with investigating corruption allegations based on interactions of sitting members of federal parliament and departmental staff with corporations, lobby groups and private individuals.

Members of the public will have no right to lay complaints or concerns before the Deputy-Commissioner who will head this second division. Only departmental heads and the Australian Federal Police appear to have the right to refer a matter to the Public Sector Division.

The division will not hold public hearings or publish the results of any secret hearings. There will be no transparency in its processes.

This second division represents business as usual for federal parliamentarians, as the government of the day will be able to keep even the most egregious matters under its adjudication by asserting the matter should be classified as a straightforward Code of Conduct breach or a simple matter of non-compliance.

The new Commonwealth Integrity Commission is expected to have an annual budget of around $30 million. A sum which reflects its toothless status.

BACKGROUND


The Australian Government proposes to establish a Commonwealth Integrity Commission (CIC) to detect, deter and investigate suspected corruption and to work with agencies to build their resilience to corruption and their capability to deal with corrupt misconduct. The CIC will consist of a ‘law enforcement integrity division’ incorporating the existing structure, jurisdiction and powers of ACLEI and a new ‘public sector integrity division’. Both the law enforcement and public sector divisions of the CIC will be headed by separate deputy commissioners, who will each report to a new Commonwealth Integrity Commissioner. The two divisions will have different jurisdictional coverage, powers and functions, tailored to the nature of the entities within their jurisdiction. The law enforcement division will retain the powers and functions of ACLEI, but with an expanded jurisdiction to cover several further agencies that exercise the most significant coercive powers and therefore present a more significant corruption risk. The public sector division will cover the remaining public sector. As such, its powers and functions will be different to those of the law enforcement division and will be appropriately tailored.

Jurisdiction 

Law enforcement division
The law enforcement division will have jurisdiction over those agencies already within ACLEI’s remit, being:

• the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission
• the AFP • the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC)
• the Department of Home Affairs, and
• prescribed aspects of the Department of Agriculture and Water Resources (DAWR).
 Its jurisdiction will also be expanded to cover additional public sector agencies with law enforcement functions and access to sensitive information, such as the:
• Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC)
• Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA)
• Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), and
• Australian Taxation Office (ATO)……

Public sector division

The public sector division of the CIC will have jurisdiction over:

• public service departments and agencies, parliamentary departments, statutory agencies, Commonwealth companies and Commonwealth corporations
• Commonwealth service providers and any subcontractors they engage, and
• parliamentarians and their staff.

By extending the jurisdiction of the public sector division of the CIC to service providers and contractors, the CIC will have the capacity to oversee the integrity of entities which expend or receive significant amounts of Commonwealth funding where there is evidence of corrupt conduct that meets the relevant criminal threshold proposed. The CIC will also be able to investigate members of the public or other private entities that receive or deal with Commonwealth funds (and might not otherwise be within jurisdiction), to the extent that their suspected corrupt conduct intersects with a public official’s suspected corrupt conduct….

The public sector division of the CIC will be responsible for investigating ‘corrupt conduct’ where the commissioner has a reasonable suspicion that the conduct in question constitutes a criminal offence. Notably, the public sector division will investigate conduct capable of constituting a nominated range of specific new and existing criminal offences that will constitute corrupt conduct in the public sector.
 ‘Corrupt conduct’ will include abuse of public office, misuse of official information and non-impartial exercise of official functions. A range of consolidated and new public sector corruption offences will be included in the Criminal Code Act 1995 (the Criminal Code). The information below under the heading ‘Amendments to the Criminal Code’ outlines a preliminary summary of ways in which amendments might be made to relevant legislative offences that will collectively form the jurisdictional basis for the CIC. 

It is intended that the public sector division will focus on the investigation of serious or systemic corrupt conduct, rather than looking into issues of misconduct or non-compliance under various codes of conduct. Misconduct that is not defined as a criminal offence at Commonwealth law is considered more appropriately dealt with by the entities where the misconduct occurs: public sector agencies for public servants; Houses of Parliament for parliamentarians; the Prime Minister for Ministers; the Special Minister of State for ministerial staff….

Powers

Law enforcement division

The law enforcement division of the CIC will have access to the coercive and investigative powers that ACLEI currently does—these are necessary because the agencies within jurisdiction themselves have access to significant coercive powers and in many cases, sensitive intelligence, personal or other information. The consequences of corruption in circumstances where public officials have access to law enforcement or other coercive powers is generally more significant than for public officials without access to such powers. Those with access to coercive powers and knowledge of law enforcement methods are better able to disguise corruption and corrupt conduct can have a greater impact (for example, where millions of dollars of illicit drugs are permitted to enter the Australian economy). 8 The law enforcement division will have the power to:

• compel the production of documents
• question people
• hold public and private hearings
• arrest
• enter/search premises
• seize evidence
• undertake controlled operations and assumed identities, and
• undertake integrity testing.

Public sector division

The powers available to the public sector division reflect the different nature of the corruption risk in the areas it will oversight. The public sector division of the CIC will have the power to:

• compel the production of documents
• question people
• hold private hearings, and
• enter/search premises.

It will not be able to:

• exercise arrest warrants
• hold public hearings, or
• make findings of corruption, criminal conduct or misconduct at large.

The extent to which the CIC public sector integrity division will have the ability to access telecommunications and surveillance device powers will be part of the consultation process on the proposed model. The law enforcement integrity division will retain all powers that ACLEI currently holds......

Referrals about parliamentarians and their staff 

The public sector division could receive a referral regarding a parliamentarian or their staff that met the CIC’s threshold for investigation from the IPEA, the AEC, the AFP or other integrity agencies. For example, if the IPEA observed potentially corrupt conduct that it reasonably suspected was capable of constituting a criminal offence, it could refer that activity to the CIC for investigation. 

The public sector division of the CIC will also be able to investigate parliamentarians or their staff where an existing CIC investigation into suspected corruption within a different part of the public sector revealed evidence that will meet the investigation threshold. For example, if the CIC was investigating suspected criminal corrupt conduct within a procurement process involving a department, and through that investigation it found evidence suggesting corrupt activity by any Member of Parliament or member of the executive government which it reasonably expected met the relevant criminal threshold, the CIC could initiate an investigation into that matter. 

The CIC will not investigate direct complaints about Ministers, Members of Parliament or their staff received from the public at large.......

Monday, 17 December 2018

Once again peak scam is here for the summer


Throughout the year there are periods where I receive scam calls up to twice a week.

Sometimes I am warned about my imminent arrest for tax evasion, sometimes I am informed that I have compensation money coming to me from a motor vehicle accident in which I was allegedly involved, but most often I am told by a fake Telstra representative that there is something wrong with my computer [substitute various alternative scenarios here] and that my Internet service will be cancelled unless I power up my PC and follow instructions.

I stopped listening to their spiel years ago and now simply hang up.

However, telephone and email scamming is now ubiquitous and peak scam is on us for another holiday season.......

ACCC ScamWatch, 11 December 2018:

Watch out for holiday season scams

Scamwatch is warning people to be careful about being caught out by holiday season scams.

“Scammers will take advantage of special days or major events like Christmas to fleece people of their money or personal information,” ACCC Deputy Chair Delia Rickard said.

Here are three common holiday season scams people should look out for:

Online shopping scams: scammers will set up fake online stores or post goods for sale in buy‑swap-sell groups or online classified sites to trick people into buying items that don’t exist. This scam has cost Australians nearly $3 million in 2018, with more than 8,700 reports.

Travel scams: scammers trick people into believing they’ve won a holiday or scored a really good deal on a travel package, like a cruise. Unfortunately the prize or the cheap accommodation are phony. In 2018, nearly $135,000 has been lost to this scam.

Parcel delivery scams: scammers may ask you to print off a label, do a survey, claim a prize, or view the status of your delivery by clicking on a link or downloading an attachment. Some scammers may even call or text with claims about an unsuccessful delivery. These scams are aimed at getting people to download malware onto their computer, or give up their personal information. People have lost about $31,000 to these scams in 2018.

“Scamwatch has also seen a massive influx of reports and money lost to tax scams. In November we received 7,500 reports of these scams and $400,000 was reported lost,” Ms Rickard said.

“This isn’t a usual holiday season scam, however a lot of people are getting calls from scammers pretending to be from the tax office or the police and threatening them with arrest over unpaid tax debts.”

“This is a scam. If you ever get a call or email containing threats like this, hang up the phone or delete the email,” Ms Rickard said.

Ms Rickard added that the key to avoiding a scammer’s con these holidays is a healthy dose of scepticism and research.

“We love snagging a great deal online for a loved one’s Christmas present and the idea of a bargain holiday is perfect for many after a long year. But don’t fall for it,” Ms Rickard said.

“Be sceptical about an online store you haven’t used before. Do some research to see if they’re legitimate and don’t be fooled by big discounts. With travel deals, call the accommodation provider directly, for example the cruise line or hotel, to check if the deal is legitimate.”

“If you see a seemingly great deal on an accommodation rental website like Airbnb, make sure you only communicate and pay through the official site to avoid getting stung by a fake listing,” Ms Rickard said.

“We’re all expecting parcels this time of year but be careful about online links and never download attachments. If you’re wondering if a delivery notice is legitimate, check the tracking number at the Australia Post or other delivery company website, or call them directly using a number you find from an online search or the phone book.”

“While with friends and family over the holidays, consider taking the opportunity to spread the warnings about these scams particularly to those loved ones who may be vulnerable.” Ms Rickard said.

Further information about holiday season scams is available at www.scamwatch.gov.au. People can also follow @scamwatch_gov (link is external) on Twitter and subscribe to Scamwatch radar alerts to get up-to-date warnings.

The Daily Examiner, 15 December 2018; p.5:

When Jenny Hall had a missed call on her phone and a message claiming to be from Centrelink in relation to an adjustment to some payments, she didn’t give a second thought in calling back.

However Ms Hall was sceptical of the man who answered the phone when she called back and when he called her a “f------ b----” after his legitimacy was questioned, her suspicions were confirmed.

“I rang back and they gave me a number to call and a claim number so I thought it sounded real,” she said.

“I rang the number and some guy answered the phone and at one point we got cut off, so I called back and the same person answered and I thought that was strange.
“He claimed they went through some records and taxes which were linked to Centrelink, which I said was strange because I get an accountant to do my taxes.

“Then he started saying that I needed to get a lawyer because I had a big tax bill. I said wait there and I asked for his name and started asking him some questions.
“I said I wanted to talk to his superior and he said that he was in charge and that’s when I knew he was lying.”

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s Scamwatch website revealed reports of tax scams threatening arrest or jail over unpaid debts have jumped significantly in the past month…..

The Daily Examiner, 15 December 2018; p.13:

A Casino woman has a message for shoppers after being scammed by a market stallholder at the Jacaranda Festival Markets.

Kelly-ann Oosterbeek bought a powdered anti-inflammatory product in Grafton, and paid the $80 by Eftpos.

Mrs Oosterbeek was then told the item would be posted to her.

“If you feel like anything is slightly off with any purchase you are making, walk away,” she warned.

The “supremely weird” transaction process made Mrs Oosterbeek feel nervous.
She was concerned enough to take photos of the stall, and she asked to see the stallholder’s business credentials. She also took photos of the registration, ABN and insurance, and got a signed receipt saying the product would be posted.

“I was standing there with my hubby, four of my six kids and my daughter’s partner – I had so many witnesses,” Mrs Oosterbeek said.

But the product never came.

“I want to warn people of the Northern Rivers because the lady told me she was heading north with her market stall,” Mrs Oosterbeek said.

Trying to give the stallholder the benefit of the doubt, Mrs Oosterbeek waited a few days before contacting her to make sure the product had been posted, but she claimed Mrs Oosterbeek had been given it on the day.

“They wouldn’t budge with their claims, saying I was trying to rip them off and eventually saying my husband had taken the product and not told me,” she said.

“I wasn’t too worried – I’d done everything right as a consumer and I felt really covered – so I took the case to Fair Trading.

“Even with all of my evidence, witness statements, and a signed receipt promising postage of the item there was nothing they could do.”


Proposed Religious Discrimination Act looks a lot like PM Scott Morrison appealing to his 'base' ahead of the May 2019 federal election


On 13 December 2018 Australia's 'interim' Prime Minister and Liberal MP for Cook, Scott Morrison, announced that his government intended to protect religious freedom in Australia and to protect the rights of Australians to be themselves by way of a new piece of legislation titled the Religious Discrimination Act.

Not a line of this legislation appears to have been put down on paper to date even though it is apparently expected to come before the Australian Parliament in the seven days or so it will sit before the May 2019 federal election.

One would have thought that religious freedom and diversity of faith was thriving in Australia given over 127 different formal manifestations of religious faith/spirituality exist in its cities, towns and villages without ongoing overt community discord or institutionalised discrimination.

Even former Liberal Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock concedes the Religious Freedom Review he led found little evidence that discrimination is occurring in Australia. That lack of hard evidence at population levels mean that government cannot reliably assert that religious discrimination as a form of harm is an existing problem requiring the 'solutions' it is proposing - such as Prime Minister Morrison's idea of a religious freedom commissioner to handle religious discrimination complaints, even though it was not recommended by the review

As religious faith holds no interest or importance for up to 15 million of the est. 24.6 million Australians alive today, I'm sure a good many voters are wondering what the fuss is all about and why Morrison is intent on protecting against nebulous future enemies which do not yet exist and whose probability appears to exist in his mind and nowhere else

After all, the Australian Constitution bars the creation of a state religion as well as barring laws prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, organised religions receive tax exempt status, education in faith-based primary & high schools is funded by the federal government and, discrimination in employment or occupation on the basis of religion is already unlawful under federal legislation. 

One has to suspect that the real intention of this new Religious Discrimination Act is to justify and codify discrimination by organised religions against individuals and groups in the wider secular society.

BACKGROUND



*61% of Australians say religious faith/spirituality plays no part/little part in their decision making;
*21% don’t believe there is any God/spirit/life force;
*a further 14% used to believe in God but don’t anymore;
*38% never pray or meditate;
*47% never attend a religious service; and
* only 18 % of Australians regularly attend religious services.


Sunday, 16 December 2018

Baby power appears to be a ticking time bomb for consumers



Reuters Investigates, 14 December 2018:

Facing thousands of lawsuits alleging that its talc caused cancer, J&J insists on the safety and purity of its iconic product. But internal documents examined by Reuters show that the company's powder was sometimes tainted with carcinogenic asbestos and that J&J kept that information from regulators and the public….

J&J didn’t tell the FDA that at least three tests by three different labs from 1972 to 1975 had found asbestos in its talc – in one case at levels reported as “rather high.”……

…J&J has been compelled to share thousands of pages of company memos, internal reports and other confidential documents with lawyers for some of the 11,700 plaintiffs now claiming that the company’s talc caused their cancers — including thousands of women with ovarian cancer.

A Reuters examination of many of those documents, as well as deposition and trial testimony, shows that from at least 1971 to the early 2000s, the company’s raw talc and finished powders sometimes tested positive for small amounts of asbestos, and that company executives, mine managers, scientists, doctors and lawyers fretted over the problem and how to address it while failing to disclose it to regulators or the public.

The documents also depict successful efforts to influence U.S. regulators’ plans to limit asbestos in cosmetic talc products and scientific research on the health effects of talc.

A small portion of the documents have been produced at trial and cited in media reports. Many were shielded from public view by court orders that allowed J&J to turn over thousands of documents it designated as confidential. Much of their contents is reported here for the first time……

The World Health Organization and other authorities recognize no safe level of exposure to asbestos. While most people exposed never develop cancer, for some, even small amounts of asbestos are enough to trigger the disease years later…..

What J&J produced in response to those demands has allowed plaintiffs’ lawyers to refine their argument: The culprit wasn’t necessarily talc itself, but also asbestos in the talc. That assertion, backed by decades of solid science showing that asbestos causes mesothelioma and is associated with ovarian and other cancers, has had mixed success in court.

In two cases earlier this year – in New Jersey and California – juries awarded big sums to plaintiffs who, like Coker, blamed asbestos-tainted J&J talc products for their mesothelioma.

A third verdict, in St. Louis, was a watershed, broadening J&J’s potential liability: The 22 plaintiffs were the first to succeed with a claim that asbestos-tainted Baby Powder and Shower to Shower talc, a longtime brand the company sold in 2012, caused ovarian cancer, which is much more common than mesothelioma. The jury awarded them $4.69 billion in damages. Most of the talc cases have been brought by women with ovarian cancer who say they regularly used J&J talc products as a perineal antiperspirant and deodorant.

At the same time, at least three juries have rejected claims that Baby Powder was tainted with asbestos or caused plaintiffs’ mesothelioma. Others have failed to reach verdicts, resulting in mistrials.

J&J has said it will appeal the recent verdicts against it. It has maintained in public statements that its talc is safe, as shown for years by the best tests available, and that the information it has been required to divulge in recent litigation shows the care the company takes to ensure its products are asbestos-free. It has blamed its losses on juror confusion, “junk” science, unfair court rules and overzealous lawyers looking for a fresh pool of asbestos plaintiffs…..

Read the full article here.