Bridget Archer MP speaking in support of Motion seeking to bring Australian journalist & activist home: "For more than 4½ thousand days and counting, Julian Assange has not experienced true freedom. We're now just a week away from a decision on his final UK court appeal, where he faces up to 175 years in prison over 17 espionage charges and one charge of computer misuse. We know that his life is at risk."

 

Hansard, Votes and Proceedings, Motions, Wednesday 14 February 2024:

Assange, Mr. Julian Paul

Mr WILKIE (Clark) (16:48): I move:

That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the following:

(1) the Member for Clark moving:

That this House:

(a) notes that:

(i) on 20 and 21 February 2024, the High Court of Justice in the United Kingdom will hold a hearing into whether Walkley Award winning journalist, Mr Julian Assange, can appeal against his extradition to the United States of America;

(ii) Mr Assange remains incarcerated in HMP Belmarsh in the UK, awaiting a decision on whether he can be extradited to the USA to face charges for material published in 2010, which revealed shocking evidence of misconduct by the USA; and

(iii) both the Australian Government and Opposition have publicly stated that this matter has gone on for too long; and

(b) underlines the importance of the UK and USA bringing the matter to a close so that Mr Assange can return home to his family in Australia.

(2) debate on the motion being limited to the mover, seconder and two other Members;

(3) speaking times being 10 minutes for the mover and five minutes for all other Members speaking;

(4) amendments to the motion not being permitted; and

(5) any variation to the arrangement being made only on a motion moved by a Minister.

The SPEAKER: Is the motion seconded?

Mr Josh Wilson: I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.....

(Speakers to the motion were Andrew Wilke MP Independent, Josh Wilson MP Labor Party, Bridget Archer MP Liberal Party and Adam Paul Bandt MP The Greens. All spoke in support of the motion) 

The House divided. [17:20]

(The Speaker—Hon. Milton Dick)

DIVISION: AYES 86 (44 majority) NOES 42 PAIRS 0

Right click on image to enlarge

Question agreed to.

COVID-19 2024: I suspect there has long been a debate in government & public health sectors from which the Australian public in large measure appears to have been excluded

How the road to widespread abandonment of effective communicable disease control began.

In January 2020 the SARS-CoV-2 virus, commonly known as COVID-19, entered Australia and by 7 April 2020 there were 5,844 confirmed COVID-19 cases across the country, with 44 deaths [North Coast Voices, COVID-19 confirmed cases count for Australia, states and territories from 29 March 2020]. 

Infection numbers continued to rise and as of 29 July 2021 the national total confirmed infection number stood at 33,732 - with 2,857 mostly locally acquired active cases - and the death toll from COVID-19 was listed as 920 people with the highest number of deaths occurring in the 80-89 year age group.

Eight days later on 6 August 2021 the Sydney Morning Herald reported:

NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian said the state must learn to live with COVID-19 as the number of people in hospital with the virus doubled within a week and the nation’s chief medical officer called for a circuit-breaker to halt the spread across Sydney.

As NSW reported a record 291 new cases on Friday, Chief Medical Officer Paul Kelly said low vaccination rates, non-compliance and the speed of diagnosis highlighted the need to reconsider the state’s strategy.

On 23 August 2021 then Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison announced the 'national plan to live with COVID'

Prime minister Scott Morrison has said Australia must 'learn to live with' Covid-19. 'Once you get to 70% of your eligible population being vaccinated, and 80% ... the plan sets out we have to move forward'. Morrison said once those vaccine targets are hit, it is not about case numbers any more and people need to change their mindsets. 'Because if not at 70% and 80% then when? Then when?,' he said. 'This can not go on forever, this is not a sustainable way to live in this country,' Morrison said.

Needless to say by 31 December 2021 'living with COVID' à la Gladys and Scott saw the national confirmed COVID-19 infection numbers grow to 395,504 men, women and children with 137,752 mostly locally acquired active infections and, 2,239 deaths.

For it seemed that 'living with COVID' might have been Morrison's coded phrase for forced herd immunity and, like many of Morrison's schemes this one doesn't really appear to be working that well - unless the intention was to abandon the old, sick or vulnerable to this disease.

So this is where we are at today.....

 

In February 2024, as part of its fragmented public reporting of COVID-19 infection in the state, NSW Health announced that from 1 January 2024 to 3 February 2024 a total of 17,140 people ranging from 0-4 years up to 90+ years tested positive to COVID-19 via a PCR test, a total of 523 of the people were local residents in the Northern NSW Local Health District. With an est. 28% of the 17,170 requiring hospitalisation in the first week of January rising to 35% by 3 February. [NSW COVID-19 WEEKLY DATA OVERVIEW Epidemiological weeks 4 & 5, ending 03 February 2024]

Confirmed COVID-19 Infection by Age Groupings, 1 July 2023 to 3 February 2024

[ibid] Right click on image to enlarge

Note: The highest age group infection rate per 100,000 for the entire 6 months is a Bright Pink line representing those aged 90+ years and the second highest is Bright Blue representing those aged 65-89 years. While for the last four months and four days the third highest infection rate is represented by Red which indicates small children 0-4 years of age.

At state and national level total COVID-19 deaths have been increasingly hidden from the view of the general public in undifferentiated or hard to quantify mortality graphs and, on 20 October 2023 Australia’s Chief Medical Officer declared that COVID-19 is no longer a Communicable Disease Incident of National Significance (CDINS) following the end of winter in Australia.

On 8 February 2024 La Trobe University sent out a media release discussing a study led by Dr Joel Miller, Associate Professor of Mathematics and Statistics at La Trobe University, found that locking down the most at-risk group of people for a significant period, while simultaneously promoting infection in other groups in order to reach herd immunity, could be the best way to protect the high-risk groups. [my yellow highlighting]

However, increasing the exposure of one group to a disease would create an ethical dilemma and potentially result in the most disadvantaged groups in the community – usually with the least political power – becoming the highly-infected group.....

ABC News, 11 February 2024:

Steve Irons' older brother Jim was only supposed to be in hospital for a short while. A retired stockman from Maryborough, Queensland, Jim was diagnosed with leukaemia just before Christmas in 2022. He was flown to Brisbane for testing, then back to Maryborough Hospital, where doctors were putting together a plan for him to be treated at home.

But a patient in the room next door to Jim's had COVID, Steve says, and on January 14 last year, Jim tested positive too. "After four days, when the hospital told me he was no longer infectious, I took the risk and decided to visit him," says Steve, who'd flown up from Tasmania. "I sat with him for three days, playing country music, reading to him."

And then, on Saturday January 21, Jim Irons died of COVID-19 pneumonia and acute myeloid leukaemia, aged 79. It still distresses Steve to know his brother would have lived longer had he not caught a dangerous virus in a place he should have been safe. Once Jim had COVID, he says, hospital staff kept his door closed and donned masks and gowns when they came into his room. But hindsight is 20/20. "For me, to put him next door to a COVID patient caused his death," Steve says. "It didn't have to happen that way. If they'd had a separate COVID ward … with formal routes of entry, cleaning, controlled ventilation, Jim could still be with us now."

Twelve months later Australian hospitals have become a strange new battleground in the fight against COVID, with doctors and public health experts concerned that too many patients are catching the virus — and an alarming number are dying — as a result of inadequate infection control. Until recently, tools like contact tracing, testing, N95 respirators and good ventilation were mainstays of COVID management in healthcare settings. But in many hospitals they've been wound back or ditched in tandem with other community protections, putting patients and healthcare workers at risk and deterring others from seeking treatment.

Health departments insist the risk of catching COVID cannot be eliminated completely, and that hospitals maintain stringent measures to prevent infections and manage outbreaks. But senior healthcare workers in several states say vulnerable people — including transplant and oncology patients and others with compromised immune systems — are contracting COVID because even basic precautions are not being taken: a consequence, they say, of hospitals' failure to address airborne transmission, and the pervasive myth that COVID is "just a cold".

The 'Robodebt' of medicine

Of course, evidence clearly shows COVID is nothing like a cold, particularly for hospital patients who are at higher risk of severe illness and death. Shocking data released under Freedom of Information laws last year revealed 5,614 people were suspected to have caught COVID in Victorian public hospitals between 2020 and April 2023, with more than one in 10 confirmed or suspected to have died as a result of their infection. In Queensland, similar data shows an average of 13 people caught COVID in hospital every day in the 18 months to June last year, with one patient dying every two days.

"The data we are aware of indicates that there is a large problem here," says Associate Professor Suman Majumdar, chief health officer for COVID and health emergencies at the Burnet Institute. "The key policy aim in Australia is to protect the medically vulnerable and there is no more vulnerable group than people in our hospitals and aged care."

Whilst patients who catch COVID in hospital might be older and sicker, Dr Majumdar says, "this is a patient safety issue". "These are preventable infections and therefore preventable deaths and we need to take action to reduce them by setting targets, tracking progress and reporting transparently like we do for other hospital acquired infections."....

A simple explanation of the 'right to disconnect' - that is the right to separate your work life from your home & family life

All employees in the national workplace relations system are covered by the National Employment Standards (NES).

This is regardless of the award, registered agreement or employment contract that applies. 

Details can be found at:

https://www.fairwork.gov.au/employment-conditions/national-employment-standards

Considering that Opposition Leader & LNP MP for Dickson Peter Dutton has vowed to repeal the Albanese government’s newly passed tranche of workplace reforms, including the right to disconnect, if the Coalition was to be re-elected to office next year — here is a simple explanation of how, under the law, workers now have the legal right to ignore phone calls and emails made by their employers out of working hours or demands to work unscheduled unpaid hours if the employer's request can be considered unreasonable. In other words, workers have the right to disconnect their home and family life from their work life.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvKfaKR2UAs

The federal public service sector appears to have spent most of the seven months since the Robodebt Royal Commission ended in circling the wagons

 

On Friday 7 July 2023 the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme tabled its final report and recommendations.

Three days later on Monday 10 July 2023, the Australian Public Service Commission (APSC) posted online an open letter which was reportedly emailed 170,000 federal public servants, "A message to you from PM&C Secretary Davis and APS Commissioner de Brouwer on the Royal Commission into the Robodebt Scheme", which stated in part:

Following the release of the report on Friday, a taskforce led by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, the Attorney-General’s Department, and the Australian Public Service Commission will be established to support Ministers in preparing the Government’s response.

Separate to this, the APSC will oversee an independent process to determine if public servants with adverse findings have breached the APS Code of Conduct. This process will be established under the APS Commissioner’s powers in the Public Service Act 1999. It is designed to be fair, independent, and consistent.

The APSC has engaged Mr Stephen Sedgwick AO to exercise these powers as an Independent Reviewer. Mr Sedgwick will make inquiries and determinations about whether an individual referred for inquiry has breached the APSCode of Conduct.

On 3 August 2023 the APSC revealed that:

The Commissioner has now received 16 referrals to the APSC’s centralised code of conduct mechanism, consisting of:

• current APS employees named in the sealed section of the Royal Commission’s report

• former APS employees referred by their most recent Agency Head, and

• former Agency Heads referred by the Minister following advice from the Secretary of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.

All referrals for investigation of potential breaches of the APS Code of Conduct have now been made and the Code of Conduct Taskforce in APSC has notified all referred individuals. An assessment will now be undertaken to establish in each case whether there are sufficient grounds to commence an investigation into suspected breach(es) of the APS Code of Conduct. The APSC will not provide details on individual cases or any further breakdown.....

Mr Stephen Sedgwick AO has been appointed as an independent reviewer to make inquiries into possible breaches of the APS Code of Conduct by current and former APS employees.

Ms Penny Shakespeare has been appointed as a supplementary reviewer to make inquiries into the conduct of former Agency Heads. The Public Service Act 1999 requires that the reviewer for referrals under section 41(2)(k) is a current senior public servant.

An independent sanctions adviser will be appointed, as required, to make recommendations to the relevant Agency Head, should any current APS employees be found to have breached the APS Code of Conduct.

On 8 February 2024 APS again updated its online information concerning the review:

Since the last update on 3 August 2023, the Code of Conduct Taskforce in the APSC has continued inquiries into all 16 referred matters.

To date:

• 15 investigations have proceeded to the issuing of notices outlining the grounds and categories for potential breach of the APS Code of Conduct.

• Of the 15 investigations, 4 individuals have been issued a preliminary determination that they have breached one or more elements of the APS Code of Conduct; 11 investigations remain current.

• One investigation has concluded as the individual's actions did not meet the threshold to issue a notice of suspected breach.

Final determinations and, if appropriate, decisions about sanctions will be communicated to individuals once preliminary determinations are finalised. The timeframe for the conclusion of inquiries depends on various factors, including the complexity of each matter, the number of submissions and any extensions that may be requested by respondents.

The 16 matters are complex, with a significant volume of evidence. Sufficient time is required to allow the Independent Reviewers, Mr Stephen Sedgwick AO and Ms Penny Shakespeare, to conduct the inquiries in a manner that is robust and affords respondents appropriate procedural fairness.

Elsewhere on the APSC website it was noted that:

The decision about the employment arrangements for public service employees identified in the Royal Commission report is a matter for their current employer. Agency Heads can take action before a formal investigation has started or concluded.

In considering the most appropriate action, the employer needs to properly consider a number of factors including the information provided in the report and the seriousness of the allegations, as well as the particular circumstances of the individual’s employment including their current roles and responsibilities.

The APSC and individual departments and agencies will not be commenting on the employment arrangements of individuals because, to do so, may inadvertently disclose content contained in the sealed chapter or risk prejudicing ongoing inquiries.

Based on APSC's own statements it does not appear very likely that any of the16 public servants identified by the Royal Commission will actually lose their public service employment.

On 8 February 2024 media outlets gave pared down accounts of the progress of this independent review. For example......

ABC News, 8 February 2024:

Four current or former public servants have breached the Australian Public Service code of conduct in relation to the Robodebt scheme, according to the preliminary findings of an independent investigation.

Last year, the Australian Public Service Commission (APSC) launched an investigation into 16 public servants who were identified by the royal commission into the unlawful debt recovery program as being involved in it.

The royal commission said the scheme was an extraordinary saga of "incompetence and cowardice" that was "neither fair, nor legal".

It recommended a number of people be referred for civil and criminal prosecution.

The findings form part of the ongoing APSC investigation into whether the public servants in question breached their responsibilities as described in the Code of Conduct.

The Code of Conduct, which is enshrined in the Public Service Act, requires public servants to act "honestly and with integrity".

It requires they maintain confidentiality and use their power and inside information appropriately.

It also forbids them from providing "false and misleading information" in the course of their work.

The APSC has not disclosed which elements of the code the four individuals are accused of breaching.

Breaching the code is not an offence, but can carry sanctions or lead to dismissal.

Another 11 individuals remain under investigation. One individual has been cleared of breaching the code.

Former Home Affairs secretary Mike Pezzullo was last year dismissed from his role after an independent investigation found he had breached the Code of Conduct on 14 occasions.....

BACKGROUND

Mediastatement on the inquiry into possible breaches of the APS Code ofConduct by Mr Michael Pezzullo AO

On 24 September 2023, the Australian Public Service Commissioner, Dr Gordon de Brouwer, received a referral from the Minister for Home Affairs, the Hon Clare O'Neil MP, after concerns were raised in the media about the Secretary of the Department of Home Affairs, Mr Michael Pezzullo AO.

In accordance with the provisions of the Public Service Act 1999, the Commissioner appointed Ms Lynelle Briggs AO to lead an independent inquiry into these matters and report to the Prime Minister.

The Inquiry was conducted under the provisions of the Public Service Act, and consistent with the principles of procedural fairness.

Ms Briggs determined that Mr Pezzullo breached the Australian Public Service Code of Conduct on at least 14 occasions in relation to 5 overarching allegations, those allegations being that Mr Pezzullo:

• used his duty, power, status or authority to seek to gain a benefit or advantage for himself,

• engaged in gossip and disrespectful critique of Ministers and public servants,

• failed to maintain confidentiality of sensitive government information,

• failed to act apolitically in his employment,

• failed to disclose a conflict of interest.

By way of sanction, Ms Briggs recommended that Mr Pezzullo’s appointment as a Secretary be terminated pursuant to section 59 of the Public Service Act.

Section 72A of the Public Service Act provides strict restrictions on the disclosure of information obtained as part of an Inquiry into possible breaches of the Code of Conduct. In addition, the Privacy Act 1988 applies to the use and disclosure of personal information obtained during an inquiry. However, given the public nature of the allegations and the importance of upholding confidence in the Australian Public Service, it is in the public interest that the overarching breach findings and the recommended sanction are made available in this case.

No further information regarding the contents of the Inquiry will be provided by the Australian Public Service Commission.

27 November 2023

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Opinion: "Those with the loudest voices do not speak for all Jews in Australia"

Sarah Schwartz and Max Elliott Kaiser writing in The Sydney Morning Herald, 6 February 2024:

Those with the loudest voices do not speak for all Jews in Australia.

Today, talk about antisemitism is everywhere - in newspapers, conversations between friends, and especially on social media. Many Jews feel scared. They are told to see antisemitism in the scarves worn in solidarity with Palestine, in the words "Free Palestine" voiced at protests, and in the stickers calling for the boycott of Israeli products.

But while reports of antisemitism have increased in Australia since Hamas' October 7 attack on Israel - as have those of anti-Palestinian racism and Islamophobia - none of these are examples of it. They are instead legitimate expressions of support for Palestinians who are facing overwhelming levels of violence and displacement.

When Australia's pro-Israel lobby groups mischaracterise these expressions as antisemitic, they produce fear and demonise Palestinians and their supporters. These accusations rely on a conflation of Jews and Israel - that any criticism of the state of Israel is seen as an attack on all Jews. This conflation reflects the view, promoted by Israel, that Jewish identity and safety worldwide is inextricable from Israel and its "security". Any criticism of Israel's use of brute force against Palestinians in the name of this security is by default deemed antisemitic.

As proud Jews who are committed to combating real racism, we know these are not the same thing. Jewish people have identities separate from the state of Israel and our cultures and practices are far older than Zionism. The truth is that the Jewish community is not a monolith. We might better speak of multiple Jewish communities with unique histories, diverse expressions of Jewishness, and - in our view increasingly - conflicting views on Israel. Jews here and around the world, particularly those with personal connections to Israel, are still reeling from the killing of more than 1100 people in Israel, the majority civilians, on October 7. Many Jews also abhor the violence Israel has since meted out to Palestinians in Gaza. More than 27,000 people have been killed, according to Gaza's health ministry, many of them children and most of them civilians, and 2 million have been displaced from their homes.

Almost 1000 Jewish people in Australia have signed an open letter condemning Israel's collective punishment of Palestinians in Gaza, calling for a ceasefire and stating that: "Our Jewish values are incompatible with the unjustified cruelty and reckless disregard for human life and dignity that the Israeli government is displaying."

A survey in June 2023 found disagreement between Jews in Australia in relation to Israel's control over Palestinians in the West Bank. Irreconcilable differences of opinion between Jews are widening, yet the broader Australian public could be forgiven for thinking all Jews agree.

This is in part because most so-called Jewish representative organisations in Australia refuse to represent this diversity of opinion between Jews and have become explicit Israel lobby groups. One of these organisations, the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, prepares a regular report on rising antisemitism in Australia.

In its December 2023 report, cited widely in the media, it brings attention to many real incidents of hate against Jews such as graffiti in November on a block of flats saying "kill jews, jews live here".

However, disgusting instances such as this are also lumped in with legitimate political expressions of solidarity with Palestinians, criticism of Israel and criticism of Zionism as a political ideology. Examples include graffiti and placards reading "Zionism = racism" and "end the Palestinian Holocaust" being considered antisemitic, as was the protest chant "intifada, intifada", which means "uprising" in Arabic.

The Israel lobby's conflation of these types of incidents has meant that claims of antisemitism are being exploited to stifle legitimate criticism of Israel's actions in the Gaza Strip and West Bank.

The Australian public now knows there is a concerted effort by organised pro-Israel lobbyists to target individuals who publicly criticise the state of Israel.

Leaked messages from WhatsApp groups reveal campaigns to target actors who wore the keffiyeh - a scarf worn in solidarity with Palestinians - for a curtain call; broadcaster Antoinette Lattouf, who reposted content on Gaza; and doctors who engaged in political action in support of healthcare workers in Gaza. We should all be concerned when political lobbying crosses over into intimidation aimed at suppressing legitimate expression in a democratic society.

The baseless weaponisation of accusations of antisemitism by various lobby groups aims to undermine the movement for a just future for Palestinians, but it also undermines the fight against antisemitism. The history and concept of antisemitism risks becoming confused and devalued amid a very real fight worldwide against genuine anti-Jewish racism and an increase in fascist activity. It will lead to real instances of antisemitism being dismissed.

We are proud of being Jewish. We are the descendants of Jews who fled violence, horror and racism. We grew up hearing stories of Holocaust survivors. For us, honouring our ancestors means fighting against racist violence wherever it appears. Doing all we can to stop Israel's overwhelming violence against Palestinian civilians, found to be a plausible case of genocide by the International Court of Justice, is an ethical imperative precisely because of our Jewishness and our histories.

We write these words knowing we will face backlash. Palestinians face the worst targeting from lobbyists. However, the state of Israel, and groups that lobby on its behalf, have no qualms about going after fellow Jews. In order to maintain that their actions are for the benefit of all Jews, they must silence and discredit Jewish dissenters.

Every Jew we know who has spoken out against Israel has faced threats, social exclusion, intimidation, campaigns for sacking or attempts to discredit them. We are called "self-hating", "Kapos", "Nazi sympathisers", or "fake Jews". Lattouf's Jewish lawyer Josh Bornstein was even called a "traiter" [sic] by a participant in the Lawyers for Israel group which advocated for the broadcaster's sacking.

We are part of a growing number of Jewish people who have spoken out against Israel's actions. Antisemitism is a real threat, but the cynical misappropriation of this term is causing unnecessary fear and shutting down critical dialogue around Israel's war. We are proud of our Jewishness, and we refuse to let those with the loudest voices speak for all Jews in Australia.

Sarah Schwartz is a human rights lawyer and lecturer at the University of Melbourne. Dr Max Elliott Kaiser is a historian, expert on antisemitism and author of Jewish Antifascism and the False Promise of Settler Colonialism.

Tweet of the Week

 

Introducing our #BirdOfTheWeek! The Eastern Whipbird is one of the most characteristic sounds of eastern Australian forests.

Check out their full bird profile here: https://t.co/dmoJxr0T1D

📽️Eastern Whipbird video by Tim Siggs pic.twitter.com/SmRdN5ANGT

— BirdLife Australia (@BirdlifeOz) February 9, 2024

 

Cartoons of the Week

Alan Moir

Mark David

David Rowe

Cathy Wilcox

Matt Golding