Friday, 21 December 2018
Nationals MP Andrew Broad behaves badly, then sinks into oblivion
Nationals MP for Mallee Andrew John Broad came into the Australian Parliament as part of the Abbott Coalition Government in 2013 and, continued as a backbencher in the Turnbull Coalition Government.
He became Assistant Minister to the Deputy Prime Minister in the Morrison Coalition Government on 28 August 2018.
So one could argue that he became a member of the House of Representatives and continued to be one under the leadership of prime ministers not known for a deep understanding of political or personal ethics and, so lacked guidance.
On the other hand one could surmise that his entry into conservative politics was a matter of like being naturally drawn to like.
Readers can make up their own minds about forty-three year old Andrew "James Bond" Broad, son of Christian missionaries and winner of the 2016 Christian Values Award - a man who allegedly proudly boasted that he knows how to "ride a horse, fly a plane & f*ck my woman".
On 17 December 2018 Broad resigned from the front bench due to the circumstances surrounding this boast and questions concerning who paid his expenses for a Hong Kong trip.
It would appear that a private entity ( perhaps even the man himself) paid for Broad's flight to and from Hong Kong and accommodation, but he was happy to stick taxpayers with the cost of connecting flights in Australia until he was caught out by the media - wining and dining an online escort “Sweet Sophia Rose” while away from his wife.
This was allegedly not the first attempt at online dalliance.
By 18 December Broad was the subject of a barrage of sexual misconduct allegations....with reports at least three other women have complained to the National Party about his behaviour over the past twelve months.
Before noon that day he had announced he will not be standing for re-election in May 2019.
I rather think Andrew has singlehandedly sunk Prime Minster Scott Morrison's planned values-based election campaign.
If Morrison mentions the values held by himself and his Coalition government voters are likely to openly laugh remembering Andrew and Barnaby.
Thursday, 20 December 2018
The ethics or otherwise of Liberal Party funding
The Australian, 18 December 2018:
Image: Twitter |
Promotional material for
the expo also touted stalls for government agencies, including Centrelink and the
Australian Electoral Commission, although there is no evidence they were
charged.
The expo was not billed
as a political fundraiser.
Mr Robert yesterday
conceded he had instructed exhibitors to pay their fees into the LNP campaign
account, which were declared as donations.
“Under electoral
guidelines, we couldn’t set up a different account for the event so the money
had to be paid into the LNP campaign account, and yes, they were declared as
donations,’’ he said.
Federal Assistant Treasurer and Liberal MP for Fadden Stuart Robert insists that the entire expo attended by an est. 10,000 people and all its events ran at a loss, therefore none of the $300,000 in donations is capable of being used in an election campaign.
Given Robert's party fund raising history I suspect that assertion requires a fact check.
He has not been alone in running senior's expos.
Liberal MP for Bonner Ron Vasta also held a senior's expo in November 2018, an event which had fifty stall holders. One has to wonder if they paid a fee for their expo sites which also went into Liberal Party coffers.
Indeed, these expos were quite popular with Liberal MPs. Minister for Home Affairs and Liberal MP for Dickson Peter Dutton held one on 30-31 August this year. As did Liberal MP for Forde Bert Van Manen and Liberal MP for Moncrieff Steve Ciobo in their electorates in September 2017.
PEOPLE POWER: Grafton Loop of the Knitting Nannas six years old and still going strong
The Grafton Loop of the Knitting Nannas Against Gas was officially launched six years ago on 19 October 2012.
The local nannas first began knitting in peaceful opposition to coal seam gas exploration and mining in the early days of the Glenugie blockade of a Metgasgo CSG test drill site in the Clarence Valley.
As part of the wider NSW Northern Rivers movement they helped keep the north-east "Gasfield Free!"
The Grafton Loop continues to be active on environmental issues and regularly hold knit-ins outside local state and federal MPs electoral offices.
This is the Grafton Loop on 13 December 2018 outside Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan's office, accompanied by "Nanna Kerry", a mascot veteran of mining protests in south-east Queensland.
This letter was sent to Kevin Hogan on the same day.....
Letter to Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan from Grafton Loop of the Knitting Nannas Against Gas, NSW Austr... by clarencegirl on Scribd
https://www.scribd.com/document/395886572/Letter-to-Nationals-MP-for-Page-Kevin-Hogan-from-Grafton-Loop-of-the-Knitting-Nannas-Against-Gas-NSW-AustraliaWay to go, Nannas!
Labels:
activists,
Clarence Valley,
coal,
Coal Seam Gas,
people power
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.
Labels:
climate change,
people power,
youth
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 issues include the
massive Cambridge Analytica scandal and a security breach that affected nearly 30 million users.
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......
Labels:
data breach,
ethics,
Facebook,
fake news,
Social media
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...........
Liberal Party of Australia ... by on Scribd
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.
The new Commonwealth Integrity Commission is expected to have an annual budget of around $30 million. A sum which reflects its toothless status.
BACKGROUND
Commonwealth
Integrity Commission — proposed reforms, December 2018, excerpts:
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….
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.......
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.......
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)