International Women's Day 2015 in Australia: now this is irony at its best

The Liberal National Party of Queensland (LNP) hosted its official International Women’s Day event at the Tattersalls Club, a private membership club for men since 1865.

Women have access to this club but only as partners of members. They are welcome to obtain a Partners Card, providing them with access to Club facilities and services. Partners are also welcome to bring guests to the Club, or enjoy the amenities at their own leisure.

The advertised keynote speaker at this event on 6 March 2015 was acting Parliamentary Speaker Fiona Simpson who cannot apply for membership of this club on the basis of her gender.

Other listed speakers were Federal President of the Nationals Christine Ferguson and wife of the Deputy Prime Minster Lyn Truss.

Most of the women attending this function were able to do so because the club has commercial function rooms available to non-members for corporate events, private functions or weddings and the LNP availed itself of these facilities.

This was the Australian Minister for Women, Prime Minister Tony Abbott, mockingly misleading both parliament and voters on the subject according to Hansard on 4 March 2015:

 See: http://youtu.be/z9I32hpoQeo

Mr ABBOTT (Warringah—Prime Minister) (14:54): Madam Speaker, this is just how wonderful this broad church is that I lead. Obviously, they have now broken down the last barrier, and they have made the men-only club admit women.

Government members: Hear, hear!

Mr ABBOTT: Isn't that fantastic! At last this bastion of chauvinism has admitted women. They have admitted women, and they have done it on International Women's Day because of the Liberal National Party. Good on the Liberal-National Party for smashing the glass ceiling yet again. Yet again, we are smashing the glass ceiling. I say congratulations, and thank God! Thank God that bastion of old fashioned chauvinism has finally collapsed like the walls of Jericho at the trumpet cry of the Liberal-National Party!

LNP Women vice-president Peta Simpson when questioned about the choice of venue invited ridicule by attempting to compare using these public function rooms with African-American Rosa Parks’ defiance of white supremacy in Alabama in 1955 and also saying in further defence of this choice; “But how can we celebrate international women’s day knowing that there’s not an international men’s day – and then when the men do want to have something that’s for themselves, we can’t respect it?”.

The irony of this position is noted in a nation which while expressing aspirations towards gender equality still exhibits structural disadvantage/institutional and cultural bias against women.

In Australia an estimated 1 in 6 women have experienced physical or sexual violence from a current or former partner [Australia's National Research Organisation for Women's Safety] and, in the fifty-two weeks of last year 81 women died by violence. In 2015 the count had reached 17 women by 2 March – that’s two women killed each week [Destroy the Joint 2015].

Historically and currently working women earn less per week on average than their male counterparts with official statistics showing that by November 2014 male average weekly earnings was $1,371.50 which represented a growth in males earning of est. $46 a year since November 2004, but for females average weekly earnings was the much lower $887.90 which represented a growth in female earning of less than est. $30 a year since November 2004 [http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6302.0].

The national unemployment rate for persons 20-74 years in 2012-13 was the same for both males and females, however the underemployment rate for this same age cohort was 9.0% for females and 5.1% for males [Australian Bureau of Statistics, Gender Indicators, Australia, Feb 2015].  

In addition, The Australia Institute in December 2014 stated; women account for almost half of the workforce (46 per cent), they have enjoyed only a 32 per cent share of income tax cuts dealt out since 2005. Of a cumulative total $169 billion delivered back to workers, $115 billion has gone to men, and $54 billion has gone to women…. Women earn less and stand to lose more, with 55 per cent of the government’s budget cuts set to come from the pockets of Australian women between now and 2017.

Although more females than males between 15 and 65 years of age had completed high school or its equivalent and, more females in that age group had a Bachelor degree or higher tertiary qualification in 2014 [Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2014], only 19.8% of all companies listed on the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) have women as directors and on 31 January 2015 the percentage of women on ASX 200 boards was 19.4% [Australian Institute of Company Directors, 2015]. This month it was reported that were only 23 female chairs or chief executive officers of ASX 200 companies, with the remaining 377 chair and CEO positions held by males [Perth Now, 6 March 2015].

Women are not equally represented in the public service sector either, but do fare better as the Latest data from the Australian Public Service Commission shows that women occupied 40% of Senior Executive Service positions, and 47% of Executive Level positions in the Australian Public Service in 2014. These figures are unchanged from 2013 [Australian Bureau of Statistics, Gender Indicators, Australia, Feb 2015].

Starting salaries for new university graduates show a 4.4 per cent wage gap between average annual salaries offered to men and those offered to women across 22 occupation groups, with men receiving up to $4,700 more than women [Graduate Careers Australia, June 2014].

Across Australia women continue to be significantly under-represented in parliament and executive government, comprising less than one-third of all parliamentarians and one-fifth of all ministers [Parliament of Australia, Politics and Public Administration Section, July 2014].

According to the Right Now organisation; In a 2013 survey, women account for only 20% of partners in Australian law firms. In other recent data, women account for only 20% of the bar where women barristers have shorter appearance times than their male counterparts. Women constitute 16% of the bench in the Federal Court. A 2013 Monash University gender study indicated that a female barrister making oral argument before the High Court of Australia, with a male barrister opposing, is less likely to receive the vote of a justice in the majority.

In Australia women born in 2010-2012 have a life expectation 3.4 years longer than men. However, indigenous women in the same cohort have a life expectation which is 11.3 years less than non-indigenous women and 6 years less than non-indigenous males. In 2012, almost 1,500 of the deaths of Indigenous people living in NSW, Qld, WA, SA and the NT were avoidable. After age-adjustment, the rate of avoidable deaths was 3.7 times higher for Indigenous people than for their non-Indigenous counterparts. [Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet, Mortality, 2013].

It is noted that institutional racism may be a factor in female mortality rates as the Chair of The Social Determinants of Health Alliance stated in February 2014; "When an Indigenous person is admitted to hospital, they face twice the risk of death through a coronary event than a non-Indigenous person and concerningly, Indigenous people when having a coronary event in hospital are 40 percent less likely to receive a stent* or a coronary angiplasty. ...institutional racism is resulting in Indigenous people not always receiving the care that they need from Australia's hospital system" and a spokesperson for the Australian Indigenous Doctors Association added "Whereas Aboriginal people may present to hospitals often later and sicker, the sort of treatment they might get once in hospital, is not necessarily reflect[ing] that higher level of ill health. We've got to ask some questions there and why is it that the sickest people are not necessary getting the equitable access to healthcare."

Despite there being no evidence to suggest that an increase in actual crime accounted for the prison increase, female imprisonment rates have doubled since 2004 and indigenous women appear to account for much of this increase [Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2014].

The scant data that exists on human slavery or slavery-like practices in Australia to date suggests that the majority of persons kept in slavery, servile marriage, sexual servitude and/or forced labour within this country are female. In 2009 of those identified victims suspected of being trafficked 188 were female and 21 were male.

When it comes to dissemination of information on female participation in the arts, this is the September 2013 example I offer; Stella Count shows the literary pages of Australia's newspapers have once more featured fewer books by women than by men.

I sincerely doubt that many of the Liberal and Nationals supporters who attended that luncheon at the Tattersall's Club would even be aware of the extent of female vulnerability and disadvantage in this country, because the current crop have so obviously drunk the political Kool-Aid supplied by their leader, Tony Abbott.

Tweet of the Week

On the subject of Australian Government policy changes and budget cut backflips.....

Celebrating language and song

Wildflower - Galiwin'ku

http://youtu.be/rmLVxRS_Sxs

The Abbott Government's first Intergenerational Report examined through jaundiced eyes

Peter Martin, Economics Editor of The Age newspaper observed on 3 March 2015:

The Intergenerational Report is required by law every 5 years. It assesses the long-term sustainability of the government's policies 40 years into the future. This one will take us through to 2055. It's 2 month's late, although that's not the fault of the treasury. Finance minister Mathias Cormann was keen to tell the Senate that it's a report of the government, not the treasury. It's inherently political. Sensitivities over its immigration projections (and possibly what it will say about climate change) have delayed it as government ministers have tossed drafts back and forth.

So what does the Abbott Government tell us in its first and Australia’s fourth Intergenerational Report?

Well, it tells us in those 145 pages that Australia has an economy that has had an unprecedented 23 year stretch of unbroken economic growth that is continuing today as I write.

It seems the nation also has a well-functioning health system.

Both of these admissions will come as a surprise to many because since the Coalition won government in September 2013 we have been repeatedly told that the country was facing a ‘debt and deficit disaster’ and, the health system was on the financial sick list so we needed to put our hands in our pockets to pay GPs a bit extra because government couldn’t afford to continue paying the Medicare rebate bill.

For some strange reason the federal government appears to believe that all males and females born since November 2013 have an average life expectancy at birth of 91.5 and 93.6 years today when what the Australian Bureau of Statistics actually said on 7 November 2013 was; "A boy born today could expect to live 79.9 years, while a girl could expect to live 84.3 years. For those approaching retirement age, say 65 years, males could expect to live a further 19 years and females a further 22 years". It defies belief that Joe Hockey and Mathias Cormann believe that in just on sixteen months life expectancy at birth has risen 11.6 years for males and 9.3 years for females.

The federal government also informs us that the elderly are living an inconveniently long time and, in its opinion more of them should remain at work or go back to work after retirement age because they are costing the government too much to keep alive - even at the minimum levels of income support and physical care it is willing to fund.

It tells us that workers’ average weekly wage will increase over the next forty years, but not at the rate wages have over the last forty years and government expects all workers to put shoulders to the wheel in order to be more productive – and swallow the reforms allegedly required to make them all that bit more competitive and flexible.

To that end its review of Australia’s workplace relations framework is apparently an important building block in facilitating the development of new markets, and allow businesses and the public sector to harness innovation.

The young had a national unemployment rate of 14.2% in January 2015 and will probably face a high unemployment rate into the future as it appears the only solution the Abbott Government has to date is to make applicants under 25 years of age wait six months before unemployment benefits and make them also ‘work for the dole’.  Presumably because, along with people with disabilities, young unemployed people are expected to generate gains in GDP and income growth over the next 40 years.

By 2055 the Abbott Government thinks that government will only need to spend an extra $400 of its own money per student to keep primary, high school and tertiary education in tip top shape.

It expects that federal government won’t be spending more money in forty years’ time on defence materiel than it does today.

Infrastructure is good to have and the nation needs MOAR & MOAR, but the Abbott Government is not quite sure how we are going to get all those roads, tunnels, by-passes, bridges, railway lines and ports it is lusting after - except perhaps by 'efficiently' selling off some which exist already to its rich mates and the foreign power best new friends of Tony Abbott.

The Abbott Government has included a handy little graph at Page 35 which shows that by 30 June 2014 its own spending spree had increased the underlying cash balance and output gap deficit to around 3% and 1.75% of GDP respectively.

Apparently the nation needs strong economic growth and a sustainable budget before it can tackle climate change. Part of any effort to mitigate those pesky adverse impacts caused by global warming is to take a proverbial broom to the countryside – because we need “Clean land” and “Clean air”– and one of the best ways to achieve that is to continue hacking away at ‘green tape’ thereby weakening the community’s ability to protect the environment.

Confident that it will get its data retention legislation through parliament the Abbott Government intends to deliver government services digitally, thereby making the forthcoming  mass surveillance of the populace as detailed as possible. Australia is about to become a hackers Nirvana sometime before 2055 and, people living in remote and rural regions will probably still face a level of difficulty in reliably accessing the Internet and therefore have intermittent problems accessing these same government services.

As for net migration, it is expected to be an est. 215,000 people per annum from 2018 onwards and, Australia’s population is predicted to be 39.7 million in 40 years’ time. Which must leave local governments across the country wondering where they are collectively going to put around 427,027 extra residents each year.

The bottom line appears to be that if Australia wants a bright and prosperous future, then every one of the Abbott Government’s punitive policies and budget cuts, rejected by voters and the Senate to date, need to be implemented.

Now who didn’t see that coming?

Mr. Eleventy puts his foot in it again

The Guardian 2 March 2015:

Last Thursday, during Question Time, Joe Hockey was asked to “outline how the government is building jobs, growth and opportunity and how will this assist all Australians.” Bizarrely, he chose to respond by suggesting “there has been more good news today” in reference “average weekly earnings” despite Australians’ earnings growing by less now than they have for over 20 years.

In delivering the “good news” Hockey told parliament that “the average wage in Australia has now increased to $76,800 a year. It increased by 2.8% this year”. He noted that this meant the average wage for Australians “works out at $1,476.30 a week”.

Firstly, Hockey got a bit confused. The 2.8% growth referred to the original data, while the $1,476.30 referred to the trend data – which only grew by 2.7%. He was referring to full-time employment only, not the average earnings of all workers – that is just $1,128.90 a week.

But what is worse is the treasurer’s suggestion that these growth figures were in any way “good news”.

They were, in fact, terrible.

The 2.8% growth (or 2.7%, to use the trend data) was the second worst annual growth going back to 1994. And the worst result occurred in the 12 months to May 2014 which saw just 2.4% growth…

Of course even these corrected November 2014 figures hide the fact that while average weekly earnings for males (total earnings all industries) was $1,371.50 which represented a growth in males earning of est. $46 a year since November 2004, for females average weekly earnings (total earnings all industries) was the much lower $887.90 which represented a growth in female earning of less than est. $30 a year since November 2004.

In New South Wales in November 2014 total weekly cash earnings for males was $1,404.90 and for females $944.10, figures which are higher than every state except West Australia for that period.

See http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/6302.0 for more information.

Time to keep track of what the boss and the banks want to do with your super

Medianet Release 2 March 2015:

BANKS OFFER INCENTIVES TO EMPLOYERS TO GAIN ACCESS TO EMPLOYEE SUPER

New research indicates that banks appear to be offering business bundling deals to employers, which could result in employees being switched into superannuation funds irrespective of the impact on their net returns and long term retirement savings.

A survey of 550 small and medium businesses conducted by UMR has produced some deeply concerning findings:

* 26% of employers surveyed said that a major bank had approached them about transferring their employees’ default superannuation to the bank’s own retail super fund in the last year.

* Just under half those approached say their bank offered them benefits to change funds.

* The most common offers made by the banks involved a direct benefit to the business rather than employees, such as discounts on business banking and insurance products. Some employers report being offered tickets to sporting events.

* 33% of employers offered benefits say they were persuaded to switch to a super fund promoted by their bank, and many more (57%) report that they are still considering switching.

* Two banks in particular appear to be the most active in approaching employers about switching default super fund arrangements and recommending their own fund.

“UMR’s employer survey gives rise to serious questions about the banks’ behaviour. It appears they are approaching employers and offering deals to bundle business banking services with employee default superannuation,” said David Whiteley, Chief Executive of Industry Super Australia.

"This could result in employees’ super contributions being paid into bank-owned super funds, which have on average historically produced lower net returns to their members.”

Were this the case, employees could retire with lower savings or feel compelled to commit more of their wages to super, or work longer, perhaps past 70, before they achieve a sufficient level of retirement income.

“In the best interests’ of employees, the law should be changed to prohibit a bank-owned super fund from providing default super services where it is also the provider of business banking services to the employer,“ said Mr. Whiteley.

“The research also reinforces the need for Australia’s super system to provide employers with a strong safety net of high performing funds to choose from, which have been assessed for quality by the Fair Work Commission. For the vast majority of Australians who leave it to their employer choose a fund for them, this process promotes consumer confidence in the system which safeguards Australia's retirement savings.

“However, the banks are lobbying the government to scrap the safety net. This would suit their vertically integrated business model and reduce competition by creating barriers to entry for super funds not owned by the banks,” he said. 

“It would also remove consumer protection for around eight million Australians who don’t choose their own super fund. Last year the banks unsuccessfully tried to remove consumer protections for Australians needing financial advice, now they are attempting to do the same with superannuation.

“Encouragingly, the research also found that most employers want to do the right thing by their employees,” said Mr. Whiteley.

“Fees and returns rank first and second as their most important considerations when selecting a default superannuation fund for their workers.”

Get the full report here.