Media Entertainment & Arts Alliance: "This has been a dire 12 months for the state of press freedom in Australia"

Forward to the Media Entertainment & Arts Alliance (MEAA) 2015 Australian Press Freedom Report:

This has been a dire 12 months for the state of press freedom in Australia — for journalists, for the communities we serve and for sources that trust us to tell their stories.

On October 30 last year, Attorney-General George Brandis admitted that the controversial section 35P of the Government’s first tranche of national security laws was written with the aim of targeting whistleblowers. “It was primarily, in fact, to deal with a Snowden-type situation,” he said. Whistleblower Edward Snowden had worked with journalists to reveal US government officials had routinely and deliberately broken the law. [1]

On February 27 this year, the report of Parliament’s Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security revealed that targeting whistleblowers was one of the aims of its metadata retention scheme. Recommendation 27 of the committee’s report said journalists’ metadata would be accessed “for the purpose of determining the identity of a journalist’s sources”.

Public interest journalism relies on whistleblowers, the confidential sources that provide crucial information to journalists — sometimes placing both at great risk.

It is a well-known ethical principle of journalism that journalists do not reveal their confidential sources. It’s a principle that is vigorously defended because it is the only way many vital stories in the public interest can ever be told. Whistleblowers turn to journalists to help expose misconduct, illegality, fraud, threats to health and safety, and corruption. Our communities are the better for their courageous efforts to ensure the public’s right to know.

If the identity of whistleblowers can be revealed then that has a chilling effect on public interest journalism; sources needing anonymity cannot rely on their contact with a journalist being kept secret. When that happens, we all lose.

The politicians who ignored press freedom concerns about the raft of national security laws failed to understand how confidential sources and public interest journalism are linked.

If you are going after whistleblowers, you are going after journalism.

And even when they did register the concerns for press freedom, their solutions failed miserably. Take the so-called “safeguard” of journalist information warrants introduced as an amendment to the data retention scheme. The journalist information warrant will operate in secret on pain of a two-year jail term. It relies on “public interest advocates” appointed by the government. It will still allow a journalists’ metadata to be accessed to identify a journalist’s sources, and the journalist and their media organisation will never know access was granted. Nor will they be able to argue the public interest in protecting the identity of a whistleblower.

In short, the three tranches of national security legislation passed by the Parliament represent a colossal failure to stand up for press freedom, freedom of expression, privacy, freedom to access information and the public’s right to know.

As this 2015 report into the state of press freedom in Australia shows, press freedom has been under assault in many other areas. South Australia continues to reject attempts to introduce a shield law, thus exposing journalists throughout Australia to the prospect of plaintiffs going “jurisdiction shopping”.

Tasmania briefly considered breaking away from the uniform national defamation scheme to reintroduce the prospect of corporations suing for damages.

Freedom of information law reform continues to linger in limbo due to successive governments’ inaction and a lack of courage in embracing sensible remedies that ensure the public can benefit from truly open government.

And while we are all delighted at the release and homecoming of Peter Greste from his Cairo prison, the re-trial of Peter and his colleagues goes on. MEAA is also awaiting the fate of Australian journalist Alan Morison who faces up to seven years in a Thai jail for reprinting a paragraph from a Reuters news report.

This year marks the 40th anniversary of the murder of our colleagues Brian Peters, Malcolm Rennie, Tony Stewart, Gary Cunningham and Greg Shackleton in Balibo and Roger East in Dili in East Timor. MEAA is disappointed that the AFP spent five years on examining these war crimes only to abandon their investigation without seeking any co-operation from Indonesia and “without any interaction with their counterparts, the Indonesian National Police. The result is that impunity has triumphed and the killers of the Balibo Five and Roger East have literally got away with murder.

It can only be hoped that over the coming year, greater effort will be made by governments, politicians, government agencies and those who like to talk about championing press freedom to turn away from repressing freedom of expression and actually respect and promote it.

Paul Murphy
CEO MEAA

Brief background on Australian journalist Alan Morison here.

Abbott Government's mindless obeisance to foreign-owned multinational commercial fishing corporations has had the inevitable result

The 100% Dutch-owned subsidiary of Parlevliet & Van der Plas Beheer B.V. the Australian registered Seafish Tasmania and its super trawler hired from the parent company, the now rebranded Geelong Star, have been found to have committed the inevitable environmental crime associated with large factory ships – killing prohibited species as part of their by-catch.

The Abbott Government would have been well aware that classifying commercial fishing trawlers on length of vessel and not freezer storage capacity would lead to adverse environmental impacts but, in its mindless rejection of any measure put in place by the former federal Labor government, Tony Abbott & Co have shown that far-right ideology is more important that preserving sustainable food resources and biodiversity of marine life for the benefit of present and future Australian citizens.

The Guardian, 3 May 2015:

The Australian environment minister, Greg Hunt, has condemned as “unacceptable and outrageous” the killing of a dozen dolphins and seals by a factory fishing trawler.

The Geelong Star, a ship that environmental groups and some MPs wanted banned from fishing Australian waters, voluntarily returned to its home port after catching four dolphins and two seals on its second local outing.

The Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) had previously said the ship would face stricter controls after it also caught and killed four dolphins and two seals in its nets on its first trip.

Hunt released a statement on Sunday saying he was “absolutely appalled” by the news, ABC reported.

Hunt said he would write to the AFMA and to Tasmanian senator Richard Colbeck, the parliamentary secretary for fisheries and a strong defender of the trawler’s methods.

The Geelong Star has factory freezer capabilities but escapes a permanent ban on so-called super trawlers because at 95 metres it is under the 130-metre size limit.

Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson said the government should cancel the trawler’s fishing licence and management plan immediately.

“They’ve failed twice. The regulator has failed in its job to protect dolphins and seals and who knows whatever other marine life and the boat needs to go home,” he told ABC.

Colbeck released his own statement saying the further deaths of marine mammals was “very bad news and is not welcomed by anyone”.

He said the decision of operators Seafish Tasmania to “voluntarily return to port is appreciated”….

Basic building blocks of the Australian superannuation rort

Superannuation is generally taxed more concessionally than some other forms of saving, such as bank deposits, in recognition of the fact that superannuation saving cannot be accessed until retirement.

 * Pre-tax contributions of up to $30,000 pa ($35,000 for those aged 50 or over) into superannuation funds are taxed at a flat rate of 15 per cent in the fund.

 * It is also possible to make post-tax contributions of up to $180,000 per annum.

 * Superannuation fund earnings in the accumulation phase are taxed at 15 per cent, while superannuation fund assets that support a retirement income stream are tax exempt.

 * Most superannuation benefits to those aged over 60 are tax exempt. [Intergenerational Report 2015]

The quote above lays out the basic outline of concessional arrangements attached to the national mandatory superannuation scheme.

How does it work in real life?

In the 2012-13 financial year 9.3 million employers contributed $54 billion to their employees' superannuation funds and 1.7 million employees contributed $27.8 billion to their superannuation funds.

Of these 1.7 million employees, 571,575 individuals earn less than $37,001 a year. Currently the federal government contributes an annual lump sum payment (equal to 15 per cent of an individual's annual superannuation contributions) to a low income employee's super fund. However, from 1 July 2017 the lump sum payment will cease and the annual superannuation contributions of these same employees will be taxed at the rate of 15 per cent.

In 2012-13 there were also 183,975 non-employee individuals (or individuals receiving only a small proportion of income from work as an employee), with income derived from a personal business/self-employment, investments, government pensions/allowances, super, partnership/trust distributions, and/or a foreign source, who made personal superannuation contributions totalling $2.9 billion. These super contributions could be claimed as tax deductions.

Of these ‘non-employees’, 26,980 had annual taxable incomes of over $180,000 and made personal superannuation contributions totalling $603.07 million. Which equates to income of $22,352 per person per annum on which little or no tax is paid.

When will the Abbott Government address the imbalance in the national superannuation scheme, where the working poor are penalised and wealthy rewarded for their participation?

Some of Australia's richer citizens in 2012-13, not content with legally rorting the superannuation scheme, took their sense of entitlement to levels undreamed of by ordinary workers, as this observation in The Sydney Morning Herald on 30 April 2015 demonstrates:

Fifty-five of Australia's highest earners paid no income tax at all during 2012-13, not even the Medicare levy.

All earning at least $1 million, they managed to write their taxable incomes down to below the $18,200 tax-free threshold, although for most the exercise was expensive.

Tax statistics released Wednesday reveal that 40 of them claimed an extraordinary $42.5 million for the "cost of managing tax affairs" meaning they each paid an average of $1 million to an adviser prepared to help to bring down their taxable income, which is itself a tax deduction.

Between them they reported earning $129.5 million, an average of $2.3 million. By the time their accountants had finished with them they reported losing a combined $12.8 million.

The implausibility of someone earning $2.3 million and paying half of it to a tax adviser suggests some may be understating​ their earnings.

A tax office spokeswoman said there were "legitimate reasons why a wealthy taxpayer might not pay tax in a particular financial year".

These included tax losses through poor business performance, tax losses in previous years which could be carried forward indefinitely and dividend imputation credits.

She said the majority of wealthy Australians paid the right amount of tax.

Most of the 55 were either ungenerous or modest when it came to giving, claiming nothing for gifts. However 10 of the 55 gave between them $10.4 million, also suggesting their incomes were higher than reported. The gifts may not have all gone to charities. The Tax Office also allows deductions for gifts to political parties.

Fifteen were unsuccessful in business, losing $2.7 million between them. They carried over previous losses of $22.5 million.

They were more successful when it came to investing, receiving $8.8 million between them in so-called 'franked' dividends, and only $839,000 in unfranked dividends. Franked dividends allow the recipients to cut their taxable incomes to take account of company tax already paid.

They were also surprisingly successful landlords. Whereas 1.3 million Australian landlords claimed between them losses of $12 billion, the 15 of the 55 millionaires who rented out properties made a combined $1.6 million dollars……

Australian Prime Minister Abbott nine days before Budget Night 2015

Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott

It is looking suspiciously like childcare subsidies are only guaranteed long enough to take the Abbott Government through the next federal election campaign and, those older Australians whose sole income is the age pension will still be (perhaps somewhat more creatively) diddled out of adequate annual pension rises.

Of course, being Abbott, the means-tested childcare-preschool subsidy will now be paid directly to the business operating the centre and comes with an activity test for the child's mother. Show us you are working/training/studying or your child misses out.

Extract from Joint Doorstop Interview, Jordan Springs, Western Sydney on 3 May 2015:

QUESTION:

Prime Minister, why is the funding for preschools only for the next two years?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, we want to ensure that there is certainty going forward. Obviously, we have a federation reform whitepaper and that will look at the question of who is going to take primary responsibility for preschool going forward. The important thing, as far as this Government is concerned, is that every Australian four year old should have access to preschool and we are ensuring that for the next two years, that will be the case, and the difference between this Government and our predecessor is that our predecessor government made the commitment that everyone should have access – but it didn't make the money available. It wasn't in the contingency reserve. The money wasn't in the forward estimates. We have provided the money to ensure that every Australian four year old will continue to get a guarantee of access to preschool.

QUESTION:

In terms of changes to the childcare subsidies, why is the Government moving to give the subsidies to childcare providers and how will that make families better off?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, what we want to do is to ensure that childcare is affordable and accessible. We want to have a better childcare system. We’ve made this commitment to the Australian people at the election. We said that, first of all, we'd have a Productivity Commission report and then we would put the appropriate policy in place to implement the recommendations of the Productivity Commission. Now, we've taken those recommendations. We've subjected them to pretty fair consultation and scrutiny and we'll have some very good announcements to make in the Budget which I think the Australian people will welcome.

QUESTION:

Why do parents earning over $250,000 still qualify for a subsidy under this plan?

PRIME MINISTER:

Well, I'm not going to get into the detail of what will be in our package, but I do want to say that it is important that childcare is seen not as welfare but as a way of strengthening our economy, because the more people we can get who are contributing, well, the better for everyone. The more people that we can have participating in the economy, if that's their choice, the better for everyone because, obviously, there's the fulfilment which comes from being able to combine work and family, and then there's the general strengthening of the economy that you get when you have as many people as possible in the workforce. So, I think it is a very good announcement that we'll be making soon and it is going to enhance the quality of our society as well as the strength of our economy.

QUESTION:

In terms of the pension, why you have abandoned those changes to the pension indexation?

PRIME MINISTER:

I’m not going to comment on what is just speculation. You wouldn't expect me to comment on pre-Budget speculation, except to say that I’m absolutely determined that the measures in this Budget will be responsible and fair. That's the thing about this Budget: I am absolutely convinced that on Budget night it will be seen as responsible, measured and fair. It is a Budget which is going to deliver jobs, growth and opportunity. It's a Budget which is going to make Australians feel more optimistic and confident about their future. We are a great country. We have fundamental strengths. Yes, our economy was damaged by six years of debt and deficit under Labor and in some respects it is a long hard road back, but we are well and truly embarked on the road back. Our country is coming back. Our economy is strengthening and I think people will be more confident and optimistic on Budget night.

* Photograph of Tony Abbott found at Google Images

Another step down the path to fascism in Abbott's Australia

In Abbott’s Australia indirect government control of media and investigative journalists - through fear of arrest, trial and gaol sentence – is becoming entrenched through federal legislation.

The Guardian 27 April 2015:

Journalists who report on serious wrongdoing by Australian intelligence officers may still face prosecution under new national security laws, according to the commonwealth director of public prosecutions (CDPP).

Australia’s acting independent national security legislation monitor, Roger Gyles QC, is considering the impact of a new section inserted into the Asio Act in 2014 – section 35P – which would criminalise disclosure of information that relates to a “special intelligence operation”.

Gyles was scheduled to hold hearings on Monday as part of his inquiry into the laws, which were passed by the federal parliament with Labor’s support in 2014.

The new section has sparked concerns among news organisations, human rights groups and some opposition politicians. Journalists and whistleblowers may face jail for up to 10 years if they breach the disclosure offence.

There is no public interest consideration or defence that would allow a journalist to report on intelligence matters. But for a prosecution to be initiated by the CDPP, a public interest test must still be applied. The federal government relied in part on this check to reassure journalists who were critical of the new laws.

Unusually, the CDPP outlines two hypothetical scenarios that reporters might be placed in to consider whether it would proceed with a prosecution in a submission to Gyles’s inquiry.

In one scenario a journalist receives information about “serious wrongdoing by a commonwealth officer in the course of a special intelligence operation”. The journalist contacts Asio, which refuses to confirm or deny whether a special intelligence operation is under way, and eventually the journalist publishes the information.

While the CDPP indicates the public interest considerations would not favour a prosecution, it indicates that it might still consider the possibility.

“This scenario may well be one in which the public interest considerations either favour no prosecution taking place, or are ‘finely balanced’. As stated above the matters that will be taken into account in assessing whether or not a prosecution is in the public interest will be different in every matter,” the CDPP submission said.

The admission is likely to raise further concerns about the potential chilling effect the disclosure laws could have on the media.

ABC The Drum 17 March 2015:

The Coalition's push to save and search all of our metadata for at least two years will have a chilling effect on press freedom.

Journalists' sources will be compromised by metadata collection. Without the ability to interact with confidential sources without the government finding out, journalists may as well give the game away.

Even with the yet-unseen government amendments proposed yesterday, after negotiations with the Opposition, Australia is going in the opposite direction of our two closest allies the United States and the UK.

Requiring a warrant before searching journalists' metadata sounds like a modicum of protection. The public discussion around it indicates it will just be a "tick and flick" approach and won't give journalists or media organisations the right to argue their case.

The warrants will be obtained in secret and media organisations will be none the wiser.

Anzackery: ignorant flag wavers shouting down Australia's genuine and complex military, political and social history

Anzackery ~ n. 1. nationalistic, laudatory and distorted portrayals of Anzac history with little regard to accuracy or context;  2. hyperbolic rhetoric extolling the supposed place of Anzac in history; 3. jingoistic mythology or praise concerning Anzac exploits, usually at the derogatory expense of allied or enemy combatants; 4. shameless exploitation of Anzac commemoration and sentiment for commercial, political or authorial gain. 5. fixation on inaccurate or actual Anzac history at the expense of considering Australia’s current and future strategic security needs. [Draft definition produced by defence lobby group Australia Defence Association]

This was Australian Communications Minister Malcolm Bligh Turnbull venting on Twitter before contacting SBS management to complain about one of its sports journalists:

Unfortunately for Mr. Turnbull, uncomfortable history is not that easily airbrushed away.

This was the type of behaviour that the journalist was alluding to when he wrote about summary execution and rape in two of his five ANZAC Day tweets…..

World War Two Australian newsreel exultant admission that strafing of Japanese survivors was widespread in the Battle of the Bismarck Sea at approx.1:23 minutes and 5:23 minutes, with images of Australian airmen killing Japanese soldiers and/or sailors adrift in a small lifeboat at approx. 5:36 minutes:

https://youtu.be/azanISsx19c

For the next several days, American and Australian airmen returned to the sight of the battle, systematically prowling the seas in search of Japanese survivors. As a coup de grâce, Kenney ordered his aircrew to strafe Japanese lifeboats and rafts. He euphemistically called these missions "mopping up" operations. A March 20, 1943, secret report proudly proclaimed, "The slaughter continued till nightfall. If any survivors were permitted to slip by our strafing aircraft, they were a minimum of 30 miles from land, in water thickly infested by man-eating sharks." Time after time, aircrew reported messages similar to the following: "Sighted, barge consisting of 200 survivors. Have finished attack. No survivors." [http://www.historynet.com/battle-of-the-bismarck-sea.htm#sthash.WYKrkJGC.dpuf]

The killing of unarmed, sleeping, sick or wounded Japanese was common. Although official pressure was put on troops to take prisoners, the Australian front-line soldiers - like their American counterparts - had little desire to do so. [Australian War Memorial, 2015, symposium document]

[Extract from the war diary of Australian Second AIF soldier Eddie Allan Stanton in Richard J. Aldrich,  2014, The Faraway War: Personal Diaries Of The Second World War In Asia And The Pacific]

I stood beside a bed in hospital. On it lay a girl, unconscious, her long, black hair in wild tumult on the pillow. A doctor and two nurses were working to revive her. An hour before she had been raped by twenty soldiers. We found her where they had left her, on a piece of waste land. The hospital was in Hiroshima. The girl was Japanese. The soldiers were Australians. The moaning and wailing had ceased and she was quiet now. The tortured tension on her face had slipped away, and the soft brown skin was smooth and unwrinkled, stained with tears like the face of a child that has cried herself to sleep…..

This was the first time it happened. But since then I had become a monotonously regular visitor to the hospital, always bringing with me a victim of the Yabanjin  - the barbarians – as they began to call the Australians.   [Extract from the memoirs of former Australian interpreter & Second AIF soldier with the British Commonwealth Occupation Force (BCOF) in Japan, Allan Stephen Clifton writing as Carter, 1950, Time of Fallen Blossoms, p 86]

Ending of the Preface to Time of Fallen Blossoms

Royal Commission warns woman Tony Abbott called "honest", "credible" and "heroic" that she may have to be examined further over alleged wrongdoing

Back in 2012 Australian Prime Minister (then Coalition Opposition Leader) Tony Abbott described then Secretary of the Health Services Union, Kathy Jackson, as honest, credible and heroic because her war with political adversaries was embarrassing the Labor Party.

Since then widespread allegations of fraud and theft have surfaced in relation to Ms. Jackson, as well as reports of other unusual financial arrangements.

So it is no wonder that The Australian reported on 27 April 2015 that:

Royal commissioner Dyson Heydon QC has warned his inquiry is far from finished with Kathy Jackson, saying she will have to demonstrate strong ­reasons why her tenure at the Health Services Union should not be examined further.

Reopening the royal commission investigating trade union governance and corruption yesterday, Mr Heydon said he was not convinced by arguments that he should refrain from making findings about the former HSU ­nat­ional secretary while the union pursued her in civil proceedings. The union’s new leadership has also referred allegations against her to Victoria Police.

“It must be stressed that the ­issues affecting Ms Jackson should be dealt with, unless good cause is shown for a contrary course,” Mr Heydon said.

“The desirability of dealing with some or all of the issues ­affecting Ms Jackson is something to be considered later this year. It may be necessary to debate the matter, for the submissions of Ms Jackson’s solicitor ­opposed that course.”

Jeremy Stoljar SC, counsel ­assisting the royal commission, last year recommended criminal charges against Ms Jackson for submitting a “false claim” when she negotiated a $250,000 payment from Melbourne’s Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre for the HSU after a dispute over workers’ back pay, but Mr Heydon held off making findings about this in his interim report.

He said yesterday that it was more convenient to deal with ­issues surrounding Ms Jackson’s conduct in one go in his final ­report, rather than separating them too soon.

The HSU’s case against Ms Jackson is due to be heard in the Federal Court in June…….

Now I've heard everything! Liberal MP blames Labor for his own party's continuing refusal to support same-sex marriage

Just when I thought the Liberal Party of Australia couldn’t possibly take its lack of responsibility for its own political actions to an even more bizarre level, The Sydney Morning Herald on 27 April 2015 published a bizarre claim by one Liberal MP that Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s refusal to allow members of the parliamentary Liberal Party a conscience vote on any bill relating to same-sex marriage is actually all the fault of the dastardly Australian Labor Party:

Deputy Labor leader Tanya Plibersek has "wrecked" progress within the Liberal Party towards a conscience vote on same-sex marriage, the Liberal Party's first openly gay federal parliamentarian says.

Dean Smith - a conservative senator from WA who recently revealed he now supports same-sex marriage - said he felt "personally disappointed" by Ms Plibersek's decision to push for a binding Labor vote on the issue at the party's national conference in July.

"If the ALP was to adopt a binding vote on same-sex marriage then the issue of a conscience vote in the Liberal Party is dead," Senator Smith told Fairfax Media.

"Conservatives who oppose same-sex marriage and a conscience vote will be sitting pretty. Tanya Plibersek will be the first line in their argument.

"This has put the cause back and she needs to explain herself to same-sex marriage proponents.

"There has been a slow and cautious approach to achieving a conscience vote and she has wrecked that."

Senator Smith said he suspected Ms Plibersek's position was more about internal Labor politics than advancing the cause of same-sex marriage. 

Labor's platform currently supports same-sex marriage but does not make it compulsory for Labor MPs to support it in a parliamentary vote. Opposition Leader Bill Shorten is on the record as a supporter of a conscience vote on the issue. 

The fact that Labor has allowed its parliamentarians a conscience vote has been one of the primary arguments of those lobbying for the Liberal Party to overturn its binding opposition to gay marriage.

Liberal politicians have traditionally prided themselves as having more freedom to vote according to their conscience than Labor politicians, who risk expulsion from the party for crossing the floor.

"I have always been distrustful of the Left on this issue and now my personal fears have been realised," Senator Smith said. 

A spokesman said Ms Plibersek would not comment on internal Liberal Party issues. Earlier she said Labor should adopt a binding vote on the issue because same-sex marriage is an issue of legal discrimination, not conscience……

We'll see what NSW National Party MPs are made of as a party member pushes for Megasco to commence drilling for tight gas on one of his farms

Northern Rivers communities and Bentley in particular need to keep a sharp eye on National Party MPs, particularly those with electorates on the North Coast, as it appears that former Lismore City councillor National Party member Peter Graham may be trying to play the political mates card in order to activate the terms of his access agreement with coal seam & tight gas miner Metgasco Limited.

Echo Netdaily 27 April 2015:

A Bentley landowner is hoping the state government will support any moves by gas mining company Metgasco to begin exploring for gas on his property.

Farmer Peter Graham, a former Lismore city councillor, signed an access agreement with Metgasco in January 2012, which covered his family’s land at Bentley.

Before any drilling could take place, thousands of protestors set up camp on land adjacent to the Graham’s property, vowing to stop any drill rigs from entering.

With reports of up 800 police set to ‘break’ the Bentley blockade, the state government announced that it was suspending Metgasco’s drilling license.

Last week, however, the NSW Supreme Court overturned that decision, describing it as unlawful.

Now Mr Graham wants Metgasco to get on with the job, arguing NSW Premier Mike Baird was supportive of the industry.

‘Throughout the state election both Labor and the Greens were saying that Mike Baird was supportive so I assume that support is still there,” Mr Graham told ABC radio.

He rejected claims that there was no gas shortage, saying NSW was buying gas from Queensland instead of developing a local industry.

Mr Graham said he was concerned that local Federal National MP Kevin Hogan and state National MP Chris Galaptis had spoken out against the industry.

‘It does concern me and I have to talk to my National Party friends.

‘I need to sit down and talk with them, and the industry needs to sit down and talk with them,’ he said......

Only an Aussie would have this last word.....

Oh, would that it were true! :-D

The Sydney Morning Herald 25 April 2015:

GAG OF THE WEEK

I know it. You know it. It really was a dark and stormy night. And it was just Tuesday last. Off our east coast, two flashing lights are coming closer and closer, each signalling in Morse code as radio contact can't be established, with the static from the lightning.

First flashing light: "Please change your direction fifteen degrees to north to avoid a collision."

Second flashing light: "Highly recommend you divert your course fifteen degrees to south to avoid a collision."

First flashing light: "This is the captain of a US Navy ship. I say again, divert your course."

Second flashing light: "No. I say again, you divert your course."

First flashing light: "This is Admiral William Saunders III of the aircraft-carrier Enterprise. We are the largest warship of the US Navy. I command that you divert your course now or face the consequences."

Second flashing light: "This is Joe, the keeper of the Barrenjoey lighthouse. Your call."

Twitter: @Peter_Fitz

An estimated 650,000 Australians are diddled by their boss. Time to ask your employers for proof that they are contributing to a super fund in your name?

The Sydney Morning Herald 27 April 2015:

By law, employers have to contribute 9.5 per cent of an employee's salary into their super fund.

However, a report in October by Tria Investment Partners found employer non-compliance amounted to $1.3 billion a year. Those affected by companies that did not allocate a super contribution were, on average, $3750 a year out of pocket, the report found.

In total, $2.5 billion is lost each year, including through the cash economy, sham contracting and businesses that go bust owing employees.

It estimates that 650,000 Australians are diddled by their boss. The worst industries for non-compliance are property services, mining, hospitality and manufacturing.

The report found that a 25-year-old whose super contributions were not paid for five years would lose 14 per cent of their total retirement fund because of compounding factors…..

About $200 million a year is lost by workers at businesses that go into insolvency.

However, Tax Office officials conceded last year that it was often "uneconomical" to chase small, individual amounts.

Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia chief executive Pauline Vamos said that was "disturbing" because the money owed was mainly to low-income earners.

Australian Taxation Office (ATO) page retrieved 27 April 2015:

Compulsory employer contributions

If you’re eligible for compulsory super guarantee contributions, your employer must pay them into a complying super fund.

Eligibility

Generally, you’re entitled to super guarantee contributions from an employer if you’re 18 years old or over and paid $450 or more (before tax) in a month. It doesn’t matter whether you’re full time, part time or casual, and it doesn’t matter if you’re a temporary resident of Australia.

If you’re under 18 you must meet these conditions and work more than 30 hours per week to be entitled to super contributions. If you’re a contractor paid wholly or principally for your labour, you’re considered an employee for super purposes and entitled to super guarantee contributions under the same rules as employees.

How much your employer should pay

If you’re eligible for super guarantee contributions, at least every three months your employer must pay into your super account a minimum of 9.50% of your ordinary time earnings, up to the ‘maximum contribution base’. (Note: prior to 1 July 2013 the rate was 9% and during the 2013-14 financial years the rate was 9.25%)

Checking that your employer is paying the correct super

If you think your employer isn’t paying your super into the right fund, or isn’t paying as much as they’re supposed to, you should ask your employer about it and check how much your super fund has received. If you still think there’s a problem you can lodge an enquiry with us.

Providing your tax file number

You need to provide your tax file number (TFN) to your employer and/or super fund on a Tax file number declaration form. If you don’t, your super fund may take extra tax out of your super contributions.

Choosing a super fund

Most people can choose the super fund they want their employer contributions paid into. If you’re eligible to choose a fund, your employer must give you a Standard choice form so you can make that choice in writing.

Working overseas

If you take up an Australian employer’s offer to temporarily work for them overseas, your employer must continue to pay super contributions for you in Australia. Your employer may be able to apply to the ATO for a Certificate of coverage so neither you nor your employer will have to pay super (or a super equivalent) in the other country.

FLOOD WATCH FOR THE NEW SOUTH WALES COASTAL VALLEYS FROM THE QUEENSLAND BORDER TO TAREE FOR THIS FRIDAY AND SATURDAY

IDN36501

Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology New South Wales

FLOOD WATCH FOR THE NEW SOUTH WALES COASTAL VALLEYS FROM THE QUEENSLAND BORDER TO TAREE FOR THIS FRIDAY AND SATURDAY

Issued at 11:52 am EST on Wednesday 29 April 2015

##

Note: This Flood Watch is a "heads up" for possible future flooding along all rivers and creeks within a nominated valley and is NOT a Flood Warning [see note below].

Onshore winds and rain will increase as a trough deepens off the northern NSW coast on Thursday and Friday. Another East Coast Low is expected to form within this trough on Saturday near the QLD border before moving south to be offshore of the Mid North Coast on Sunday. The northern half of the coast (Mid North Coast and Northern Rivers) will receive the heaviest rain with multi-day falls of 150-200mm, locally 350+mm from Wednesday night to Saturday. Friday and Saturday will see the heaviest widespread falls.

At this stage there is a greater than 70% chance of flooding in the following river valleys developing during Friday and Saturday:

1. Tweed River valley - moderate to major flooding

2. Brunswick River valley - moderate to major flooding

3. Richmond and Wilsons River valley - moderate to major flooding

4. Clarence River Valley, including the Orara River - minor to moderate flooding

5. Coffs Harbour - minor to moderate flooding

6. Bellinger and Kalang River valley - moderate to major flooding

7. Nambucca River valley - moderate to major flooding

8. Macleay River valley - minor to moderate flooding

9. Hastings River valley - minor to moderate flooding

10. Camden Haven valley - minor to moderate flooding

11. Manning River Valley, including Gloucester - minor to moderate flooding

There is still the possibility of renewed flooding in the Hunter Valley (including the Paterson and Williams Rivers) on Sunday and Monday. This will be reviewed on Thursday based on the latest information.

This Flood Watch means that people living or working along rivers and creeks must monitor the latest weather forecasts and warnings and be ready to move to higher ground should flooding develop. Flood Warnings will be issued if Minor Flood Level is expected to be exceeded at key sites along the main rivers for which the Bureau of Meteorology provides a flood warning service. Across NSW over 70% of Flood Watches are followed by flooding within the catchment.

FloodSafe advice is available at www.ses.nsw.gov.au

For emergency assistance call the SES on telephone number 132 500.

For life threatening emergencies, call 000 immediately.

Weather Forecast:

For the latest weather forecast see www.bom.gov.au/nsw/forecasts/

Next Issue:

This Flood Watch will be renewed by 11am Thursday morning.

For latest rainfall and river level information see www.bom.gov.au/nsw/flood/

One more reason not to buy pizza from an American multinational fast food chain

Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Florida, media release, 23 April 2015:

BARTOW, Fla. - The Council on American-Islamic Relations Florida (CAIR Florida) has announced they will pursue a lawsuit for public accommodation discrimination and other legal claims against a Davenport Domino's Pizza for the horrendous treatment of a Muslim customer on July 27, 2012.

Hakima Benaddi, a Florida woman who was wearing a Muslim head covering at the time, was accused by Domino's Pizza management of threatening to blow up the location after she complained about the service and pizza she received. On July 27, 2012, a pregnant Benaddi went to Domino's to order a veggie pizza with her 23-month-old daughter. When Benaddi opened her pizza box she discovered that it was grossly inadequate and returned to complain and seek a refund.

"I was surprised because what I got was nothing like my order," Benaddi explained. "That pizza was barely suitable to feed to a dog."

Prior to the incident, Benaddi was a regular customer at the location. There was one small difference, however, on the day of the incident Benaddi had recently started covering her hair by wearing the hijab, the Muslim head scarf.

The Domino's Pizza did not assist Benaddi when she returned, they did not offer to make her a new pizza or offer her a refund. Instead, the cashier laughed at her and mocked her limited English proficiency.

Then, in what could only be described as a brazen discriminatory act, the Domino's Pizza management called local police claiming that Benaddi had threatened to blow up the location resulting in Benaddi's arrest.

Benaddi was in custody for over 24 hours before she was released. She was also forced to remove her headscarf before her booking image was taken.

CAIR Florida's investigator revealed that eyewitness accounts were consistent with that of Benaddi's and admitting that Benaddi never made any threats other than to file a complaint. The story the Domino's Pizza's manager provided to the police was completely, intentionally and maliciously fabricated.

Although the felony charge against Hakima was dropped before the arraignment, Domino's Pizza has yet to confirm any wrongdoing.

"Without them acknowledging what they did wrong, this is our only opportunity for her voice to be heard," said Thania Diaz Clevenger, Civil Rights Director of CAIR Florida. "We need to tell people that this is not okay, to let Domino's Pizza know this is not okay, and to let other Muslim women who are targeted to know that they can stand up for themselves."

###

CAIR Florida is the state's largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization. Its mission is to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties of all people, empower American Muslims, and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding.

Coal seam & tight gas miner Metgasco Limited puts a dollar price on walking away from its NSW North Coast exploration leases

Metgasco chief executive Peter Henderson said they would be seeking compensation for the year-long suspension of the drilling licence and all associated losses of the suspension, which could run as high as $15 million.

Mr Henderson said Metgasco would require a further $110m if the company was forced to exit its operations in the state’s north.

[The Australian, 27 April 2015]

One hundred and ten million dollars is a small price to pay to protect an existing NSW North Coast^* regional economy which annually contributes an estimated $20.6 billion plus to the Gross State Product (GSP) or 15% of the total NSW GSP.

In 2012-13 the Northern Rivers^** (where Metgasco has its exploration leases) contributed $13.6 billion in Gross Regional Product (GRP) to the North Coast regional economy, in large part via its tourism, agribusiness-forestry, manufacturing and commercial fishing sectors.

* Local Government Areas: Ballina, Bellingen, Byron, Clarence Valley, Coffs Harbour, Gloucester, Great Lakes, Greater Taree, Kempsey, Kyogle, Lismore, Nambucca, Port Macquarie-Hastings, Richmond Valley, Tweed.

** Local Government Areas: Ballina, Byron, Clarence Valley, Kyogle, Lismore, Richmond Valley, Tweed.

Destroy the Joint is counting dead women - Part Five

Destroy The Joint

Since 1 January 2015 thirty-three women have died in violent incidents. That equates to two women killed each week so far this year.

Destroy The Joint keeps a register of these deaths here.

This is the latest death.

NSW Police media release 26 April 2015:

Man charged following alleged domestic-violence related murder - Brewarrina

Sunday, 26 April 2015 01:19:56 PM

A man has been charged with murder following an alleged domestic violence incident in Brewarrina yesterday afternoon.

About 5.45pm (Saturday 25 April 2015), police from Darling River Local Area Command were called to a Byron Street home where they found a woman suffering serious injuries.

Additional emergency services were called to assist but the woman, aged 18, died at the scene.

A crime scene was established and investigated by specialist forensic officers

A 22-year-old man was arrested at the scene and taken to Brewarrina Police Station where he was charged with murder and three outstanding warrants.

He was refused bail and is due to appear at Bourke Local Court tomorrow (Monday 27 April 2015).

Police from Darling River Local Area Command, with the assistance of neighbouring commands have established Strike Force Goninan to investigate the matter.

Initial investigations suggest the incident was domestic violence related.
                                         

NSW Supreme Court rejected CSG miner Metgasco's contention that the NSW Government acted unreasonably in finding its community consultation process "inherently ineffective"

Excerpt from Metgasco Limited v Minister for Resources and Energy [2015] NSWSC 453 (24 April 2015):

74.          Fourthly, to the extent that Metgasco submitted that it was unreasonable for the Delegate to find that the consultation undertaken was inherently ineffective, in the sense of lacking attributes and qualities that would make it efficacious, I respectfully reject that submission. The Delegate was entitled, by way of more than one pathway leading to the guidelines, to consider whether Metgasco had engaged in consultation that could be characterised as being effective in its attributes but not its results. That includes whether the community consultation plan was sufficient. I do not propose to engage in an impermissible review of the merits of that decision; to my mind it was not so unreasonable to be amenable to judicial review. It follows that, if this were the only ground upon which Metgasco relied, I would not intervene on the basis of it.