In December 2017 AUSTRAC filed a further 100 alleged contraventions against the Commonwealth Bank amending the statement of claim in the current civil penalty proceedings:
Tuesday 10 April 2018
Big banks get hammered in first round of Banking Royal Commission hearings
I am sure
that the Turnbull Coalition Government was hoping that voters would not form
opinions such as this when it set up the deliberately ‘hobbled’ Royal
Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial
Services Industry.
First
Round of Banking Royal Commission Reveals Systemic Issues in the Banking
Industry
Customers are falling victim to the
misconduct of banks with evidence being presented at the Banking Royal
Commission (BRC) of fraudulent
conduct, approval of inappropriate loans and excessive interest rates. The
first round of public hearings have finished with the big four banks (NAB,
Westpac, ANZ and CBA) being scrutinised by the Commission over its
inappropriate behaviour.
The
big banks get hammered in first round of BRC hearings
NAB’s employee
incentive scheme saw fraudulent conduct by its bankers making unsuitable loans,
the dishonest use of customer signatures, and false documentation being provided
to support loan applications. Even worse, staff in some branches accepted
bribes to facilitate loans they knew were based on fraudulent documents.
Whistleblowers called out the fraud, but the bank did not notify the regulator
until months after they were required to.
The Commonwealth Bank of Australia has also been criticised for
its brokers fees and commissions for home loans and associated CBA insurance
products that customers purchased. Brokers failed to clearly disclose upfront,
on-going fees and incentives to stop people paying off their mortgages sooner.
CBA was also under fire after they admitted to waiting two years before
reporting a problem with their personal loan insurance program that affected
over 20,000 customers.
ANZ have
also been scrutinised with the bank failing to check customers’ expenses before
approving them for a home loan. Their car finance business, Esanda, was also
found to have been undertaking dodgy practices before it was sold in October
2015. This included the inappropriate use of customer’s financial information
and increasing interest rates for better commissions.
It was found that Westpac also had its own dodgy
practices. Similar to the other banks, the commissions attached to Westpac
employees’ approval of car loans has caused issues of inappropriate loans being
made. It has also been found that the bank increased credit card limits without
checking customer’s current employment status.
Systemic
change required in the banking industry
It is clear that there is a lack of accountability mechanisms and
internal controls to manage potential conflicts of interest and the
detection of fraud within banks. Commission based incentive programs have
resulted in the approval of inappropriate loans and fraudulent conduct.
Customers are falling victim to greedy banks with higher interest rates and the
misuse of their personal information. It is only now that the banks have been
caught out that they are apologetic and pledging to change their practices. It
is unacceptable that this has been occurring on a consistent basis throughout
all banks, and requires a systemic
change to be made in the banking industry.
The findings during the Banking Royal
Commission’s first hearing indicate two key things. Firstly, commissions and
employee incentives are a key contributor to misconduct. This needs to be
regulated in some way. Customers should enquire about commissions and any
associated fees before purchasing any banking services. Secondly, the industry
regulator ASIC needs to implement proactive measures to monitor the
practices of financial institutions. Many of the reported cases of misconduct
were only made aware to the regulator years after, or even swept completely
under the rug. They need to be prevented from occurring in the first place.
While this from the Australian Transactions Reports & Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC) CEO Nicole Rose via
ABC
News on 5 April 2018 would have been as welcome as seven day old fish heads in the prime ministerial letter box:
Australia's
financial intelligence czar Nicole Rose says she is shocked at the depth of
money laundering in the economy involving organised crime, child exploitation
and drug importation.
"I
thought coming from the Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission that I had
a pretty good handle on serious and organised crime," she told the ABC's
AM program.
"I
didn't appreciate the depth and breadth of involvement with private entities
and banks. I didn't appreciate how many industries it does actually touch.
"There's
a misperception that money laundering is a victimless white collar crime that's
probably just looking at tax avoidance.
"It
has a massive impact on everyday life whether that's child exploitation,
serious and organised crime or drug importation. It all involves money
laundering." [my yellow highlighting]
In December 2017 AUSTRAC filed a further 100 alleged contraventions against the Commonwealth Bank amending the statement of claim in the current civil penalty proceedings:
In December 2017 AUSTRAC filed a further 100 alleged contraventions against the Commonwealth Bank amending the statement of claim in the current civil penalty proceedings:
AUSTRAC CEO, Nicole Rose
PSM, said that the additional alleged contraventions were identified after the
civil penalty proceedings were instituted through AUSTRAC’s ongoing
investigation into CBA.
‘These allegations are
very serious and reflect systemic non-compliance over approximately six years’,
Ms Rose said.
AUSTRAC now alleges over
53,800 contraventions of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism
Financing Act 2006.
Financial
Review, 9
April 2018:
The financial
intelligence regulator AUSTRAC has stolen the spotlight from Commonwealth Bank
CEO Matt Comyn on his first day in the top job with allegations that the bank
broke the law by knowingly opening transaction accounts for customers it had
reasons to suspect of money laundering.
Among the transactions
AUSTRAC says the bank ought to have known, or at least suspected, were not
legitimate was $250,000 deposited by an Iranian salesman and a second unemployed
customer and a $150,000 deposit made through a Russian Bank from company
located in a known tax haven.
AUSTRAC's reply
yesterday to CBA's defence of the money laundering allegations made it
difficult for Mr Comyn to clear the air as he promised the
bank would be more accountable and more transparent under his leadership…..
"We have been too
slow to fix mistakes and we have failed to meet some important regulatory and
compliance obligations. This is unacceptable," Mr Comyn said in a
reference to the bank's fraught dealings with regulators including AUSTRAC,
ASIC and APRA.
By late morning,
however, AUSTRAC's new claims showed that the two parties were some way from
settling the issue the bank has set
aside $375 million to resolve, which relates to the regulator's claims it
has repeatedly breached transaction reporting requirements.
"CommBank suspected
on reasonable grounds that the opening of CommBank Accounts 78,79, 81, 82 and
84 were 'specifically generated for the purpose of laundering money',"
AUSTRAC said yesterday.
"Commbank's failure
to give the AUSTRAC CEO an SMR (suspicious matter report) in respect of its
suspicion ... constitutes a contravention of Section 41 (2) of the Act."
Labels:
banks and bankers,
royal commission
So many Newspoll losses mean democratic processes at risk as Turnbull Government strives to claw back political ground
“The Coalition now trails Labor by 47.5 per cent to
52.5 per cent in two-party terms across the four polls. This reflects a 48:52
result from Fairfax/Ipsos, the same from Newspoll, the same from Essential and
a 46:54 result from ReachTel on March 29.” [The
Sydney Morning Herald, 9 April 2016]
From
May 2014 to September 2015 the Abbott
Coalition Government experienced 30 consecutive negative Newspoll federal voting intentions
opinion polls*.
After
the sacking of Tony Abbott by his party and the installation of Malcolm
Turnbull as prime minister the Turnbull Coalition
Government saw 12 positive Newspolls before this second rendition
of a Coalition federal government itself experienced 30 consecutive negative
Newspolls from 12 September 2016 to 9 April 2018.
This
polling history indicates that the Liberal-National federal government is
likely to have only had the national electorate’s approval for around ten of
the last thirty-seven calendar months.
According
to the Australian Electoral Commission;
As
House of Representatives and half-Senate elections are usually held
simultaneously, the earliest date for such an election would be Saturday 4
August 2018. As the latest possible date for a half-Senate election is Saturday
18 May 2019, the latest possible date for a simultaneous (half-Senate and House
of Representatives) election is also Saturday 18 May 2019.
Given
that (i) between them the Abbott and
Turnbull governments have
experienced experienced only 12 positive
polls in the last 68 Newspolls; and (ii)
the Liberal Party has already admitted that during its successful March 2018 South Australian
election it had utilised
the services of one of the known “bad actors” on the international election campaign
consultancy scene, the US-based data miner i360;
it is highly likely that “bad actors” will be employed once more and over the
next four to thirteen months voters will be subjected to a barrage of
misinformation, bald lies, vicious rumour and false promises from both
Coalition politicians and their supporters in mainstream and social media.
Voters will have to fact check what they hear and read as never before.
Voters will have to fact check what they hear and read as never before.
* A
federal voting intentions Newspoll is
considered negative for one or other of the two main political parties based on two party preferred percentage results.
Newspolls surveys normally occur every two to three weeks outside of election campaign periods when they are likely to occur more often.
Newspoll results can be found at https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/newspoll.
Newspolls surveys normally occur every two to three weeks outside of election campaign periods when they are likely to occur more often.
Newspoll results can be found at https://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/newspoll.
Monday 9 April 2018
Donald Trump's callous disregard for the reality of this situation knows no bounds
Trump Tower is a 58 story building containing a
mix of residential apartments, business premises, retail stores and restaurants
in mid-town Manhattan, New York.
The
thirty-four year old building has been the site of two fires this year.
An
electrical fire in the air conditioning-heating system in January 2018 which injured
three people and a 50th floor blaze at approx. 5.30pm on 7 April 2018
which killed one person and injured at least four others.
None of the 238
apartments on the 38 residential floors below the three-story Trump
penthouse have sprinkler systems installed.
….firefighters
and Secret Service members checked on the condition of Mr Trump's apartment on
the top floors of the 58-storey building.
TrumpTower residents were not advised there was a fire in the building. With the exception of one celebrity resident who was contacted by President Trump's personal attorney and told to leave the building immediately for their own safety.
TrumpTower residents were not advised there was a fire in the building. With the exception of one celebrity resident who was contacted by President Trump's personal attorney and told to leave the building immediately for their own safety.
By the time that tweet was sent the man who died in the fire had been dead at least tweve hours.
Labels:
#TrumpFAIL,
Donald Trump
Trump called out for untrue personal attack
Fox News pointed out in polite terms that US President Donald J. Trump is telling wall-to-wall lies in his personal attack on the founder of Amazon (an American electronic commerce and cloud computing corporation) and owner of The Washingtom Post, multi-billionaire Jeff Bezos.
It also linked this attack to newspaper's reporting of the the DOJ-FBI investigation into alleged links between the the Trump presidential campaign and Russia's interferrence in the 2016 US national elections.
Perhaps Trump should cast his mind back to the last American president that tried to silence The Washington Post - in that case for it's reporting of the Watergate political scandal.
He might also care to recall that Bezos (the world's 'richest' man in 2018) only holds est. 16 per cent of Amazon shares - there are another 2,447 shareholders of record and est. 60.53 per cent of the share pool is owned by institutional investors, who as representatives of a host of beneficial shareholders won't be happy with Trump's crude attempt to force Amazon share value down.
Land degradation will be main cause of species loss & driver of the migration of millions of people by 2050
IPBES:
Science and Policy for People and nature, media
release, 26 March 2018:
Worsening Worldwide Land
Degradation Now ‘Critical’, Undermining Well-Being of 3.2 Billion People
Main cause of species loss & driver of the migration of millions of people by 2050 In landmark 3-year assessment report, 100+ experts outline costs, dangers & options
Worsening land degradation caused by
human activities is undermining the well-being of two fifths of humanity,
driving species extinctions and intensifying climate change. It is also a major
contributor to mass human migration and increased conflict, according to the
world’s first comprehensive evidence-based assessment of land degradation and
restoration.
The dangers of land degradation, which
cost the equivalent of about 10% of the world’s annual gross product in 2010
through the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services, are detailed for
policymakers, together with a catalogue of corrective options, in the
three-year assessment report by more than 100 leading experts from 45
countries, launched today.
Produced by the Intergovernmental
Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), the
report was approved at the 6th session of the IPBES Plenary in MedellĂn,
Colombia. IPBES has 129 State Members.
Providing the best-available evidence
for policymakers to make better-informed decisions, the report draws on more
than 3,000 scientific, Government, indigenous and local knowledge sources.
Extensively peer-reviewed, it was improved by more than 7,300 comments,
received from over 200 external reviewers.
Serious Danger to Human
Well-being
Rapid expansion and unsustainable
management of croplands and grazing lands is the most extensive global direct
driver of land degradation, causing significant loss of biodiversity and
ecosystem services – food security, water purification, the provision of energy
and other contributions of nature essential to people. This has reached
‘critical’ levels in many parts of the world, the report says.
“With negative impacts on the
well-being of at least 3.2 billion people, the degradation of the Earth’s land
surface through human activities is pushing the planet towards a sixth mass
species extinction,” said Prof. Robert Scholes (South Africa), co-chair of the
assessment with Dr. Luca Montanarella (Italy). “Avoiding, reducing and
reversing this problem, and restoring degraded land, is an urgent priority to
protect the biodiversity and ecosystem services vital to all life on Earth and
to ensure human well-being.”
“Wetlands have been particularly hard
hit,” said Dr. Montanarella. “We have seen losses of 87% in wetland areas since
the start of the modern era – with 54% lost since 1900.”
According to the authors, land
degradation manifests in many ways: land abandonment, declining populations of
wild species, loss of soil and soil health, rangelands and fresh water, as well
as deforestation.
Underlying drivers of land
degradation, says the report, are the high-consumption lifestyles in the most
developed economies, combined with rising consumption in developing and
emerging economies. High and rising per capita consumption, amplified by
continued population growth in many parts of the world, can drive unsustainable
levels of agricultural expansion, natural resource and mineral extraction, and
urbanization – typically leading to greater levels of land degradation.
By 2014, more than 1.5 billion
hectares of natural ecosystems had been converted to croplands. Less than 25%
of the Earth’s land surface has escaped substantial impacts of human activity –
and by 2050, the IPBES experts estimate this will have fallen to less than 10%.
Crop and grazing lands now cover more
than one third of the Earth´s land surface, with recent clearance of native
habitats, including forests, grasslands and wetlands, being concentrated in
some of the most species-rich ecosystems on the planet.
The report says increasing demand for
food and biofuels will likely lead to continued increase in nutrient and
chemical inputs and a shift towards industrialized livestock production
systems, with pesticide and fertilizer use expected to double by 2050.
Avoidance of further agricultural
expansion into native habitats can be achieved through yield increases on the
existing farmlands, shifts towards less land degrading diets, such as those
with more plant-based foods and less animal protein from unsustainable sources,
and reductions in food loss and waste.
Strong Links to Climate
Change
“Through this report, the global
community of experts has delivered a frank and urgent warning, with clear
options to address dire environmental damage,” said Sir Robert Watson, Chair of
IPBES.
“Land degradation, biodiversity loss
and climate change are three different faces of the same central challenge: the
increasingly dangerous impact of our choices on the health of our natural
environment. We cannot afford to tackle any one of these three threats in
isolation – they each deserve the highest policy priority and must be addressed
together.”
The IPBES report finds that land
degradation is a major contributor to climate change, with deforestation alone
contributing about 10% of all human-induced greenhouse gas emissions. Another
major driver of the changing climate has been the release of carbon previously
stored in the soil, with land degradation between 2000 and 2009 responsible for
annual global emissions of up to 4.4 billion tonnes of CO2.
Given the importance of soil’s carbon
absorption and storage functions, the avoidance, reduction and reversal of land
degradation could provide more than a third of the most cost-effective
greenhouse gas mitigation activities needed by 2030 to keep global warming
under the 2°C threshold targeted in the Paris Agreement on climate change,
increase food and water security, and contribute to the avoidance of conflict
and migration.
Projections to 2050
“In just over three decades from now,
an estimated 4 billion people will live in drylands,” said Prof. Scholes. “By
then it is likely that land degradation, together with the closely related
problems of climate change, will have forced 50-700 million people to migrate.
Decreasing land productivity also makes societies more vulnerable to social
instability – particularly in dryland areas, where years with extremely low
rainfall have been associated with an increase of up to 45% in violent
conflict.”
Dr. Montanarella added: “By 2050, the
combination of land degradation and climate change is predicted to reduce
global crop yields by an average of 10%, and by up to 50% in some regions. In
the future, most degradation will occur in Central and South America,
sub-Saharan Africa and Asia – the areas with the most land still remaining that
is suitable for agriculture.”
The report also underlines the
challenges that land degradation poses, and the importance of restoration, for
key international development objectives, including the United Nations
Sustainable Development Goals and the Aichi Biodiversity Targets. “The greatest
value of the assessment is the evidence that it provides to decision makers in
Government, business, academia and even at the level of local communities,”
said Dr. Anne Larigauderie, Executive Secretary of IPBES. “With better
information, backed by the consensus of the world’s leading experts, we can all
make better choices for more effective action.”
Options for Land
Restoration
The report notes that successful
examples of land restoration are found in every ecosystem, and that many
well-tested practices and techniques, both traditional and modern, can avoid or
reverse degradation.
In croplands, for instance, some of
these include reducing soil loss and improving soil health, the use of salt
tolerant crops, conservation agriculture and integrated crop, livestock and
forestry systems.
In rangelands with traditional
grazing, maintenance of appropriate fire regimes, and the reinstatement or
development of local livestock management practices and institutions have
proven effective.
Successful responses in wetlands have
included control over pollution sources, managing the wetlands as part of the
landscape, and reflooding wetlands damaged by draining.
In urban areas, urban spatial
planning, replanting with native species, the development of ‘green
infrastructure’ such as parks and riverways, remediation of contaminated and
sealed soils (e.g. under asphalt), wastewater treatment and river channel restoration
are identified as key options for action.
Opportunities to accelerate action
identified in the report include:
Improving monitoring, verification
systems and baseline data;
Coordinating policy between different
ministries to simultaneously encourage more sustainable production and
consumption practices of land-based commodities;
Eliminating ‘perverse incentives’ that
promote land degradation and promoting positive incentives that reward
sustainable land management; and
Integrating the agricultural,
forestry, energy, water, infrastructure and service agendas.
Making the point that existing
multilateral environmental agreements provide a good platform for action to
avoid, reduce and reverse land degradation and promote restoration, the authors
observe, however, that greater commitment and more effective cooperation is
needed at the national and local levels to achieve the goals of zero net land
degradation, no loss of biodiversity and improved human well-being.
Knowledge Gaps
Among the areas identified by the
report as opportunities for further research are:
The consequences of land degradation
on freshwater and coastal ecosystems, physical and mental health and spiritual
well-being, and infectious disease prevalence and transmission;
The potential for land degradation to
exacerbate climate change, and land restoration to help both mitigation and
adaptation;
The linkages between land degradation
and restoration and social, economic and political processes in far-off places;
and
Interactions among land degradation,
poverty, climate change, and the risk of conflict and of involuntary migration.
Environmental and
Economic Sense
The report found that higher
employment and other benefits of land restoration often exceed by far the costs
involved. On average, the benefits of restoration are 10 times higher
than the costs (estimated across nine different biomes), and, for regions like
Asia and Africa, the cost of inaction in the face of land degradation is at
least three times higher than the cost of action.
“Fully deploying the toolbox of proven
ways to stop and reverse land degradation is not only vital to ensure food
security, reduce climate change and protect biodiversity,” said Dr.
Montanarella, “It’s also economically prudent and increasingly urgent.”
Echoing this message, Sir Robert
Watson, said: “Of the many valuable messages in the report, this ranks among
the most important: implementing the right actions to combat land degradation
can transform the lives of millions of people across the planet, but this will
become more difficult and more costly the longer we take to act.”
Unedited
advance Summary for Policymakers of the regional assessment of biodiversity and
ecosystem services for Asia and the Pacific
EN
PDF
EN
Word
Unedited
advance Summary for Policymakers of the thematic assessment of land degradation
and restoration
EN
PDF
EN
Word
Sunday 8 April 2018
Australian Taxation Commisioner discreetly warns staff to keep their mouth shut when approached by ABC Four Corners reseachers
ABC TV airs “Mongrel bunch of bastards”, the Four Corners/Fairfax investigation into the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) on Monday 8 April 2018 at 8.30pm.
At least one ATO employee appears to have talked with some of the journalists involved in the investigation. His home was recently raided by the Australian Federal Police accompanied by an ATO investigator.
The ATO is not happy and issued this warning to all staff.....
Image via Twitter
Labels:
ABC television,
ATO,
Fairfax Media,
investigation,
taxation
Is the U.S. becoming a country hostile to Australian tourists?
According to
the Australian Bureau of
Statistics there were 13.7 million internet subscribers in Australia at
the end of June 2017 and a 2016
Deloitte survey found that 84% of Australians had a smart phone.
An est. 20
million Australians use
a social media platform like Facebook,
Instragram or Twitter
via a desktop computer or mobile phone.
Because we
are one of the most digitally connected populations in the world the United
States is about to pose an additional risk to our personal Internet privacy and
safety if we seek any form of visa entry into that country.
ABC
News, 31
March 2018:
A US federal government
proposal to collect social media identities of nearly everyone who seeks entry
into the country has been described as a "chilling" encroachment on
freedom of speech and association.
The State Department
filed a proposal which would require most immigrant and non-immigrant visa
applicants to list all social media identities they have used in the past five
years, as well as previously used telephone numbers, email addresses and their
international travel history over the same period.
The information would be
used to vet and identify them, which would affect about 14.7 million people
annually.
The proposal goes
further than rules instituted last May. Those changes instructed consular
officials to collect social media identities only when they determined
"that such information is required to confirm identity or conduct more
rigorous national security vetting," a State Department official said at
the time.
The proposal requires
approval from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) but it supports
President Donald Trump's campaign promise to institute "extreme
vetting" of foreigners entering the US to prevent terrorism.
The American Civil
Liberties Union expressed concern, saying the move would have a
"chilling" effect on freedom of speech and association.
"People will now
have to wonder if what they say online will be misconstrued or misunderstood by
a government official," Hina Shamsi, director of ACLU's National Security
Project, said in a statement.
"We're also
concerned about how the Trump administration defines the vague and over-broad
term a 'terrorist activities' because it is inherently political and can be
used to discriminate against immigrants who have done nothing wrong.
Australian public opinion was changing on the subject of US-Australia relations before this latest Trump Regime move against digital privacy - it began to shift after Donald Trump was elected US president......
Australian public opinion was changing on the subject of US-Australia relations before this latest Trump Regime move against digital privacy - it began to shift after Donald Trump was elected US president......
ABC
News, January
2018:
Recent polling by the United States Studies Centre
(USSC) and YouGov — surveying both Australians and Americans — gives
mixed grades on American strength after the first year of Mr Trump's
presidency. Perceptions of American strength and international security are
closely linked for large portions of the publics in both countries — with some
interesting exceptions. Our data suggest that many see the world as more
dangerous precisely because the United States is perceived to be weaker under
Mr Trump.
Almost half of Australians report that the United
States has grown weaker over the past 12 months.
Only 19 per cent of
Australians think America has grown stronger over the first year of the Trump
presidency.
Americans are less dour
in their assessments, with 36 per cent saying that the United States has become
weaker over the last year. "Weaker" leads "stronger"
by 27 points in the Australian data, but this difference is just six points
among Americans….
Does a stronger (or
weaker) America under Mr Trump affect assessments of Australia's security? It's
complicated. In the aggregate, Australians associate a stronger America with a
safer world and a safer United States, but this does not extend to assessments of
Australian security.
More than half of
Coalition voters say Australia faces more danger than a few years ago,
irrespective of assessments of American power under Mr Trump. Labor voters and
minor party supporters do associate a weaker America with a less secure
Australia.
For Greens voters — at
best sceptical about the US-Australia relationship — a weaker America makes for
a safer Australia. Most Greens voters report that America is weaker under Mr
Trump and just 32 per cent of those see heightened dangers for Australia over the
last few years; among Greens seeing America as stronger under Mr Trump, half
report things becoming more dangerous for Australia, although the small number
of Greens in our data prevent firm conclusions.
Historically, a robust,
bipartisan consensus has seen little partisanship in Australian public opinion
on the value of Australia's relationship with the United States. Our data
suggest that this equilibrium is under some stress. References to Mr Trump
activate partisan differences in Australian thinking about the United
States. While Australians (like Americans) associate increases in American
power with a safer world, a perceived link with enhanced Australian security is
weak at best (and probably inverted for Greens voters).
On the other hand,
despite large partisan divisions, Americans continue to associate American
strength with increased security for America's allies.
This proposition has
been the bedrock of Australian foreign policy and defence thinking for decades,
and remains so, Mr Trump notwithstanding. Accordingly, our data allows us to
restate the challenge for the current generation of Australian policy makers
and political leaders: articulating the value and relevance of the US
relationship to an Australian public at best unsure about the direction of the
United States under Mr Trump and the implications for Australia's security and
prosperity.
Saturday 7 April 2018
Tweet of the Week
Absolutely stunning high-definition video of Antarctic Minke Whales taken with a new camera system that can record continuous underwater footage for weeks at a time! These are the same whales Japanese whalers hunt under their New Scientific Research Program in the Antarctic Ocean pic.twitter.com/oXUS7Zxwmp— Quad Finn (@Quad_Finn) March 31, 2018
Quote of the Week
“Homelessness is
one of the most potent examples of disadvantage in the community, and one of
the most important markers of social exclusion (Department of Human Services,
2002).” [Australian Bureau of Statistics, 29 March 2018]
Labels:
Australian society,
homelessness
Friday 6 April 2018
Monash Family versus Monash Forum
Members
of the Monash Forum include Craig Kelly, Eric Abetz, Tony Abbott, Barnaby Joyce
and Kevin Andrews. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen [The
Sydney Morning Herald, 5 April 2018]
The allegedly
more than 20 member strong Monash Forum circulated a letter in
late March 2018 emphasising the importance of coal-fired power to the
Australian economy and setting out principles
such as the withdrawal of subsidies for renewable energy and the advantage of
new generation of “low-emission” coal-fired power stations.
It is hard to see this group as anything but a collection of far-right politically notorious, climate change denying, xenophobic, chauvinistic, historical
revisionist ‘warriors’ on a mission to bring down Malcolm Bligh Turnbull and hasten Australia's decline into the worst aspects of its old 20th Century self.
Apparently a
group of descendants of former army general Sir John
Monash, GCMG, KCB, VD (1865-1931), as well as the Australian
Returned Services League, thought along much those same lines.
Are Facebook and those unethical data miners already manipulating voters in Australian elections?
Is the 'American disease' already making Australian democracy ill?
On 27 March 2018 the blog Queen Victoria observed:
During the recent South
Australian election, take a guess how many Labor policy announcements made the
front page of The Advertiser, the State’s only major newspaper? If you guessed
zero, you would almost be right. In fact, there were only two – a promise by
Labor to invest in TAFE, and even then it was half a tiny corner article, worth
36 words, with the other half given to a Liberal election pledge, and Labor’s
loans for solar panels and batteries, again a handful of words, and sitting
beside a Liberal promise. You’ll need a magnifying glass to spot the articles
on the front pages below..
Looking at those front pages it was easy to see what Victoria Rollison meant.
But was it more than just News Corp playing Murdoch's favourite game of Labor bashing?
Earlier, on
17 March 2018 the day of the South
Australian state election (which the Liberals subsequently won)
journalist Mark Kenny wrote in the Weekend
Australian that:
Like
Turnbull in 2016, Marshall and his team have been criticised for not being
sufficiently aggressive about Labor’s failings. But they have run short, sharp
and effective negative TV commercials (the sort that bewilderingly never came
in the federal campaign) around the theme of “I’ve had enough, Jay” which
neatly captures the mood for a corrective change. This is a good example of how
paid advertising can deliver tough messages if politicians are reluctant.
Yet
a sense of coasting has worried many Liberal supporters and observers. When I
told a group of Adelaide Liberals last month that Marshall and his team seemed
insufficiently combative towards Labor and Xenophon, a frontbencher pulled me
aside afterwards and showed me his phone. He argued I misunderstood their
methods, that public assertions and media debates were not the main game. He
showed me his i360 app, a new campaigning tool that has
revolutionised the Liberals’ marginal seats campaigning.
Through i360 the
SA Liberals believe they have progressed to a new level of targeted
campaigning, leaping far ahead of what has been used before by either major
party in Australia. If they perform well, we can expect a technological and
tactical quantum leap forward at the next federal campaign.
In
his quick demonstration, the MP called up a marginal seat, much like finding a
suburb on Google Maps, then zoomed in to a street where pins identified
addresses deemed to house swinging voters. Deeper dives on households contained
genders, ages, voting intentions or lack thereof as well as policy interests.
The information is collated from the party’s existing Feedback system, updates
from doorknocking and calls, responses to surveys conducted via email, online
or phone calls plus census data and the harvesting of social media data. This
is Big Brother meets grassroots campaigning. Neither the data nor the
technology is much use without quality information fed in and strong analysis
leading to the right strategies, along with diligent personalised attention in
follow-up visits and communications.
This
is leading-edge campaigning, as i360’s website explains. “Data is the
difference,” it proclaims, describing its “extensive political identification”
through information collected from “in-person, phone and online surveys, as
well as through partner relationships in addition to lifestyle and consumer
data” purchased from “top-tier” providers. “Our data is further enhanced by our
suite of predictive models, filling in gaps and helping us build the most
complete profile for every individual possible,” it says.
Billionaire
US Republican sponsors Charles and David Koch are major investors in the firm,
which openly canvasses only for “free-market” candidates. The SA Liberals
purchased a product licence and have worked with i360 to modify
systems for compulsory and preferential voting. Motivated by the frustration of
2014 where, despite a huge popular vote win, just a few hundred votes in the
right seats would have made all the difference, Marshall has driven this
innovative approach. He and novice Liberal state director Sascha Meldrum
visited the US in August 2016 to assess the system before other campaign
strategists joined the training and implementation.
If the Liberals surprise on
the upside today, SA’s expertise will be immediately sought after for the
looming Victoria, NSW and federal campaigns.
Long
lead times help and the SA Liberals have had more than a year to build up data
and, crucially, follow up on targeted voters more than once. This is where
grassroots organisation, numbers on the ground and diligence are essential,
lest intelligence is wasted for lack of personal politicking, but the potential
for efficiency, personalised material and two-way feedback to shape policies
and messages is huge. Even in an age when you can get an app for everything, no
app can win you an election. And I still think public policy differentiation
and aggression are crucial.But if the Liberals form a majority even after the
unprecedented Xenophon disruption, expect to hear a lot more about i360 and
data-driven campaigning.
So what
exactly is i360?
This is what
it said of itself at www.i-360.com on 31 March
2018:
At i360® we believe
THE DATA IS THE DIFFERENCE. But what does that mean? Simply put, it means
integrating data in everything we do to produce the most effective outcomes for
every one of our clients.
At the core of the
i360 operation is a comprehensive database of all 18+ American consumers
and voters containing thousands of pieces of individual and aggregated
information that give us the full picture of who they are, where they live,
what they do and what is happening around them. Leveraging this and our
capabilities in data science, analytics, technology development and
advertising, we help clients take their efforts to the next level by embracing
the concept of truly borderless data.
i360 boast of these statistics:
i360 boast of these statistics:
Snapshot of section of i360 home page, 31 March 2018
i360 has a multiple presences on Facebook eg. i360online and i360Gov.com. [IP addresses are deliberately not supplied in this post and caution is urged if readers decide to vist these pages]
i360 aslo boasts of playing a "crucial" part in the South Australian election on its
"Newsroom" page.
This
is what is said of this company elsewhere………
The
Real News, 29
March 2018:
Kochs
have a far more sophisticated operation called i360. And they track, as you
heard in the little clip from my film, 1800 pieces of data on you dynamically
and on a continuous basis. They basically know your credit card purchases, they
know your cable viewing habits. This is a lot deeper into your guts and soul
and privacy than even your Facebook profile from Cambridge Analytica. And also
you have a very similar operation used by Karl Rove. That's the guy that was
known as Bush's brain, though Bush calls him Turd Blossom. This is the, Karl
Rove was the engineer of some of the creepiest and possibly illegal activities
behind the Bush campaigns. He's still out there with his own database operation
called Data Trust, whose main client is the Republican National Committee.
These
operations do more than grab some of your private information or just your
Facebook profiles. Some of their activities have actually unquestionably bent
elections not just by convincing you do things, you know, their idea is to try
to zombify, you know, know everything about you and manipulate you. But
sometimes they go way, way beyond that in their operations to win elections….
They're
targeting you because they know very personal things about you. They literally
know, as Mark Sweetland says, we're not making that up as an example, it's
really true. For example, i360 knows if you downloaded porn and then order
Chinese food before you voted. They can use that information to manipulate how
you vote. And by the way, deviously, whether you vote at all. They can convince
you not to vote. That's a real powerful tool that they have. That's part of the
game, is convincing you not to vote. So that's one of things that they do…..
…they
can convince you. For example, a lot of the, lot of the targeting about Hillary
Clinton was not to get you to vote for Trump but to get voters who, for
example, voted for Bernie Sanders or others, to convince them not to vote at
all. And that was very, very effective, for example, in Wisconsin, where
according to a University of Wisconsin study, about 50000 people, mostly
students in Madison County and Milwaukee, didn't vote because they were
convinced that, that Hillary was evil enough that it just didn't matter. They
may be crying now, but the but the-…..
Encourage
apathy and saying that your vote doesn't matter. And that's one of the things
that they're very good at. But the other is very, some of it's not too subtle,
OK. For example, in Wisconsin the Koch brothers, a spinoff from i360, one of
the operators there working with Kochs sent out e-mails, and sent out social ,
sent out e-mails to people on their databases who own guns, who live in rural
areas and normally vote by mail-in ballot. And they sent them messages saying,
protect your guns. And these are also all Democrats. Protect your guns and
vote. Make sure you send your absentee ballot to this address on this date. The
address was wrong, and the date was too late to get your vote counted. So that
was one way that Scott Walker, for example, won his against his recall in the
recall referendum. Then they rolled it out. The same trick. Wrong date, wrong
address for your absentee ballots to minority and Democratic voters in North
Carolina. And then throughout the South.
So
some of this is really fraudulently stealing your vote away. And that's just,
that was the i360 spinoff. Then you have Data Trust, which is Karl Rove's
operation. they used an operation which I uncovered working with the Guardian
and BBC called caging. And what caging is is you send letters, Karl Rove used
his databases to target, for example, students, black students in black
colleges who were away from their school on summer vacation. They are
registered, these were students registered, for example, in the swing state of
Florida. And they knew that they weren't at their at their voting addresses
even though they are legal voters because they were home for the vacations.
They sent letters. When the letters marked Do Not Forward came back to the
Republican National Committee, those voters were challenge as not existing, and
they lost their vote. They sent these letters as well to black soldiers and
airmen at the Jacksonville Naval Air Station. They sent letters to men at
homeless shelters you don't always get their mail. And as a result they used,
they used this information to challenge the right of those voters' ballots to
be counted. If they mailed them in their ballots would be junked. If they try
to show up to vote they were blocked from voting. That's the ugly, ugly and
truly actually illegal use of these databases, and that's just some examples
we've uncovered.
Well,
I think that Cambridge Analytica, which is like I say, the least sophisticated,
and they try to use brain massaging. By the way, they also use other tactics.
One of the services that they offer, I just you know, is to is to say that
they'll set up your opponent, political opponent, with hookers and tape them.
So it's not just, they've got that database and then they would, of course, use
their social networking thing to blow it all up. But it will have a huge impact
on the 2018 election. A bigger impact on 2020.
And
this includes other operations that these database guys are working on. One of
them you mentioned, a guy Kris Kobach, secretary of state of Kansas. He is
Trump's what I call Vote Thief in Chief. He was officially appointed to run
Trump's so-called vote fraud commission. One of the databases he uses is a roll
crosscheck, where he gives lists of voters he says are registered or actually
vote in two states in a single election, which is illegal. He has claimed with
Donald Trump that three million people voted twice, mostly voters of color. And
I'm the only journalist to actually have, I have a copy of the of of his list
of double voters. The three million double voters. And it's people with names
like Jose Garcia, and David Lee, and John Black. These are just common names of
voters of color, but not, you know, obviously not common for Republicans.
But
you'll see names in this, for example, Maria Cristina Hernandez is supposed to
be the same voter as Maria Inez Hernandez. That person is supposed to be the
same voter who voted one in Virginia and one in Georgia. That's their claim.
And those voters named Garcia and Hernandez lose their vote. On that list, two
million of those accused voters, people accused of voting twice, don't have the
same middle name. Two million people accused don't have the same middle name,
and they are removing, this is important, they're actually removing hundreds of
thousands of people from the voter rolls as we speak. In fact without, without
this game, this database game called Crosscheck, which is Trump and Kobach's
database, Trump would not have won in 2016…..
It's
serious stuff. Because if it were simply a matter of targeted advertising,
convince you to vote for their candidate, that's all right.
But
Cambridge Analytica has been, their, their chiefs were caught on tape by
Channel 4, one of the outlets I work with, by Channel 4 investigators in
Britain, saying that they will create fake news about your opponent and use
their social networking abilities and use their particular targeting of
individuals, their social networking habits, to spread fake news about your
opponent. And they said we can do it in a way that no one will know that we've
been involved. They said they successfully did this already in other countries.
We don't even know how many countries because they make a point of keeping
their involvement hidden. This is very, very scary stuff. They are deliberately
creating, Donald Trump's screaming about fake news, but he employed the fake
news generator. That's the big problem. That's one of the very big problems of
Cambridge Analytica, and I know that we have that same problem with Data Trust,
i360, and some of the others.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)