Can One Nation candidates get any sleazier than this?

One Nation Queensland Leader and former LNP state minister Steve Dickson who is a 2019 federal election candidate has been forced to resign because of this video.

The married One Nation Senate candidate has been filmed groping an exotic dancer in a strip club and asking her to come home with him and saying the dancer "wants to suck my c**k".

Dickson may have resigned from all position he held in the One Nation party, however his name remains on the Senate ballot paper.

Nationals' Barnaby Joyce in deeper water

.@hamishnews uncovers some fresh insights into the water buy back scandal #TheProjectTV pic.twitter.com/jEFeyA6SpO

— The Project (@theprojecttv) April 29, 2019

13 reasons why voting for Liberal or Nationals candidates on 18 May 2019 may not be the best choice you could make

The McKell Institute, April 2019, Fork in the Road: The impact of the two major parties’ penalty rate policies in the 2019 Federal Election:

Key National Findings

Finding 1: Throughout the three year period of the forthcoming 46th parliament, workers will collectively receive $2.87 billion less in penalty rate pay under a re-elected Coalition Government than a Labor Government, when factoring in each party’s policy preferences.

Finding 2: Nationally, workers in the fast food industry are expected to receive $303.8 million less in penalty rate pay under a re-elected Coalition Government than under a Labor Government over the life of the forthcoming parliament.

Finding 3: Nationally, workers in the hospitality industry are expected to receive $837.15 million less in penalty rate pay under a re-elected Coalition Government than under a Labor Government over the life of the forthcoming parliament.

Finding 4: Nationally, workers in the retail industry are expected to receive $1.64 billion less in penalty rate pay under a re-elected Coalition Government than under a Labor Government over the life of the forthcoming parliament.

Finding 5: Nationally, workers in the pharmacy industry are expected to receive $84.86 million less in penalty rate pay under a re-elected Coalition Government than under a Labor Government over the life of the forthcoming parliament.

Finding 6: Over the life of the forthcoming parliament, workers in Queensland are collectively expected to receive $573.7 million less in penalty rate pay under a re-elected Coalition Government’s than under a Labor Government.

Finding 7: Over the life of the forthcoming parliament, workers in New South Wales are expected to receive $899.26 million less in penalty rate pay under a re-elected Coalition Government than under a Labor Government.

Finding 8: Over the life of the forthcoming parliament, workers in the ACT are expected to receive $45.69 million less in penalty rate pay under a re-elected Coalition Government than under a Labor Government.

Finding 9: Over the life of the forthcoming parliament, workers in Victoria are expected to receive $750.74 million less in penalty rate pay under a re-elected Coalition Government than under a Labor Government.

Finding 10: Over the life of the forthcoming parliament, workers in Tasmania are expected to receive $65.02 million less in penalty rate pay under a re-elected Coalition Government than under a Labor Government.

Finding 11: Over the life of the forthcoming parliament, workers in South Australia are expected to receive $209.65 million less in penalty rate pay under a re-elected Coalition Government than under a Labor Government.

Finding 12: Over the life of the forthcoming parliament, workers in Western Australia are expected to receive $299.52 million less in penalty rate pay under a re-elected Coalition Government than under a Labor Government.

Finding 13: Over the life of the forthcoming parliament, workers in Northern Territory are expected to receive $23.56 million less in penalty rate pay under a re-elected Coalition Government than under a Labor Government.

"BURNED- Are Trees the New Coal Roadshow" screening start on NSW

North Coast Environment Council, North East Forest Alliance, Rainforest Information Centre, No Electricity From Forests, Nimbin Environment Centre, Lismore Environment Centre, Bellingen Environment Centre, Coffs Coast Branch of the National Parks Association, Media Release April 30, 2019:

BURNED- Are Trees the New Coal Roadshow to tour the North Coast.

This award-winning film will be screened across the north coast over the next two weeks.

“Many people saw the film Gaslands and this spear-headed the movement against fracking.People power in the Northern Rivers region rejected this destructive activity and energy source. This film is to forests, what Gaslands was to fracking,” said Susie Russell, who has galvanised the collaboration of the participating organisations.

“The idea that whole forests are being cleared and burnt in power stations instead of coal seems crazy, but increasingly that is what is happening around the world and Australian governments want to see it happen here too.

“Due to a perversion of the international greenhouse gas accounting rules, burning wood is considered to be 'carbon neutral' because it's not a fossil fuel and eventually the carbon can get taken out of the atmosphere by growing more trees. But that will take decades, decades we don't have.

“In the meantime, forests, which are the most effective mechanism we have to capture carbon and store it, are being destroyed to fuel power stations that actually produce more CO2 than if they were burning coal! And it's being subsidised as a 'renewable' industry that is 'clean and green'. Meanwhile the homes of wildlife that depend on forests are gone, pushing many species of plants and animals closer to extinction.

“The scale of this insanity is documented in the film. It shows what is planned for our forests if people power doesn't stop it. It's a cry from the forests, for our help. We really have to stop this madness before it kills us all. Burning forests for electricity must be stopped. The scientific consensus is that saving forests is absolutely key if we want to stop runaway climate change” Ms Russell said.

See below for schedule of screenings.

Participating organisations: North Coast Environment Council, North East Forest Alliance, Rainforest Information Centre, No Electricity From Forests, Nimbin Environment Centre, Lismore Environment Centre, Bellingen Environment Centre, Coffs Coast Branch of the National Parks Association.

Roadshow: Burned- Are Trees the New Coal

Feature film documenting the burgeoning 'biomass' or 'bioenergy' industry that is converting forests to electricity, at enormous cost to the planet!

Coming soon to a forest near you.

May 1- Bellingen Memorial Hall from 6pm, food available

May 2- Coffs Harbour, Norm Jordan Pavilion at Coffs Harbour Showground , Pacific Highway, 6pm

May 4- Nimbin. Screenings at 11am, 1pm and 3pm at the Birth and Beyond Room, 54 Cullen St, close to the pedestrian crossing. Tea and coffee will be available during screenings.

May 5- Nimbin, Birth and Beyond. Screenings at 11am and 1pm as above.

May 7- Mullumbimby, The Mullumbimby Commons, 91/74 Main Arm Rd, 6pm

May 9- Byron Bay, Pighouse, 1 Skinners Shoot Rd, Byron Bay 6pm.

May 10- Lismore Gallery Events Space. Rural St/Keen St, Lismore at 6.30pm, food & drink available Slate Café from 6pm.

Followed by:

May 11- Lismore, Community Climate Crisis Rally, Peace Park, cnr Bruxner H’way & Keen St. Speakers, music & stalls 10am.

Screenings are free but donations towards venue hire and materials would be appreciated.

You can watch a trailer here: http://watch.burnedthemovie.com/

The Trouble with Water: National Party conflicts of interest and the rising odour of corruption

The Saturday Paper, 27 April 2019:

Former Australian Federal Police commissioner Mick Keelty is examining links between political donations and the issuing and buyback of agricultural water licences, amid concerns that undeclared conflicts of interest could be fuelling corruption.

Keelty told The Saturday Paper this week he is concerned about the extent of undeclared conflicts of interest among politicians, lobby groups and businesses operating in the water market.

“I’m interested to see how conflicted politicians are declaring their conflicts of interest when decisions are made about water policy,” he said.

“Where you get those conflicts of interest and they’re not addressed, that’s ripe for corruption.”

His comments come as the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder confirmed to The Saturday Paper that two contentious water licences for which the federal government paid $79 million have returned next to no water to the environment since they were purchased two years ago.

Keelty is conducting inquiries in his capacity as the Northern Basin commissioner for the Murray–Darling Basin, a position to which the federal agriculture minister, David Littleproud, appointed him in August last year with the support of the Labor opposition.

On the issue of water licences, he draws a direct comparison with the management of development applications by local government, where conflicts of interest are required to be declared.

“We’re not seeing it in water, and it should be there,” he said.

Keelty, who was also the inaugural chair of the Australian Crime Commission, is not categorical about what exposing such conflicts might reveal, though he suggests they are widespread.

“I’m not saying it’s corruption; I’m saying it’s conflict of interest,” he said. “But you could draw a conclusion that if conflicts of interest aren’t transparent, it could lead to corruption … Water is now the value of gold. If you have corruption in other elements of society, if you have corruption in other areas of business, why wouldn’t you have it here, when water is the same price as gold?”

“IT IS NOT AS TRANSPARENT AS I FIRST THOUGHT AND IT IS MUDDIED BY IN-KIND DONATIONS AND THIRD-PARTY COMPANIES OR ENTITIES THAT ARE CREATED TO OBSCURE WHO THE REAL DONORS ARE.”

Over the past decade, Keelty has undertaken inquiries and investigations for various governments on issues relating to integrity in government policy, especially in emergency management.

Now turning his attention to the struggling river system, he is aiming to improve transparency in the management of the northern Murray–Darling Basin, which has a far worse compliance record than the river system’s southern half.

His task is to ensure that water gets back to the river system where it is needed and that those who rely on this water, and should have rights for its use, are not being ripped off, especially disenfranchised Indigenous communities and others living downstream.

Keelty argues that excessive numbers of water licences have been issued – sometimes on questionable grounds – and are seriously damaging the river.

“When you look at it strategically, there are too many licences having been allocated for the amount of water that is available,” he told The Saturday Paper.

“Nobody is addressing that, that I can see.”

Keelty also believes the system is too dependent on property owners acting within the law and reporting their own activities.

“The system relies on honesty and integrity but if you look at the number of prosecutions and infringement notices issued in New South Wales in the last 12 months, the pillar of honesty doesn’t appear to be that strong,” he said.

“I can understand the suspicion and the frustration in the southern basin states because they are directly impacted by the efficiency of the systems in the northern basin.”

Keelty is currently examining the Australian Electoral Commission records of political donations, checking links between donors, decision-makers and recipients of water licences or sales contracts.

“Clearly the National Party is probably, I guess, a glaring example of where politicians could be conflicted because their constituency are the very people who are using the water and the very people who are lobbying about water policy,” he said.

But he is examining links to other parties as well. “It’s not just the National Party. Different governments will make decisions about water policy that presumably benefit their state and their constituents.”

Keelty has concerns about the system of political donations more broadly.

“It is not as transparent as I first thought and it is muddied by in-kind donations and third-party companies or entities that are created to obscure who the real donors are,” he said. “I’ve found it more difficult and less transparent than what most of us probably think it is.”

The former police chief is also arguing for proceeds-of-crime legislation to be more clearly linked to offences in the water market because he believes the risk of losing a farming property would be a significant deterrent.

“Where you can prosecute criminal charges for offending, it makes sense to have parallel action in proceeds of crime because that will have more of an impact than perhaps some of the civil charges that are being used to remedy the situation to date,” he said.

Read the full article here

Dozens of Centrelink clients have had their names published on Facebook by a Commonwealth-funded work-for-the-dole provider

ABC News, 26 April 2019:

Dozens of Centrelink clients have had their names published online in what has been described as a "shocking" abuse of privacy.

A Commonwealth-funded work-for-the-dole provider uploaded lists of people who were required to attend client meetings to a public Facebook page.

"We are at a loss as to why anyone would post about workers' appointments online," union official Lara Watson said.

"We were shocked at the publication of names on a social media platform."

The incidents are the latest to emerge from the Government's flagship remote employment scheme, the Community Development Programme (CDP).

Nearly 50 people from the Northern Territory community of Galiwinku, located 500 kilometres east of Darwin, were affected.

The job service provider, the Arnhem Land Progress Association (ALPA), established the social media page apparently with the intention of uploading such lists.

"Welcome to our Facebook page where we will be posting appointments, courses and CDP information," it wrote last month.

The two sheets of names were posted to the Galiwinku CDP page on March 11 and 12.

Both images were shared to another local Facebook group titled Elcho Island Notice Board, which has more than 2,000 members.

One CDP insider denounced the online uploads, saying they were unprecedented and could have placed job seekers at risk.

"If a person has a family violence order in place to protect them, then perhaps the perpetrator would know where she was," said the source, who requested anonymity.

"It advertised that a person is accessing welfare services, and unfortunately in Australia there's discrimination against people accessing welfare services.

"People can be bullied for being unemployed."

The Galiwinku CDP page appears to have since been removed from the internet but the organisation denied any wrongdoing.

"We do not believe that this is a breach of confidentiality," an ALPA spokeswoman said.....

"All ALPA CDP participants give … media consent when they commence as a participant."......

FaceBook Inc's role in Brexit and why it matters

https://www.ted.com/talks/carole_cadwalladr_facebook_s_role_in_brexit_and_the_threat_to_democracy

Facebook spends more than a decade expressing contrition for its actions and avowing its commitment to people’s privacy – but refuses constructive action

“It is untenable that organizations are allowed to reject my office’s legal findings as mere opinions. Facebook should not get to decide what Canadian privacy law does or does not require.” [Canandian Privacy Commissioner  Daniel Therrien, 25 April 2019]

Facbook Inc. professes that it  has taken steps to ensure the intregrity of political discourse on its platform, but rather tellingly will not roll out transparency features in Australia that it has already rolled out in the US, UK, Eu, India, Israel and Ukraine.

The only measure it commits to taking during this federal election campaign is to temporarily ban people outside Australiabuying ads that Facebook determines are “political”.

To date it has not been prepared to move on dishonest actors in Australia who are active on its platform during the election campaign.

So it should come as no surprise that Canada issued this three page news release…….

Office of the Privacy Commission of Canada, news release, 25 April 2019:

Facebook refuses to address serious privacy deficiencies despite public apologies for “breach of trust”

Joint investigation finds major shortcomings in the social media giant’s privacy practices, highlighting pressing need for legislative reform to adequately protect the rights of Canadians

OTTAWA, April 25, 2019 – Facebook committed serious contraventions of Canadian privacy laws and failed to take responsibility for protecting the personal information of Canadians, an investigation has found.

Despite its public acknowledgement of a “major breach of trust” in the Cambridge Analytica scandal, Facebook disputes the investigation findings of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada and the Information and Privacy Commissioner for British Columbia. The company also refuses to implement recommendations to address deficiencies.

“Facebook’s refusal to act responsibly is deeply troubling given the vast amount of sensitive personal information users have entrusted to this company,” says Privacy Commissioner of Canada Daniel Therrien. “Their privacy framework was empty, and their vague terms were so elastic that they were not meaningful for privacy protection.

“The stark contradiction between Facebook’s public promises to mend its ways on privacy and its refusal to address the serious problems we’ve identified – or even acknowledge that it broke the law – is extremely concerning.”

“Facebook has spent more than a decade expressing contrition for its actions and avowing its commitment to people’s privacy,” B.C. Information and Privacy Commissioner Michael McEvoy says, “but when it comes to taking concrete actions needed to fix transgressions they demonstrate disregard.”

Commissioner McEvoy says Facebook’s actions point to the need for giving provincial and federal privacy regulators stronger sanctioning power in order to protect the public’s interests. “The ability to levy meaningful fines would be an important starting point,” he says.

The findings and Facebook’s rejection of the report’s recommendations highlight critical weaknesses within the current Canadian privacy protection framework and underscore an urgent need for stronger privacy laws, according to both Commissioners.

“It is untenable that organizations are allowed to reject my office’s legal findings as mere opinions,” says Commissioner Therrien.

In addition to the power to levy financial penalties on companies, both Commissioners say they should also be given broader authority to inspect the practices of organizations to independently confirm privacy laws are being respected. This measure would be in alignment with the powers that exist in the U.K. and several other countries.

Giving the federal Commissioner order-making powers would also ensure that his findings and remedial measures are binding on organizations that refuse to comply with the law. 

The complaint that initiated the investigation followed media reports that Facebook had allowed an organization to use an app to access users’ personal information and that some of the data was then shared with other organizations, including Cambridge Analytica, which was involved in U.S. political campaigns.

The app, at one point called “This is Your Digital Life,” encouraged users to complete a personality quiz. It collected information about users who installed the app as well as their Facebook “friends.” Some 300,000 Facebook users worldwide added the app, leading to the potential disclosure of the personal information of approximately 87 million others, including more than 600,000 Canadians.

The investigation revealed Facebook violated federal and B.C. privacy laws in a number of respects. The specific deficiencies include:

Unauthorized access

Facebook’s superficial and ineffective safeguards and consent mechanisms resulted in a third-party app’s unauthorized access to the information of millions of Facebook users. Some of that information was subsequently used for political purposes.

Lack of meaningful consent from “friends of friends”

Facebook failed to obtain meaningful consent from both the users who installed the app as well as those users’ “friends,” whose personal information Facebook also disclosed.

No proper oversight over privacy practices of apps

Facebook did not exercise proper oversight with respect to the privacy practices of apps on its platform.  It relied on contractual terms with apps to protect against unauthorized access to user information; however, its approach to monitoring compliance with those terms was wholly inadequate.

Overall lack of responsibility for personal information

A basic principle of privacy laws is that organizations are responsible for the personal information under their control. Instead, Facebook attempted to shift responsibility for protecting personal information to the apps on its platform, as well as to users themselves.

The failures identified in the investigation are particularly concerning given that a 2009 investigation of Facebook by the federal Commissioner’s office also found contraventions with respect to seeking overly broad, uninformed consent for disclosures of personal information to third-party apps, as well as inadequate monitoring to protect against unauthorized access by those apps.

If Facebook had implemented the 2009 investigation’s recommendations meaningfully, the risk of unauthorized access and use of Canadians’ personal information by third party apps could have been avoided or significantly mitigated.

Facebook’s refusal to accept the Commissioners’ recommendations means there is a high risk that the personal information of Canadians could be used in ways that they do not know or suspect, exposing them to potential harms.

Given the extent and severity of the issues identified, the Commissioners sought to implement measures to ensure the company respects its accountability and other privacy obligations in the future. However, Facebook refused to voluntarily submit to audits of its privacy policies and practices over the next five years.

The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada plans to take the matter to Federal Court to seek an order to force the company to correct its privacy practices.

The Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner for B.C. reserves its right under the Personal Information Protection Act to consider future actions against Facebook.  

Related documents:

Report of Findings

Chart: Facebook findings highlight the need for legislative reform

Remarks by the Privacy Commissioner of Canada regarding the Facebook/Cambridge-Analytica investigation

* Note: my yellow highlighting

Nor should this alleged 'mistake' made by Facebook cause surprise.......

The New York Times, 25 April 2019:

SAN FRANCISCO — The New York State attorney general’s office plans to open an investigation into Facebook’s unauthorized collection of more than 1.5 million users’ email address books, according to two people briefed on the matter.

The inquiry concerns a practice unearthed in April in which Facebook harvested the email contact lists of a portion of new users who signed up for the network after 2016, according to the two people, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the inquiry had not been officially announced.

Those lists were then used to improve Facebook’s ad-targeting algorithms and other friend connections across the network.

The investigation was confirmed late Thursday afternoon by the attorney general’s office.

“Facebook has repeatedly demonstrated a lack of respect for consumers’ information while at the same time profiting from mining that data,” said Letitia James, the attorney general of New York, in a statement. “It is time Facebook is held accountable for how it handles consumers’ personal information.”…

Users were not notified that their contact lists were being harvested at the time. Facebook shuttered the contact list collection mechanism shortly after the issue was discovered by the press…..

Facebook Inc's rapacious business practices has been the death of online privacy and now threatens the democratic process.