...you do realise what the money being used from the Carbon Tax is being used for right?

Bracks to PM: ignore Abbott

DateAugust 26, 2012

Steve Bracks: 'I'd stop talking about Abbott.'

FORMER Victorian premier Steve Bracks has some advice for Julia Gillard: stop talking about Tony Abbott.

Speaking at the Melbourne Writers Festival yesterday, Mr Bracks said the Prime Minister's fortunes would improve if she ignored the Opposition Leader - and focused more on selling her own agenda.

''I've never seen an opposition leader talked about so much - ever,'' he told the audience at Federation Square. ''I would stop talking about Tony Abbott. I would love a press conference where he's not mentioned by the government of the day. Just concentrate on your own agenda and you'd be surprised … how things would improve and improve.''

As Labor premier between 1999 and July 2007, Mr Bracks has a few things in common with the Prime Minister. Both are Victorians. Both formed minority governments to get into office. And both have broken major election promises. For Ms Gillard, it was the carbon tax; for Mr Bracks, it was his pledge for ''no tolls'' on the Scoresby Freeway.

Comparing the two promises, Mr Bracks said federal Labor would not have copped so much heat on the carbon tax if it had bedded down all the details first, rather than ''having a vacuum for nine months where people speculate what it might be, or what might be the consequence of it''.

He also said Ms Gillard should have explained more clearly why she reneged in the first place: ''I believe the explanation should have been, 'The political circumstances have changed. I did not envisage we'd have a hung Parliament.' That was the reality. So just talk about the reality - don't try to dress it up.''

Mr Bracks also took aim at the way politicians deal with the 24-hour news cycle. Despite previously having one of the slickest spin machines in modern politics, the former premier urged MPs to be selective with the media.

''You don't have to be out every day, you don't have to respond to every story,'' he said.

''You should only be out when you've got something to push and promote and I think that's the biggest mistake governments and oppositions are making. They want to be a part of everything.''

■ Mr Bracks will appear at another Melbourne Writers Festival session today on Labor's political fortunes. The Age is a sponsor of the festival.



Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/bracks-to-pm-ignore-abbott-20120825-24thz.html#ixzz24boPEd6h

NT set for CLP government

NT NEWS | August 25th, 2012


Terry Mills

TERRY Mills has pledged to govern for all Territorians after being swept to power in the NT election.

The CLP trounced Labor on the back of huge swings in the bush.

Mr Mills said the people had voted for change and "a better future".

"For all of those Territorians, no matter where they live, every family ... you came out and you voted for that change and you've voted for a better future," he said.

"I would deliberately like to pause and acknowledge all those who are remote from Darwin. We tonight are thinking of you and your families. We are here to support you."

Mr Mills made a "pledge" to govern for all Territorians.

Your Say
"Give it 2-3 months and everyone'll be complaining about this mob... they're both the same in the long run and will renege on promises to their own mothers if it benefits them. And if you actually compare policies they both have good and bad points, so no matter who wins, we'll lose in some regards."

Cynical but True!

"We will bring the Territory together again, no division, no Berrimah line, we're all in this together."

Outgoing Chief Minister Paul Henderson called Mr Mills just after 9pm to congratulate him and concede defeat.

Mr Henderson told a gathering of loyal Labor supporters that he was proud of his five years at the helm.

He also paid tribute to his predecessor, Clare Martin, who led Labor from oblivion to power for the first time in 2001.

"I believe the Territory is very much a better place than it was 11 years ago when we inherited government," Mr Henderson said.

The CLP has been tipped to win as many as 15 seats after voters in remote areas flocked to them in droves.

Labor managed to hold all of its seats in Darwin's northern suburbs, but will lose at least three seats outside of Darwin. Independent Gerry Wood held his rural Darwin seat of Nelson.

http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2012/08/25/313144_ntnews.html

Galaxy Research shows two out of three people believe Newman's job cuts going too far

by: Daryl Passmore From: The Sunday Mail (Qld) August 26, 2012

CAMPBELL Newman's slash-and-burn approach to balancing the state's books has created a jobs panic among public servants that is infecting other Queenslanders.

An exclusive Galaxy Research poll for The Courier-Mail/Sunday Mail shows two out of three people believe the Premier is going too far with his proposal to cut 20,000 public sector jobs.

The scale of the new Government's strategy has startled even its own supporters, with 45 per cent of LNP voters saying the number of redundancies is too high.

While the measures will shave about 10 per cent of public service jobs, more than half of all Government employees (52 per cent) fear they may be the ones facing the axe, the poll shows.

And the survey of 800 people statewide reveals that the nervousness over job security is spreading rapidly to workers in the private sector.

Forty-nine per cent of people employed by small to medium companies say they are worried about joining the dole queue during the next 12 months.

Those working for large companies feel more comfortable, with 64 per cent reporting they are not concerned about their positions.

The Newman Government, elected in a historic landslide in March, is desperate to get the state's finances back on track after inheriting $65 billion in debt, projected to blow out to $100 billion by 2018-19.

The Premier has said Queensland has "20,000 more public servants than it can afford", and ministers are drawing up details of cuts in their departments ready for next month's Budget.

Treasurer Tim Nicholls last week flagged the prospect of extra royalties on resources companies that are already closing mines, cutting jobs and postponing new projects.

Parliament passed a bill on Thursday night removing legal job protection for government employees except police, opening the door to greater outsourcing.

Thousands of public servants and community-sector workers hit by funding cuts have already taken to the streets as part of a 1000-day campaign of action.

And it appears they have the support of most Queenslanders.

"There is quite clearly a strong view that Campbell Newman's suggestion that up to 20,000 public sector jobs could be cut is excessive," Galaxy Research managing director David Briggs said.

"It is creating panic within the ranks of public servants.

"And this, as well as other factors in the economy, seems to be fuelling wider job concerns in the community.

"This whole issue . . . is fuelling discontent with Campbell Newman."

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/can-dos-job-cuts-going-too-far-poll/story-e6freoof-1226458058874

The cook's tour, from the high life to bankruptcy
DateAugust 26, 2012

.JULIA GILLARD and her ex-boyfriend Bruce Morton Wilson split 17 years ago and since then their lives have taken vastly different turns. One is the Prime Minister, the other went from living the high life on funds allegedly scammed from some of Australia's biggest construction companies to bankruptcy. Both ended up with new partners who are hairdressers.

Mr Wilson, the former Australian Workers Union organiser, quit the union after the scams were discovered in 1995. That is when Ms Gillard said she dumped him. A couple of months later, however, land title documents show he bought a house with his then wife Francine in the well-to-do Perth suburb of Karrinyup.

The then 39-year old Mr Wilson, who was born in the Pilbara mining town of Port Hedland, bought the bungalow-style home on a 718sqm block for $235,000, selling it three years later for $278,000. It is understood he then ran a number of businesses. By 2009, whatever funds he may have had disappeared and, according to a statement of his affairs given to his trustee-in-bankruptcy, he had hit rock bottom. He was living in a rented unit, listing his occupation as a cook. His only assets included his tools of trade, a set of knives worth $200, a Holden Astra worth $15,000, $200 in cash and a laptop computer worth $300.

The car and the laptop were subject to hire purchase loans on which he owed more than they were worth. His debts had reached $50,713.77, owed to unsecured creditors including Westpac, National Australia Bank, Citibank, Telstra and Optus. Mr Wilson was released from bankruptcy in May this year and is now a cook at a club at Port Stephens. His first wife, Francine, who is understood to be Swiss-born, and their two sons are living overseas.

Advertisement Mr Wilson is now said to be in demand from current affairs programs to tell his story.

The celebrity agent Max Markson said he approached Mr Wilson earlier this year, but was told he was not interested.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/the-cooks-tour-from-the-high-life-to-bankruptcy-20120825-24t6m.html#ixzz24cRdPRBn

so you can guarantee that each and every dollars is being directed to the correct department....i seriously doubt it, just like payroll tax, 3x3 petrol raod tax, the [petrol excise,and about 3 gazzillion other taxes.....just goes to revenue and then wasted by morons who get everything handed to them and deliver nothing....

Working well for QLD so far. The cycle continues.

Union bagman: I didn't know I had home loan

DateAugust 26, 2012
.
'He had never received a loan statement', Harry Nowicki, lawyer. Photo: Sahlan Hayes
The self-confessed union bagman Ralph Blewitt - the legal owner of a terrace house in Fitzroy allegedly purchased using misappropriated Australian Workers Union funds - has claimed that he never knew he had a housing loan for the property.

Mr Blewitt, speaking through the retired Melbourne lawyer Harry Nowicki, said he had never applied for the loan or supplied any income details or asset and liability statements. He has appointed the law firm Galbally Rolfe to inspect the loan and conveyancing files held by Slater & Gordon to determine who was behind it.

Mr Nowicki told The Sun-Herald that he was the one who had informed Mr Blewitt about the loan.

''He had never received a loan statement or made a payment,'' said Mr Nowicki.

The terrace house in Kerr Street, Fitzroy, which was bought in 1993 for $230,000, became part of a police and union investigation after Mr Blewitt and another former union organiser - the then boyfriend of the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, Bruce Morton Wilson - were accused of illegally scamming hundreds of thousands of dollars from construction companies which was supposed to go to the union.

AWU officials blew the whistle on the alleged fraud in 1995 after discovering numerous unauthorised bank accounts in the name of the union allegedly set up by Mr Wilson. It has been alleged that some of that money was used to buy the Fitzroy house in the name of Mr Blewitt, who is now offering to tell all if he is guaranteed immunity from prosecution.

No charges have been laid over the scam. Although the house was in Mr Blewitt's name, it was Mr Wilson who lived in it.

Mr Wilson was an AWU state secretary in Western Australia and later Victoria. He met Ms Gillard in 1991 when she was a senior industrial lawyer with Slater & Gordon in Melbourne. Ms Gillard acted for Mr Wilson and the AWU and she had drawn up the documents for an association which was allegedly used by Mr Wilson and Mr Blewitt to siphon off funds. Ms Gillard has consistently denied any wrongdoing.

Mr Wilson and Ms Gillard were together until 1995 when Ms Gillard discovered she had been deceived by Mr Wilson and she said she ended the relationship.

Mr Blewitt, who now lives in Asia, broke a 17-year silence to say he was willing to tell all he knows about the union scam so the chapter could finally be closed.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/union-bagman-i-didnt-know-i-had-home-loan-20120825-24t6o.html#ixzz24cokx5Cf

Is Abbott on thin ice? Absolutely

DateAugust 24, 2012


WHEN Tony Abbott appeared on the ABC's 7.30 on Wednesday, he looked like a man desperately trying not to make a mistake. Then, as these things sometimes go, he made a bad one.

Under tough questioning from presenter Leigh Sales about his insistence the carbon tax was a factor in the Olympic Dam decision, he said he hadn't read that day's BHP statements.

If trust is the Prime Minister's stand-out problem, Abbott's is credibility. Put simply, the man exaggerates.
Yesterday, he insisted he had in fact read its announcement, claiming he'd been referring to another issue when he had said ''no''. His explanation wasn't particularly convincing - he'd had an opportunity to correct himself on the program - but it was equally hard to believe that he didn't scan the press release.

In question time, the government made merry with Abbott's blunder. It was the second question time this week in which the government scored royally off a gaffe by the Opposition Leader.

On Monday, Abbott suggested that independent schools were badly done by, allowing Julia Gillard to allege he'd be ''Jack the Ripper'' when it came to cutting funding for government schools. The Coalition had to quickly try to clean up its own mess, insisting it wouldn't leave any schools worse off.

The political pressure cooker, as the parliamentary term goes into its last year, plus constant media scrutiny in the round-the-clock cycle ensure any error gets maximum airing.

Perhaps the surprising thing about Abbott is that he hasn't made more slips. He attempts to be so disciplined he sometimes looks like he's been coated with political formaldehyde. The preoccupation with discipline extends to the Abbott office's control over the frontbench. Some shadow ministers rail about the constraints they are under, with the leader's staff vetting and restricting their media engagements.

The fear of veering off message is understandable, but there is a cost, especially when the message is uncompromising, which leads to blatant skewing.

Barrister Julian Burnside picked Abbott up over his dodging when asked on 7.30 why he referred to ''illegal'' arrivals seeking asylum, when in fact these are ''unauthorised'' rather than ''illegal''. Burnside is not a politically neutral observer. But it is fair enough to call out Abbott over being loose with the terminology when the motive is likely to be to inflame the debate.

Abbott as a politician is coming across as neither subtle nor supple. This makes it harder for the voters to get a grip on what makes him tick and what he would be like as PM. It also means it is difficult for Abbott to adapt to changing circumstances.

If trust is the Prime Minister's stand-out problem, Abbott's is credibility. Put simply, the man exaggerates. Whatever you may think of the carbon tax, for example, it is never going to be responsible for all that Abbott claims. Nor is the government as bad as he says. And Australia's economic situation is better than he allows - although he has recently slightly nuanced his line here, to emphasise how much better things could be under another government.

Labor's challenge is to turn Abbott's over-hype back on him. On carbon, it started just before the tax began on July 1, stepping up the effort when that commencement went quietly (although there are more electricity bills to come - the government shouldn't celebrate too early). Craig Emerson's dreadful No Whyalla Wipeout was part of this effort to point to the ludicrousness of some of Abbott's claims.

The as-yet-unanswerable question is whether a discredited government has sufficient firepower to discredit an opponent who is stretching credibility. Cabinet minister Greg Combet, during a ferocious government attack on Abbott in Parliament yesterday, declared hopefully: ''The deceit will go up and up, and it is going to clean out your credibility big time.''

It's difficult for Labor on the carbon tax, because of Abbott's success in demonising it; on the other hand, initial polling showed people's experience hadn't matched their fears.

If Abbott insists on simply repeating claims that he can't properly substantiate, this will feed into voters' questions about him. Yet having planted the carbon tax at the centre of his election strategy, and kept the debate black and white, he finds it hard to deal with facts that don't fit the line.

Hence his discomfort under Sales' questioning about Olympic Dam, when the comment of BHP Billiton's Marius Kloppers on tax was put to him. Kloppers said the South Australian and federal governments and all the agencies ''that have worked with us to make this a reality have been absolutely wonderful partners to have''. Asked whether the issue of tax had come into the judgment to hold back, he said the decision was almost wholly associated with capital costs - the tax environment for this project hadn't changed (the mining tax doesn't cover the minerals at Olympic).

Abbott went to earlier comments from the company about tax. But he came off second best - no wonder he doesn't front up too often on that and similar programs.

Abbott has been extraordinarily successful as an opposition leader. This week, however, brought a sharp reminder of a vulnerability which has previously been a strength - his absolutism.

Michelle Grattan is The Age's political editor.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/is-abbott-on-thin-ice-absolutely-20120823-24oyz.html#ixzz24d3Mjy3G

Got halfway and had to turn it off. Unbelievable that this guy is even in parliament.

She didn't lie. Under a Labour government a Carbon Tax was not going to be introduced. The government is a coalition.
More simpleton statements from simpleton thinking.......

If you want to get technical, she actually said "there will be no carbon tax under the government I lead". She is the leader of this government right?

Are you betting your bottom dollar on that?

Give them twelve months and Labour will have tribunal on Broadband, Carbon tax and some other unpopular policies and will do back flip on all of them.

This refugees tribunal and the three experts costs us about 400K and has exposed how dumb Labour actually is, something 85% of us already knew for a while now.

Marcus Priest and Matthew Drummond



Former Reserve Bank board member Warwick McKibbin says the federal government’s decision to link carbon permits to European prices is a dangerous policy equivalent to signing up the Australian dollar to the euro zone.

Australian Industry Group chief executive Innes Willox also raised doubts about government forecasts that the $23-a-tonne carbon price will reach $29 by 2015-16, given the debt crisis in Europe, which has reduced demand for carbon permits.

From 2015, the price of Australian carbon permits will be tied to European prices, a change that will leave an important source of government revenue and business carbon costs dependent on conditions in Europe.

The federal opposition said the government was outsourcing responsibility for economic policy to Europe.

Professor McKibbin said the European scheme was a failure, a reference to the low prices for European carbon credits. Lower prices are less effective at cutting emissions.

“It shows a lack of understanding of what good climate policy should be and what is in Australia’s national interest,” he writes in The Australian Financial Review today.

“Australia’s climate policy design has been a farce and it keeps getting worse,” Professor McKibbin says.

The federal government stepped up attempts to win business support for the changes. Prime Minister Julia Gillard said the European Union was working to bolster the price.

“There’s been significant volatility in all markets, including carbon markets,” she said on a trip to the Cook Islands for a regional summit.

“In order to predict a price in three years’ time, you don’t simply look at today’s price and say to yourself that’s inevitably going to be the price in three years’ time. I mean that’s nonsense, clearly nonsense.”

Professor McKibbin, who is professor of economics at the Australian National University’s Crawford School of Public Policy, said: “Surely now is not the time to subject Australia to economic shocks out of Europe through an additional channel of the price of carbon.

“By joining the euro zone, we would complete the trifecta of fundamental policy errors and we could then blame someone else for our economic failures.”

The changes to the carbon scheme will be made by legislation to be introduced into Parliament in coming weeks, provoking speculation the aim is to prevent a future Coalition government from unwinding them.

While it would have been possible to allow Australian business to buy European permits by regulation, a government source indicated it would be done by legislation to ensure “certainty”.

On Wednesday, advisers to Climate Change Minister Greg Combet and the secretary of his department, Blair Comley, contacted major business groups to sell the benefits of the changes to Australian companies.

And yesterday, a three-day consultation roadshow by the Department of Climate Change began in Canberra. Sessions will be held in Sydney and Melbourne today and tomorrow.

The price of carbon in the European emissions trading scheme is about $10. But the European Union is considering proposals to delay by regulation the release of up to 1.2 billion emissions permits next year. Legislation by the European Parliament would be required to cancel these permits or hold them in reserve.

While a decision on new regulations is expected this year, the proposal is being resisted by the Polish government, which has a large coal industry. Germany’s Economy Minister, Philipp Rösler, recently expressed opposition to intervention in the EU emissions trading scheme.

Isaac Valero-Ladron, spokesman for EU Climate Change Action Commissioner Connie Hedegaard, told The Australian Financial Review Australia would not have a role in those negotiations, despite Tuesday’s decision that means the Australian carbon price will be wholly dependent on their outcome.

“It’s important that Australia, now that we have linked the carbon price, is fully informed, but the EU ETS [emissions trading system] is concerned for the moment with EU member-states,” the spokesman said. Greater exchange between Europe and Australia would be possible once the schemes were formally linked in 2015, he said.

Coalition leader Tony Abbott said: “This idea we somehow secure our economic future by tying up with Europe, when Europe is going backwards and Asia is going forwards, just shows how wrong-headed this government is.”

Deutsche Bank carbon analyst Tim Jordan said there was a risk that once EU economic ministers became involved in discussions over the changes, they could be put on hold.

“It will be like increasing taxes,” Mr Jordan said.

International Emissions Trading Association chief executive Dirk Forrister said traders were expecting the changes and they were factored into European prices.

“The real expectation of most in the market is that Europe believes in this market,” he said from Geneva.

“It’s a question of how much and when. It’s not going to be a quick, easy process, obviously, because there are economic consequences to any change they make.”

Ai Group’s Mr Willox said it was hard to see how the price of carbon in Europe would reach $29 in 2015-16.

“It’s still dealing with the Greek debt issue,” he told Sky News.

Ms Gillard and Mr Combet brushed off suggestions the budget would take a hit in 2015-16 due to a lower than expected carbon price.

“In Europe it has been impacted quite seriously over the last nine months, 10 months by the debt crisis in Europe,” Mr Combet told ABC TV. “And you would certainly hope and anticipate that over the course of the next three years those issues will be addressed and confidence will return to the European market.”

Some economists warn of a potential revenue shortfall of $3 billion to $5 billion a year due to lower carbon prices.

This year’s budget projected cash receipts from carbon permits will be $6.7 billion, which does not include the value of free permits for emissions-intensive industries exposed to foreign competition, which will depend on the carbon price at that time.

However, revenue from the scheme in 2015-16 includes 25 per cent of the carbon price liability from 2014-15 of about $2.3 billion.

Finance Minister Penny Wong said there would be no changes to a second round tax cuts scheduled for 2015/16.

“We’ve made a commitment about the assistance package, and there’s a reason we’ve done that,” Senator Wong said.

“Apart from recognising the cost of living pressures on families there’s also a very important set of tax changes in the assistance which are very good for participation.”


As a result, the share of 2015-16 cash receipts which depend on the international price of carbon a tonne is $4.4 billion. Overall revenue in 2015-16 is projected to be $438.4 billion, so the impact of halving carbon price revenue would be around 0.5 per cent.


The Australian Financial Review

Rinehart's welfare comments an 'insult to millions': Treasurer
DateAugust 30, 2012 - 4:41PM

Treasurer Wayne Swan has slammed mining magnate Gina Rinehart for insulting Australian workers after she accused people of being jealous of the wealthy.

Mrs Rinehart, Australia's richest person, says those who are jealous of the wealthy should start working harder and cut down on drinking, smoking and socialising.

In her regular column in Australian Resources and Investment magazine, she wrote it was billionaires like herself who were doing more than anyone to help the poor by investing their money and creating jobs.

"There is no monopoly on becoming a millionaire," Mrs Rinehart wrote.

Advertisement "If you're jealous of those with more money, don't just sit there and complain. Do something to make more money yourself - spend less time drinking or smoking and socialising, and more time working.

"Become one of those people who work hard, invest and build, and at the same time create employment and opportunities for others."


"Tony Abbott is Gina's knight in shining armour when it comes to fighting for tax cuts for her and Clive Palmer" ... Treasurer Wayne Swan. Photo: Alex Ellinghausen
She also suggested the government should lower the minimum wage of $606.40 a week and cut taxes to stimulate employment.

But Mr Swan said the comments were "an insult to the millions of Australian workers who go to work and slog it out to feed the kids and pay the bills".

"The big question is whether [Opposition Leader] Tony Abbott will endorse Gina Rinehart's social policies as he's endorsed her tax, industrial relations and environmental policies," the Treasurer said in a statement.

"Tony Abbott is Gina's knight in shining armour when it comes to fighting for tax cuts for her and Clive Palmer."

Mr Swan added: "The question for Tony Abbott today is does he agree with Gina Rinehart that Aussies are lazy workers who drink and socialise too much?

"Will he do her bidding and slash the minimum wage as Gina wants him to?"

Mr Abbott has yet to respond.

But Australian Greens deputy leader Adam Bandt has joined a chorus of criticism of Ms Rinehart for insulting workers.

Mr Bandt said he was continually amazed at people like Ms Rinehart, who did not see the mining boom as belonging to everyone.

"They want to take all of the benefits for themselves and distribute none of it to the rest of the country," he told journalists.

"A lot of people work very hard and work a lot harder than Gina Rinehart does and take home less each week than her."

Earlier today, federal Health Minister Tanya Plibersek said Ms Rinehart was out of line attacking those on the lowest wages.

"I think it's pretty easy for Gina Rinehart to say that people on the minimum wage should get paid less," she told the Seven network today.

"I think she should try living on the minimum wage."

Australian Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon, told Seven she respected success but Ms Rinehart was not self-made.

"She's accumulated wealth from her family."

Senator Rhiannon said workers were out there creating the wealth.

Building union chief Tony Maher said Mrs Rinehart's comments showed why Australia's mining billionaires should not lead Australia's economic debate.

The Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union national president said in a statement today that Mrs Rinehart's comments revealed her "twisted logic".

"At the same time as trying to import cheap foreign labour and avoid paying tax, Rinehart claims it's millionaires and billionaires who are the greatest for social good. What planet is she living on?"

Mr Maher said Mrs Rinehart was born into a mining fortune and once you had such a fortune it was not hard to build on it, especially in an era of record prices for Australian resources.

Mrs Rinehart should not employ foreign workers if she genuinely wants Australians to be richer, north Queensland MP Bob Katter said.

Mr Katter said Ms Rinehart would be more believable if she did not want to import foreign workers for coalmines in Queensland's Galilee Basin.

"So thank you for your advice, Gina, but this demonstrates the most burning question before the Australian people today," he said.

"Are we going to give the 200,000 jobs that are coming with the coal expansion in the Galilee Basin ... and in iron ore to foreign workers as Gina Rinehart wants?

"Bringing in the foreign workers is not about her being unable to get Australians to do those jobs, it's about cutting back pays."

AAP



Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/political-news/rineharts-welfare-comments-an-insult-to-millions-treasurer-20120830-251u5.html#ixzz251ZLCBzy

Labor to slash public servants
PUBLISHED: 6 hours 38 MINUTES AGO | UPDATE: 3 hours 41 MINUTES AGO

Prime Minister Julia Gillard told a Public Service union conference in Sydney this week that the opposition is already boasting “of huge, radical cuts” and that “thousands of public servants will go”. Photo: Andrew Meares

Laura Tingle Political editor

Federal cabinet ministers have been told that departments face another round of big staffing cuts, in a move that will blunt Labor’s attack on state Coalition governments for slashing public service numbers.

Cabinet ministers have been told the expenditure review committee of cabinet will impose a further “efficiency dividend” on the federal bureaucracy, in addition to the on-going 1.5 per cent dividend and an additional, one-off 2.5 percentage-point boost dividend imposed last November. That took the dividend – in effect, enforced spending cuts – in 2012-13 to 4 per cent.

However, the government is apparently looking for another name for the across-the-board cut to the federal bureaucracy, which is already enduring a reduction in staffing numbers by 4200 over a two-year period.

Individual departments are being told how many positions they will have to shed as part of the savings measure. It comes as the mid-year review of the budget once again is turned into a mini-budget to rein in costs to offset spending blowouts and revenue shortfalls to keep the surplus forecast this financial year on track.

Treasurer Wayne Swan yesterday disputed estimates that there was a $120 billion bill for taxpayers over the rest of the decade as result of Labor commitments.

Mr Swan attacked the estimate published in The Australian Financial Review as “arbitrary” and cited Labor’s record of finding savings.

The government is refusing to adjust its forecast revenue collection from the carbon price, despite deciding this week to dump the $15 floor price originally proposed to come into effect in 2015, and the much lower world carbon prices quoted in current markets.

The government’s modelling of the carbon price – and therefore revenue – is based on a general equilibrium model rather than spot market prices. It claims there is no need to change the forecast at this point.

Research from the Parliamentary Library shows the mining tax will fall $620 million short next financial year of fully funding federal budget plans for families and businesses that it was designed for. This estimate does not take into account any revenue hit from falling commodity prices.

But the government is still pressuring the Coalition to explain how it plans to make up a $70 billion budget shortfall its own spokesman has identified in the past. This shortfall includes having to fund a proposed “direct action plan” that would aim to fund carbon abatement measures from the budget.

Labor has also been on the attack in the past week over swingeing public service cuts imposed by Coalition state governments that have been endorsed by federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott. The federal Coalition has promised to cut 12,000 public service jobs and to outsource large areas of federal policy administration to the states.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard told a Public Service union conference in Sydney this week that the opposition is already boasting “of huge, radical cuts” and that “thousands of public servants will go”.

But with the surplus under pressure, the federal government is having to undertake its own further cuts to bureaucratic numbers. Ministers have also been told they must submit their proposals for further spending cuts by October, before the release of the mid-year review of the budget.

The government has also imposed a freeze on $2 billion a year of grants as cabinet seeks to offset a $2 billion blowout in the cost of asylum seeker policy, along with softer than expected company tax and mining tax receipts.

In addition to shoring up the surplus, the government is under pressure to fund spending commitments in the next few years, having committed to the National Disability Insurance Scheme, a dental care scheme, education reforms, and changes to the carbon price scheme from 2015.

In a letter published in the Financial Review today, Mr Swan attacks “an arbitrary decision to set a new eight-year benchmark of budgeting that has not been applied to any previous government, in order to concoct a sensationalised figure that completely ignores the established facts about the government’s record of finding savings and maintaining spending discipline. The government found $33 billion of savings in the last budget, and $100 billion of savings in the preceding budgets.”

Mr Swan said the Financial Review’s figures include “a hypothetical revenue shortfall from the carbon price in three years’ time – plucked randomly from a well-known critic of the government’s carbon price policy . . . and incorporated in the front page headline figure as fact”.


The Australian Financial Review


Laura Tingle

AUGUST 31, 2012 | BY REBECCA BOWE
The Battle for Privacy Intensifies in Australia

Australians are fending off threats to their right to privacy from all directions. First, there was Australian Attorney General Nicola Roxon’s push to expand government online surveillance powers, submitted to Parliament in a package of reforms sought in a National Security Inquiry.

Then, on Aug. 22, the Australian Senate approved the Cybercrime Legislation Amendment Bill 2011, granting authorities the power to require phone and Internet providers to store up to 180 days worth of personal communications data. The purpose is to aid in investigations by both foreign and domestic law enforcement agencies, making it especially controversial since it can result in granting foreign governments access to Australian citizens’ communications data. The legislation only allows for data retention in the cases of specifically targeted individuals.

The bill is based on the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime – which we've flagged in the past as one of the world’s worst Internet law treaties – and the passage of the bill opens the door for Australia to join the Convention.

At least we can welcome the news that one of the most controversial aspects of Roxon’s National Security Inquiry proposal, a vague mandatory data retention provision that would have required service providers to retain all users’ communications data for up to two full years, seems to have been placed on hold – for now, anyway.

Yet at the same time, the newly approved Cybercrime Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 is viewed by some in Australia as a kind of “data retention lite,” and a precursor to the mass, untargeted surveillance that the more extreme proposal may yet usher in. An outcome of the approval of this bill, after all, is that providers will now have to install systems enabling data retention for up to 180 days – and pay for it themselves.

Public Fights Back

Despite the steady march toward expanded online snooping powers for law enforcement in the name of “national security,” a hefty pile of submissions landed in Parliamentary chambers last week, reflecting strong public opposition to the proposed reforms. A total of 177 submissions, representing thousands of individuals and organizations, flowed in to the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Intelligence and Security even though the government allowed only a brief timeframe for comment.

Below, we collected some reactions of various Australian stakeholders who drafted lengthy submissions to convey their serious concerns. Civil liberties advocates aren’t the only ones worried about where this is going. The Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association and Communications Alliance, a telecom industry group, also chimed in to express concerns about costly new requirements for telecoms that would come attached to these surveillance measures. Since data retention disproportionately burdens smaller ISPs affected by requiring expensive equipment upgrades, the measure has the potential to hamper innovation by discouraging new startups from entering the market.

Re: Making it a Crime to Refuse to Aid in Decryption

One of the worst ideas contained in the National Security Inquiry package is the creation of a new crime under the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act of 1979: Refusing to aid law enforcement in the decryption of communications. That interception law gratned law enforcement agencies, such as the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and the Australian Crime Commission (ACC), the ability to legally intercept communications for the first time. Reactions to the proposal hinged on the threat it poses to Australians’ right to silence.

Senator Scott Ludlam, speaking on behalf of the Australian Green Party, had this to say:

While the integrity of Australianʹs right to silence has been damaged by the anti‐terrorism laws, with regard to other criminal offences it remains intact. This proposal further degrades the right to silence, presumably to pre‐trial investigations and undermines the privilege against self incrimination. … The Committee should oppose this proposal as a serious erosion of the legal and human rights of Australians.

Electronic Frontiers Australia, a digital civil liberties organization (which is not formally affiliated with EFF), pointed out a number of problems with this idea:

EFA is concerned about the possible creation of an offence for failing to assist in the decryption of communications for the following reasons:

it undermines the right of individuals to not cooperate with an investigation
it poses a threat to the independence of journalists and their sources, particularly in 
circumstances involving whistle-blowing activity related to cases of official corruption
it could undermine the principles of doctor-patient and lawyer-client confidentiality and 
other trusted relationships
there are foreseeable and entirely legitimate circumstances in which decryption of data is 
not possible, such as where a password has been forgotten and is unrecoverable.
EFA therefore believes that the Committee should reject this proposal.

Re: Extending the Regulatory Regime to “Ancillary Service Providers”

A discussion paper submitted as part of the National Security Inquiry proposal makes it clear that the Australian government is “considering the need for a new interception regime that better reflects the contemporary communications environment,” i.e. a total overhaul of existing legislation to allow law enforcement to pry into communications taking place over platforms like Facebook or Twitter. The discussion paper defines “ancillary service providers” as “Telecommunications industry participants who are not carriers or carriage service providers.” Ultimately, this suggests the government is angling to bring all forms of online communications into the reach of interception laws.

The Australian Privacy Foundation cited the privacy concerns inherent in this proposal.

Telecommunications legislation already goes much further than regulation in most other sectors in mandating a role for private sector businesses as agents of the state in surveillance and law enforcement (banking and finance is the other main area where this has happened). These proposals would see a further significant extension of this role. Online intermediaries in particular host our communications with our friends, relatives, co-workers etc. They host a vast amount of information, the volume and scope of which is growing exponentially as we move to the cloud, use social networks, etc. Using online intermediaries as an agent of the State dramatically impacts on the state's surveillance capabilities. Even minor changes in what they are required to do on behalf of government agencies can have very broad implications for people’s privacy.

Ludlam, of the Australian Greens, also blasted the idea.

The Attorney Generalʹs paper does not explain how covering ʹancillary service providersʹ – the many and ever increasing forms of social media – in legislation will address ʹcurrent potential vulnerabilities in the interception regime that are capable of being manipulated by criminalsʹ. The Greens believe it is excessive to extend the reach of surveillance into the retention of all social media exchanges. Does this include all business exchanges on video conferencing platforms?

And EFA pointed out that this proposal could expose anyone to law enforcement scrutiny, not just people suspected of wrongdoing.

Central to many of the services that Australians deliberately sign-up for— e.g. Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, Apple iCloud, etc.—is the concept of sharing across networks. In surveilling a target’s activities in such services, shared friends or media objects connect target and non-target individuals such that following one surveillance target inescapably involves collateral surveillance necessarily breaching the privacy of non-targets. …. Indeed, “cloud computing” itself underlies “social networking”. As such, the information flows pertaining to individuals cross and recross such services to the point where, again, separating surveillance of a particular target is almost inevitably going to encounter that of other individuals, but in this case in ways that cannot be anticipated and very deeply undermine Australians’ reasonable expectation of privacy.

Have you aussies still got that red haired woman in charge, god, she is off! we got rid of ours (clarke) some year ago

that's right people havent stopped smoking.....last time i visited the shops there were plenty of cigarettes on sale???? and they have now introduced plain packaging...so NO the tax hasnt stopped smokers......

incentives work far better than penalties.......no doubt we need some form of system or scheme that encourages individuals and companies to reduce ALL types of pollution......

a tax is a money grab and is wasted in the hands of governments....its as simple as that.....

and you havent explained how i am to reduce my electricity bill......to negate the carbon tax increase.......

yes unfortunately we have the rugmunching ranga still plundering the country.......

I love it when I’m right, check the date when I predicted this!14.08.2012 :cool:

Hey another day another back flip by Labour :^o , I guess all this lies they were telling us about the climate are not as important now as popularity and been re-elected.

Tony Abbott is doing a great job as an opposition leader and is exposing this government for everything this government is USELESS.

Where are you all Labour/ Green sympathisers silence is deafening.:-"

Change power companies. The less a company produces their power through high-carbon generating methods, the less tax they pay, the less you pay. Seems simple enough.