Posts tagged ‘Australian’

On Bail Terms, UK ,NSW & Wikileaks Assange

  In light of the recent bail refusal to Wlikleaks founder Julian Assange by British Courts , the subsequent granting of bail, then revocation subject to Swedish government appeal, it is worth noting that in Australia, bail is no longer a right or foregone conclusion. In fact, severely restrictive bail conditions are often used by police as a mischevious or vindictive means of interfering with peoples freedom, employment and families, when police simply lack evidence. They arrest and lay charges safe in the knowledge that there is no penalty for laying charges without foundation. This pattern of arrests has become a norm and many regular Sydney Homeless people are often adversely affected by falsified charges, many of which are withdrawn at a subsequent hearing- in many cases six months later. We have been notified of mulitple instances of bail refusal following false arrests. False arrests and bail refusals detrimentally affecting working families to the extent that they lose their homes incomes and even children – to State Child Abduction – on the whim of a NSW Police Pig. Usually the people concerned are from low-income backgrounds AND from indigenous or ethnic communities -communities who have learned to hate and distrust State Police and rightly regard them as a State Funded racist organisation, whose aim is to terrorise those communities so as to impose anglo “values” under the disguise of  “Australian.”  

  NSW incarceration rates per capita of population are now comparable with the highest rates in the world. While no definitive statisical analysis of the percentage of “bail refused” persons whose charges (in particular those for which bail was refused) are either withdrawn or dismissed by courts , according to prison visitors and those released from the NSW gulag , somewhere in the order of one-third of those refused bail are not found guilty. They neither have recourse for damages nor for the damage done such as loss of jobs homes children.

   Often these malicious charged are manufactured in conjunction with Human Services division DOCs ( now Communities NSW) and to a lesser extent NSW Housing to engineer a particular community outcome as desired by those agencies -irrespective of what the community want.

 In supporting Julian Assange’s right to his freedom and expressing our impression that charges against him are most likely a persecutory US orchestrated vendetta for telling the truth, we are conscious of the need to draw the Australian and international publics attention to the anti-freedom Bail Gulag which exists in Australia -hugely beneficial to the most racist and monocultural police force on earth and detrinental to those who will not stand for State repression.

Local Jobs and Working Visas

Sydney and Metropolitan jobs going to visa workers empowers wageslavery employers to engage in their expolitative practices – and the Australian Taxpayer picks up the bill. The Howard regime of which current Coalition Leader Tony Abbott was a senior member and the subsequent Rudd-Gillard administration sent big business profits into the stratosphere while sending living wages plummeting.They achieved this by the simple device of over-regulating

Major reasons for employer groups enthusiasm for visitors from overseas having the right to work are those workers ignorance of Australian workers rights and their acceptance of substandard conditions. Now I’m not saying that these workers should not have the right to work in Australia. More, I’m asking,should they have the right to work in metropolitan areas where there are unemployed people capable of carrying out that same work? To illustrate, I’m using two companies. They usually work in conjunction with each other and may in fact be related.They are Subakette and Australian Traffic Management. It seems that these companies specialise in hiring exclusively English and Irish backpackers to carry out government funded civil works in the Sydney CBD. They are not the only companies but in Sydney City they certainly stand out. As does the Traffic control industry with other companies seemingly engaged in this discriminatory practice.I’ve talked to the workers from these companies regularly over the past five years and am yet to meet an Australian or Australian resident. It defies logic that these backpackers somehow acquire better skills or bring with them a special knowledge of Australian Traffic Control-so much so that they are able to get all this government funded work and Australians are not. It bothered me so much that I paid three Aussies course fees to do a Traffic Control Ticket in April. Two females(one aboriginal) and one male. Their first two points of contact were Australian Traffic Control & Retro, another with a visible discriminatory employment policy. Its nearly September now and neither of them has been able to get traffic control work. Yet there are still huge traffic control contracts in Sydney City and outlying metropolitan areas-and we want to know why Aussies aren’t getting them. Is there something about blonde female backpackers which makes them superior purveyors of this type of work? I don’t think so. Is there some innate quality english backpackers have which gives them a superior ability to interpret understand and direct local traffic, which locals lack? I don’t think so.Or could it be that they care less about maintaining the living wage which Australian workers fought for in times past?

The Prime Minister has recently announced her regionalisation policy.Immigration should create a visa category which entitles backpackers to work in identified regional areas only where Julia Gillard tells us there is a shortage of workers. After checking that those areas don’t have local unemployed people who could be trained if necessary for that work. It could well be that these so called employers pay so little that the local population calculate its unaffordable for them to work there.In this case these are not jobs or employers-they are wageslavery and exploiters and should be exposed as such.

Resident locals who wish to work should have priority over working visa tourists on all work available. If local workers are refusing the work on pay grounds then the industry must raise its pay to the needs of the local community, or wither. Immigrants should be settled for their first five years of residency in the regional areas which are screaming out for workers (according to our politicians and National Farmers Federation).

Politicians at federal state and local levels should also ensure that their departments and the contractors they engage have an appropriate local workforce engagement policy.Say 80%. It doesn”t sound like rocket science to me.

Election Possibilities

Neither The Coalition nor Labor have any right to claim a victory let alone a clear mandate and vindication of their policies. In preferring to run mirror image negative campaigns and virtually identical policies the two major parties effectively created the no-choice election.Neither leader is perceived as particularly competent, outstanding or honest.Both Parties adhere to the economic rationalist economy first people last mantra.The inevitable result is that the election result is too close to call-and in all probability a hung parliament. With independents and a lone Green lower house member holding the balance of responsibility. To get to the magical majority of 76 Lower House seats, either major party must reach an accommodation with two, or possibly three independents as a minimum. If this alone were the challenge we could reasonably expect a Coalition government with the support of the Oakeshott-Katter-Windsor block-all ex Coalition.But there is the further complication of Greens balance of responsibility in the Senate from July 2011. A Coalition government may well overcome this by ramming through all the legislation they need which will be unpalatable to the Greens, without much discussion.There would be little the opposition could do. The other diabolical possibility none of the experts have mentioned would deliver the strongest government-even after the inevitable defections from the respective parties.That is for the Coalition and Labor to form “a government of National Unity”.Abbott and Gillard as co-Prime Ministers perhaps with divided responsibilities. Both are that desperate for power. There is virtually identical policy already. Their corporate masters are the same, as are their economy first people last agendas. The final option possible is a Labor National Coalition, or even Labor Liberal or Labor LNP-the virtual demise of the current Coalition.Whatever outcome transpires the inevitable losers are the Australian people with marginalised people the biggest losers; indigenous and homeless the biggest losers of all.

Living in an Oz economy

Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Prime Ministerial wannabe Tony Abbott agree on lots of things.So many in fact that I’m surprised that they remain in different parties.

On Welfare their differences amount to the mere pedanticism of exactly how far to turn the thumbscrews.Not once did either mention a Fairpay guarantee.

Today they will prove yet again that in their eyes we live in an economy, not a society.Their economy debate should be fun. Abbotts degree in economics should ensure that he at least spells the word correctly. But I digress and trivialise and I shouldn’t.Dear Leader and Dear Leader-in-Waiting have by unanimous decree declared each themself to be the superior manager of our national economy.I would have thought that Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao had at least as much to do with sound economic management of the Australian economy,given the extremely generous prices his country has offered for our not inexhaustable commodities in our hour of perceived need; as either of the two combatants -but I don’t have a degree in economics and Tony Abbott does and what exactly that means,I’m not sure.

But I’m really looking forward to this debate because, as any thinking person would know, the person who proves to be the soundest economy manager of them all will reduce Taxes the most. Because a smart economic manager will reduce costs across all portfolios and pass on the resulting savings to the investor which is the taxpayer which is you,right? A smart economy manager in a capitalist free market economy will allow Free Market principles to apply.Businesses free to set their own prices and workers free to choose their own comfortable pay rate. Because its about freedom, choice and prosperity. Thats gotta be VERY good for workers and not a bad way to reduce unemployment homelessness economic and social marginalisation either.I’m really GETTING this!! But the best bit is that a good economic manager is a lot like a good property developer. If he hires an architect and the architect designs a building which falls down, the developer will likely never hire the architect again.And I know that no matter which of these two great people wins the debate, that person will apply this important principle. Across the many essential functions of government reward those whose performance actually delivers the desired outcomes according to the vanishing timeline set out culminating in the resolution of the problem or issues without a recurrent call on taxpayers for more and more funds.

From the stone cold reality of the sidewalk paver I’m sitting on,it seems to me that Government Australian Style is in fact the antithesis of sound economic management. Constant calls for yet more funds on already overtaxed and under-serviced tax and ratepayers is the norm.As is an extremely low return on investment to the shareholder which would again be-the taxpayer. Therefore I’m glad That Tony Abbott and Julia Gillard agreed to have this conversation..its a conversation Australia so badly needs to have.

Housing & Economic Bantustans

Unsurprisingly, most Australians are rightly concerned by the escalating cost of housing driven by bankers and their interests. Housing ownership is no longer an option for the vast majority of young Australians, forced to give up substantial percentages of their government enforced miniscule incomes to enrich some landlord or banker syndicate.

Federal Government must act to remove the attraction of housing investment for non occupiers. This should be right up federal Labors alley as they constantly seek new ways to impose taxes.

Minimum wages must go up, and consideration should be given to a responsibility being placed upon councils to ensure that sufficient affordable accommodation exists in their postcodes to accommodate their municipalities workers at the various income levels. This would eliminate the growth of economic Bantustans, population centres which exist to feed the cheap labour needs of a more expensive area…

Homelessness has now permeated to demographics where it was unheard of 5 short years ago.The inappropriately housed, such as those paying for overcrowded or illegal dwellings, couch surfers explode the figure and the myths …

Housing worries weigh heavy

Election Special

Its simple,people. The equation of government legislated constraint on wages and income, coupled with governments failure to regulate price gouging,in particular by the financial sector,but generally by all businesses can only mean that the rich get richer as the old middle classes join the homeless in the poverty queues.

As Australian PM Julia Gillard is poised to call the next federal election,she gives us absoultely no reason to consider or recommend Labor. Gillard’s National Press Club speech reinforces every message she has sent in her brief tenure as Prime Minister- and her somewhat longer political & cabinet career.

Gillard’s claim to “have kept Australians in work” should be viewed in context. Rich cotton growers in Americas deep south kept their slaves in work too, until #wageslavery became less costly than the responsibility of maintaining slaves. Rudd/Gillards Labor employment policies are a continuance of the Howard – Abbott worker servitude model copied from Canadas failed “Tough Love” program by ex priest and then Mission Australia CEO  Patrick McClure. As Minister for Industrial Relations Gillard, with her career in Industrial Law was well placed to drive equitable, Fairpay solutions. She did not. Howard policies such as Workchoices were largely retained and rebadged, continuing the same socially suicidal combination of legislated worker constraint and laissez faire capitalism. Very simply under the current system, businesses, including property hogs, have no limits on the excessive price hikes which they can foist on an unprotected public.The public, meanwhile are excessively constrained in the means available to them to act for pay equity. The minimum wage is a measly $570 per week- unlivable in Sydney,for a single person.Too bad if you happen to have one or three or more kids.

Expensive Daycare – with DOCs ready to question your parenting skills if you don’t use their invasive authorised services. Add transport costs.Add rent.Now take that away from $570 per week. Not interested in rebates. Landlords and supermarkets neither give them nor wait for them.

In the 2009 economic hiccup (caused,you may recall by bad banker lending practices) we didn’t ask tell or permit Rudd Gillard Labor to risk our money or wrath by underwriting the banks. Thats the first thing they did.Prior to standing kerbside and allowing,despite correct if expensive contrary professional advice, the chill winds of a Corporate Antarctic Gale to suck our national capital into the redline of deficit, and significantly blacken the bottom-line of a few corporate pirates. Is this the basis of Gillard’s claim to “sound economic management”? Doubtless,the stimulus spending was necessary,and would probably not have happened under a Howard/Abbott/Costello Coalition Government. However, as with all spending, the taxpayer should be entitled to see a return on investment. A return in terms which taxpayers,and voters can relate to.Which probably does not mean huge profits in the financial or other business sectors. Where is the return on investment? What had the possibility to be groundbreaking policy has become another handover of taxpayers money to friends of whichever party happens to be in power. A billion extra because Labor economically mismanaged the Insulation program. 1 sixth of their projected spend in the name of homelessness over ten years. Oh, and the Laptops for schoolkids project.The potential, through good economic management,to finesse a backbone for a much needed standardised national education backbone – in synchronicity with the National Broadband Network. Instead, a simple cash handout forced each school to make individual IT decisions on the basis of local IT knowledge- with the inevitable results. Is this the economic credibility Gillard claimed in her National Press Club speech??

Gillards claims to have resolved the potential Mining Industry backlash brings to focus the claims of respected miner Andrew “Twiggy” Forrest that Rudd was “24 hours away” from solving that “crisis”. Her claims belie the truth that in fact she, in what has become typical Labor Party consultation, slammed the door shut on relative mining minnow Fortescue and smaller miners and the entire Gas industry.It transpires that she did so for good reason as Mining Magnate Labor cohorts Marius Kloppers and co happily traded away elements benefitting those companies and sectors to secure a deal amenable to Big Mining- The Rio Tinto-BHP colossus. It is of interest

The Prime Minister referred in her National Press Club speech to the macro-economic stability within frameworks ..which have served the counrty so well in the past 18 years of Keating, Howard and Rudd governments. The significant indicators of this period include higher incidence of need for healthcare which would indicate sicker people. Contacts in the mental health field would doubtless point to increased numbers of mentally ill, and the alarming increase in suicides. Long-time honest hardworking businessmen will decry the current bank dictated business regime which pushes the need to serve bank interests to the fore, and quality of product and service out the door. A lot have been driven to bankruptcy, by the sheer greed of a minority business sector coddled and cotton wooled by these same successive governments Gillard lauds. Residential purchase and rent prices have skyrocketed in direct disproportion to real incomes. Oh, and about 20 years ago, compulsory superannuation began to kick in. Compulsory superannuation, or the sequestering of a portion of your hard-earned for most of your life for a group of elite gamblers to play with and profit from, may have had more to do with the claimed “national prosperity” than any management or mis-manangement at political level. I’m not an economist but theres a striking alignment of timelines which I’m compelled to take a closer look at.I’m compelled to do so,because so many of our homeless and marginalised community sleep in doorways and alcoves while their superannuation works miracles in the service of the rich. I’m caused to speculate just how much more evenly spread this “economic prosperity” might have been if it translated into workers pay packets, to spend or save, or finance their needs now.And we know that many hard working Australians suffer the daily drudge of Employer tyranny, low pay- high fares & late trains- easy credit and lifetime repayments, going home knowing that at the end of each working day they sink deeper under an avalanche of cascading cost increases while they are legally and practically constrained from lobbying for pay increases.We also know that the number of working homeless and working poor has risen steadily, with no end to the spiral in sight. Is this the vision Labor have for Your future, alongside their vision of French Riviera holidays for themselves, perhaps blinded to the Cote de Azur addresses of the boardroom members whom they allow to plunder and rape this country dry. This vision is as much that of Gillard and similar to the Abbotesque vision.

The list of expensive policy failures you need to question Labor and The Coalition on include;

  • Aboriginal:  Northern Territory Intervention. This policy is perhaps the most racist, inconsistent with not only Australia’s international Human Rights obligations but common decency EVER to enjoy bipartisan support in Australia. Despite the masterly Howard ploy of using child protection as a Trojan Horse, thereby keeping any legal matters arising in the murky secret and oft fanciful world of the Family/Childrens Court jurisdictions, where prying media or public cannot see, we have yet to see ANY aboriginal children “saved.From labor, Tanya Plibersek and Peter Garrett are probably worth giving another go… but its hard to see who else.. Lee Rhiannon seeks a Greens senate Federal seat and should be supported on the basis of what she has done in NSW.  ” Controversially,many in the aboriginal communities state categorically that this draconian bipartisan action has in fact placed aboriginal children, families and culture at greater risk – some going so far as to shift their children offshore.
  • Homelessness; The Road Home:
  • Insulation &  Solar Programs:
  • Computers into Schools
  • School Building Program
  • MySchool
  • Underwriting Banks
  • Refugees
  • Immigration
  • Fair Pay
  • War on Afghanistan – State Terrorism.
  • Economy: What will You (insert politicians name) do to lessen Australias reliance on “the China resource market.”
  • Mining Super Tax: Look for second tier miners to join under the able and astute leadership of Andrew Forrest in lobbying against the Rio-BHP-Labor Miners Supertax.

Please, pay particular attention to Socialist Alliance and the Greens, the larger blocks whose aspirations are more on song with those of the community.Some independents, such as Bob Katter, deserve your serious consideration if you happen to live in their electorate.Nationals  Barnaby Joyce genuinely reflects the views of his community, and it would be a shame to see the honorable Malcolm Turnbull displaced from his seat despite us having zero commonality of views- except perhaps on a direct elect republic. Of those standing Aboriginal activist Sam Watson of Socialist alliance is an outstanding candidate with his long history in black politics and his work around aboriginal and community services.

The compelling issue for Oz in 2010 is not who gets voted into power,but who control the Senate. Almost certainly,one of the major two will become government.Which is irrelevant- there is clear bipartisanship on the issues which stand between Australian people and a better life. At the end of the day we have Abbott the Unbelievable versus Judas Julia and both can be trusted to pay attention to the bottom line of big business to the detriment of all others… and that probably includes you.

%d bloggers like this: