Abbott government

Senator Ludlam has called for War Powers reform and the obligation that all decisions on war involvement must be taken only in consultation with parliament. David Macilwain argues that the matter of Australian intervening militarily in Syria without Syria's permission should be pursued in the Senate and with the attorney general, George Brandis, because it is in breech of international law.

Letter to Senator Ludlam, Fri, Sep 11, 2015

Dear Senator Ludlam,

Last week on behalf of AMRIS the attached media release was sent to all MPs and media; my apologies if you have already seen and read it.

I am writing because I just saw a video of part of your speech on Thursday, echoing Melissa Parke’s call for War Powers reform and the obligation that all decisions on war involvement must be taken only in consultation with parliament.

As you point out of course, in this case such consultation would have led nowhere, because the Labor opposition has no problem with the government’s military deployment and submission to US authority. I would suggest therefore, that the matter – of what is quite clearly a breach of international law, for which their must be consequences – should be pursued in the senate and with the attorney general George Brandis.

While Brandis laid out the supposed justification for breaching Syria’s sovereignty on the spurious and irrelevant basis of ‘collective self-defence’, in an article in Thursday’s Australian, this seems no different from the advice received from Lord Goldsmith in 2003 that the attack on Iraq was justified. (even had there been WMD it is hard to see how such an act of aggression against a sovereign state by a country not sharing any border with it could have been ‘legal’.

It is not too late to pursue this, because Australia may be brought before the ICC for its infringements when they lead to culpable casualties of Syrians. The idea that somehow the North East of Syria where we intend to confine our military is ‘ungoverned space’ has already been dramatically exposed as nonsense by this report from Deir Al Zour. Leith Fadel of Almasdar news is quite reliable, and he reports how the Syrian army and air-force have repelled an attempted attack on Deir al Zour airbase, killing up to 100 IS fighters. Deir al Zour of course is on the Euphrates, and in a direct line between Anbar and Raqqa, in the area that Australia intends to deploy its fighter jets. It is easy to see the possibility that an Australian missile could hit a Syrian army platoon or vehicle if they are in close combat with IS. Such a strike would have consequences.

I hope that you will keep pursuing this matter with supportive colleagues. Australia can make a decision at any time to start cooperating with the Syrian government, if it is truly serious about stopping the terrorist groups, but otherwise we should immediately withdraw our support for the US coalition’s dirty little war and its terrorist ‘boots on the ground’.

All regards David Macilwain

Sandy Creek, Victoria

The Federal hospital funding system, based presently on growth in demand and costs, will change under the Abbott government. This "change" is actually about slashing and downgrading what each States receive, to make the system "more efficient".

This "change" is an $57 billion attack on our nation's health care system.

In two years, over $50 billion will be stripped from hospital funding. So despite Australia's population growing faster than any other developed nation, funding will be savaged and more people will be "cared for" with less!

The Abbott government is set to change the hospital funding system introduced by Labor, which was based on growth in demand and costs, with one that ties federal funding increases to inflation and population growth. So, under this "change", funding will be on a whim, and what's begrudgingly available, not on population growth or needs!

“On top of this, the Government scrapped the National Partnership Agreement funding to the States, which rewarded performance in meeting waiting time targets for emergency departments and elective surgery. The enormity of the ongoing cuts was starkly highlighted when the Treasury advised the Senate Economics Committee that Commonwealth funding for public hospitals from 2017-18 to 2024-25 would be reduced by $57 billion" says AMA President,AMA President, A/Prof Brian Owler

Treasury figures show the commonwealth savings from cutting funding to the states for hospitals and schools will escalate rapidly, rising from $1bn in 2017-18 to $3bn in 2018-19 and $7bn the following year. By 2020-21, it will be $10bn. So, as our population continues to blow out, there will be more and more "savings" on hospitals and schools - a formula for a third world nation?

Australian Medical Association (AMA) said the system was not coping with the demands and warned the situation would worsen with less funding, and hospitals have already been hit by a $1.8 billion cut in last year's budget. The AMA has also warned of a possible ‘perfect storm’ in Australia’s public hospital system as Commonwealth funding shrinks, performance benchmarks are not being met, and prices for hospital services under activity-based funding decline.

Governments love, sponge off and delight in population growth, but they not only fail to maintain funding, it's being shrunk, piece by piece! Health care is not an optional extra, or a luxury that puts icing on the budget "cake", but something very basic that's part of our human welfare and an essential service! After more than 2 decades of "economic growth", ironically we are becoming more impoverished and worse off? Who actually benefits from this economic system? Clearly not the majority!

How can economic rationalism justify risking people's well-being, and even lives? How is our health care system to become "better", and provide more with less? It's unsustainable, cruel and potentially catastrophic.

Victoria's biggest hospitals each stand to lose out on more than $1 billion in federal funding over the next decade, according to a state government analysis. The State stands to lose $13.6 billion in funding, which according to Health Minister Jill Hennessy, was equivalent to losing 2.3 million elective surgeries or 11.6 million chemotherapy treatments. Of course, denying people surgery, and chemotherapy, will make the system more "efficient"! Nature will take its course, and people will suffer and die on the waiting lists, and thus eliminate excessive demands!

The massive shortfall in federal funding for hospitals will lead to even longer waiting times for elective surgery, prompting higher morbidity rates, with the smaller states and regional Australia worst hit. People's health care should be locked in, and set to increase incrementally with population growth- not be set as a political bargaining chip, and people made victims of poor economic management!

It's pure and cruel neo-liberalism - of caring for The Economy as the expense of the people it's meant to serve.

If Treasury is failing our present population with the provision of basic public service funding, how can it be trusted with the future, and expect the public to have confidence in the integrity of the latest Intergenerational Report?

ANMF Campaign - Take Action

Seismic testing to look for petroleum has begun in protected marine areas off the coast of Western Australia after permits were quietly granted by the Abbott government. What sort of 'protected" areas would allow the mining of petroleum? It's protected on paper no more! Nothing is protected when it comes to the power of international mining companies, and their quest for profit and energy.

These reserves were set up mainly outside existing commercial fishing zones, mining regions and away from population centres, and designed to have minimal impact of human maritime activities.

The government has cited a lack of consultation and science as the reason for the review , despite 20 years of scientific, economic and social research, and years of consultation with commercial and recreational fishers, the oil and gas industry, conservationists and community groups. What could be more comprehensive?

The Abbott government is trashing environmental safeguards, and are simply bulldozing their way through "green tape" for mining access. Just like the Peace deal in Tasmania to protect their iconic wildnerness areas, no doubt mining and petroleum companies were major donors to the party were influential in destroying previously fought agreements.

The first phase of testing included areas of the Carnavon Canyon Commonwealth Marine Reserve (CMR) , which was declared a Habitat Protection Zone by Tony Burke in 2012. The release of Burke’s plans in 2012 came after more than 20 years of scientific, economic and social research, and years of consultation with commercial and recreational fishers, the oil and gas industry, conservationists and community groups.

Marine reserves are also extremely important in a changing environment. In a time of collapsing fish stocks, ocean acidification, climate change and pollution, it's imperative that our nation protects the Antarctic and Southern oceans.

The areas covered by three sanctuaries near the Abrolhos Islands are important migratory habitat for humpback whales, blue whales, sea lions, and breeding habitat for the western rock lobster.

Australia's largest animals, blue whales , are said to be at risk from "ships of deaf" run by the oil and gas industry. After a shift in control of seismic testing from the Federal Environment Department to an industry regulator, the whales may be forced to run a cumulative gauntlet of noise, a study has found.

If petroleum is found, of course these sancturies will be allowed to succumb to mining! Seismic testing caused stress and disorientation for marine life and could lead to physical injury for endangered species. The whole concept of "economic growth" is about continually loosening environmental controls, and encroaching on habitats of non-human species that are being destroyed by human quest for power, energy and growth!

While Australia is consuming more oil we are producing less at home, and we are also storing less of it. Australia is the only member of the International Energy Agency (IEA) to be in breach of its treaty obligation to hold a 90-day 'strategic petroleum reserve'. Australia now imports about 90 per cent of its crude oil for refining into petrol and diesel fuels at the five remaining refineries. Already there are implications for defence, as the former Air Force chief points out: the Navy is now completely dependent on import sources for F44, a specialised fuel for ship-based helicopters.

There's no doubt a desperation to maintain our energy supplies, and our economic model based on "growth", and fuel for "big Australia". A whale nursery, marine biodiversity and pristine ocean ecosystems are a mere triviality, it seems. They will be under great threat for spillages and disasters.

Tony Abbott and his colleages have no respect for the environment or science and seems to be actively trying to destroy both in Australia.

The Abbott government has granted petroleum exploration licences in a proposed marine reserve near Western Australia’s Abrolhos Islands. This does not inspire much confidence that conservation currently ranks high on their agenda. It's about short-term profits and trashing any science, environmental commitments, and being "open for business" at all costs!

The Abbott government's $111 million budget cut to the CSIRO will mean job losses for 489 researchers and support staff by mid-next year. It's a lobotomy of Australia's intellect, and a savage pruning of our nation's ability to be a developed, knowledge-based economy. First the Abbott government removed the title of science minister (the first time it has occurred in 80 years) and folds it into the portfolio of Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane,

Incoming CSIRO chief executive Larry Marshall's claim that the organisation had "weathered a sea change in funding" is a mild understatement! "Change" is not always positive, desirable, inevitable or something that should be endured.

The CSIRO has "cut into the bone" to implement successive government funding cuts and further cuts will risk its ability to carry out ground-breaking research, according to its chairman and one of its most senior scientists. Cuts to research funding are more extensive that has been admitted with $6 billion in combined cuts to higher education and preventative health programs also to be taken into account, Labor claims.

It says the impact of lower funding could #10;http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/research-funding-cuts-to-top-6-billion-labor-says-20140826-108r6t.html">slow or stop vital research on infectious diseases such as the deadly Ebola virus. The actual value of the saving to government will be $6.1 billion, with nearly $5 billion of that coming from cuts to higher education, which Labor says will "indirectly impact on research".

The Australian CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation) is responsible for the invention of plastic bank notes, WI-FI and Aeroguard, among a host of other amazing innovations in science and technology.

The CSIRO scientists work in areas of climate adaptation, biosecurity, digital productivity and services, renewable energy, biosensor technology in food manufacturing, preventive health measures, medical research, sustainable agriculture and marine science, to name a few. But this research is in danger of downsizing.

Awesome things you never knew were invented by the CSIRO

It's about short-term money-saving at the cost of our future as a developed nation. One of those affected will be the bid to establish a Northern Australia CRC, (Co-operative Research Centre) a bid chaired by former National Farmers Federation president David Crombie. However, it may go ahead because it was a Coalition election promise.

Chief executive of the CRC Association, Dr Tony Peacock, says the cuts are worst than expected, and he's 'surprised and devastated'. The CSIRO had played in assisting the economy through breakthroughs in agriculture. In 1959, Menzies returned to his theme, saying the CSIRO had been a ''dominating'' factor in the development of Australia.

CSIRO research programs will be cut, and the organisation will lose $116 million in funding over four years.

These cuts fly in the face of our “Food bowl of Asia” ideal and northern expansion! Mining is not a renewable industry. Manufacturing is in upheaval at present; the sector is providing fewer jobs with each passing month. Yet, there are no proposed cuts to the “big Australia” population growth policy! If we are downsizing our industries, and research that supports innovation, and high rates o unemployment, we can hardly have skills shortages?

There will be limited, not more, jobs for graduates and professionals.

The 1400 jobs being sacrificed at the national science agency, CSIRO, will mean one in every five of its staff. This is a move that is likely to save the federal budget a hundred million or so – and cost the nation billions of dollars a year for decades to come, a false economy if ever there was one.

If Australia wants to maintain our place as a leading 21st century, and modern nation in a world of many challenges, we need strong investments in higher education, research, cutting-edge technology and science.   As it is, we are victims of economic rationalisation by politicians with little understanding, or qualifications, in these areas and are incapable of judging their importance.

Ideas, innovations and inventions can lead to industries and jobs.

It's an attack on the heart of our economy, our well-being and our status as a developed, first world nation with ideas, innovation, and cutting-edge technology. With so many modern “challenges” of food security, global diseases, medicine, environmental degradation, alternative energy sources, climate change and overpopulation, we can only descend to a country that imports and parasites on the flow from other nations, with more investments in technology and knowledge.

As delegates from around the world were gathering in Lima, Peru, last year for the latest round of negotiations towards stronger action on climate change, it was revealed that Environment Minister Greg Hunt said that the government had better things to do with the money than donate it to “bureaucratic support” people at the UN!

What “better things” is the government spending on? Certainly not anything for this generation, or future generations. We are going backwards, into isolation from even some of the developing countries that are managing to achieve their ghg emission reduction targets.

Our economic "muscle" should be from focusing on our collective intellect, not just from accumulating generic "skills".  The economic decision to cut-back CSIRO funding is being made in a policy vacuum, and will deprive vital life-blood to our nation's "brain".

The Australian Wildlife Protection Council wrote on September 1, 2014 to the Senate Standing Committees on Environment and Communications: "We condemn the Abbott Government’s attacks on the Great Barrier Reef, other priceless environmental institutions and native wildlife across Australia. We are dismayed by their lack of environmental protection since [the Abbott Government's]coming to power."

We express our shock and disgust at the attitude of the Coalition Government for their failure to see how important our environment is to many of us. It provides us with clean air, water, food - the essential elements of life for all species on this planet. Barnaby Joyce, Christopher Pyne, Warren Trusss, Eddie Abetz, too many Coalition M.P.’s and Ministers, treat the environment with total contempt [and] disregard!

It was a bad start for the government when it scrapped our climate policies and agencies:

• Carbon tax/pricing, Climate Commission, Climate Change Authority, and attempts to end Energy Renewable Target.

• It is shocking to see federal laws handed to the states. In Victoria, the Environment department, Department of Sustainability and Environment merged primary industries (DEPI) slashing jobs Not only jobs have been lost, but valuable field guides that identify wetlands, rainforests and others were thrown into the rubbish. Federal powers handed to Victoria when state laws like the FFG Act have not been revised, updated since inception; parts of the act have never been used.

• East Gippsland took DSE to court to ensure threatened species got recovery plans. The FFG is working in reverse as species should be taken of threatened species list because they’ve been recovered; species that need to be put on the list aren't being added due to a lack of resources.

• Cuts to the community are disgraceful - Environmental Defenders Office, Landcare, and Caring for Country. Axing of the Biodiversity fund is a shock as it is replaced with nothing.

• Abbott governments’ disregard in undermining our nations compliance with the World Heritage Convention regarding the Great Barrier Reef and Tasmania Wilderness World Heritage Area.

• Finally we in AWPC are disappointed, even ashamed of our local MP, Environment Minister who sends out a Newsletter with photos of himself ‘having fun’ with locals while he always refers decisions of national environmental significance such as the Southern Brown Bandicoot in our electorate to someone else, as apparently there is a conflict of interest?

Minister Greg Hunt has been an enormous disappointment when appointed as Environment Minister, which, with it comes certain responsibilities to CARE FOR COUNTRY. He even called the local police when we demonstrated outside his office against something of concern to many of us. What an absolute disregard for democracy and for the environment.

Respectfully,

Maryland Wilson
President
Australian Wildlife Protection Council
www.awpc.org.au

Environment Minister Greg Hunt has caved to the mining industry and approved Indian mining giant Adani's monstrous Carmichael Mine, threatnening the Great Barrier Reef. The coal mine will be the biggest in Australia. It will pollute our climate with massive CO2 emissions for decades. It will mean massive and continual dredging and dumping in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area and will fill the Reef with thousands of coal ships every year. Original article and petition from GetUp. Note that, if you sign, GetUp puts you on two mailing lists, however the situation is serious and their campaign may be effective.

The good news is that while Adani may have the approval, it still needs to find up to $10 billion before it can proceeed. This means the battle to protect the Reef from Adani is down to who can persuade investors, us or them.

Adani will try and convince investors to lend it $10 billion to wreck the Reef. We'll try and convince them Adani is a company with no public support who cannot be trusted. Game on.

Donations here on GetUp.

#E0E6F8;line-height:120%;">(Video inside) Many environmentalists in Australia were delightedly gob-smacked when coal baron, Clive Palmer, appeared with Al Gore and spoke of supporting alternative energy funding and against the Abbott Government's plans to roll back policy. They will be equally delighted to hear Member for Wills, Kelvin Thomson's speech in parliament supporting renewable energy too, against the Abbott Government's plans. (Mr Thomson is also the creator of the 14 point population reform plan to stabilise Australia's population.)

Read more about Kelvin Thomson.

Little Dorrit: Pensioner Entertainment

How can we justifiably expect older people to keep working until 70, especially bearing the stresses of physical/manual work? Those without the obligatory hundreds of thousands of dollars in superannuation stored away, likely will be those who are forced to work to 70, and then claim unemployment benefits.

Henry Ergas (The Australian) believes there is a strong case for reforming the age pension. But those changes must be part of a broader restructuring of our retirement incomes system. Unless that?system can provide reasonable income security in old age, the changes will prove neither economically desirable nor politically sustainable.

More Australians are surviving into old age than ever before. But to endorse pension reform is not to echo the doom and gloom about population ageing. It seems to be capitalising on a natural fear of ageing, and of dependency. He says that claims about increases in dependency ratios are wildly exaggerated: while the share of older people in the population is rising, the share of children has fallen, so the ratio of dependence to the working age population is no higher now than at federation.

With longer lives to look forward to, people increase their savings and invest more in education and training, raising productivity. Older people contribute unpaid time to caring for the elderly, the ill and for children. They also provide an army of volunteers for community groups and charities. Longer lives means that retirees and able to spend more money on entertainment, buying consumer goods, and holidays.

Placing income uncertainty is inherently inefficient, and undermines the ­income predictability that individuals value highly. Raising the eligibility age as longevity increases should provide clear monetary incentives for individuals to continue working by varying the entry level of the pension and its growth rate

It would be politically risky, and unfair, to leave Australians without assurance of incomes is unsustainable, and the public need a retirement system that's fair, efficient and affordable.

What is a dependency ratio?

The total dependency ratio tells us the proportion of the population not in the work-force who are ‘dependent’ on those of working-age, it’s a calculation which groups those aged under 15 with those over 65 years as the ‘dependants’ and classifying those aged 15-64 years as the working-age population.

A study produced by Dr Katherine Betts and published on the Monash University Centre for Population and Urban Research website, says that “if policy makers genuinely want to minimise demographic ageing at the least cost, the most effective way of doing this is to support the two child family and minimise net migration which, in the year ending 30 September 2013, was 241,000.”

Katharine Betts shows that Australia’s labour force participation rate and ratio of  dependants to workforce are at record highs, despite an increase in Australia’s median age.

Australia’s average (median) age increased from 28.9 in 1978 to 37.3 in 2013 but, despite this, the proportion of the population aged 15 plus in the labour force has grown. So, high rates of population growth haven't diluted our population's average (median) age.

Data on 31 OECD countries in 2012 show no association between the proportion of the population aged 65 plus and the proportion aged 15 plus in the labour force. These data also show that a number of countries with older populations than Australia’s (such as Switzerland and the Netherlands) have higher labour -force participation rates than ours.

Labour force participation rates among older people are rising and the greater part of government revenue (61 per cent) does not come from taxes on paid labour. So, most of government revenue does not come from paid labour, what's lacking is incoming revenue! The loss of industries, and the slowing of the mining boom, means we've inherited all the “growth” but the economic benefits haven't kept up. Betts says that while the cost of the age pension has grown faster than GDP over the last decade, demographic ageing is not the cause; rising costs have been due to discretionary policy changes.

Data on 31 OECD countries also show that there is no statistically significant association between the proportion of the population aged 65 plus and health-care expenditure as a percentage of GDP.

Demographic Ageing

Demographic ageing is caused by lower fertility (for example a TFR of 2.0, instead of an average family size of 6.5) and longer life expectancy. High net overseas migration (NOM) makes little difference to the median age but a considerable difference to the size of the population, including the size of the population aged 65 and over. An ageing population is an inevitable stage in a community's life cycle. It's a sign that we are heading towards maturity as a nation, and can expect higher living standards, and a sustainable population size.

Productivity Commission

The Productivity Commission report on ageing says that in response to the significant increase in the size of Australian cities, significant investment in transport and other infrastructure is likely to be required. There's no stated aim for this growth!

Betts points out that the infrastructure spending needed to manage population growth over the next 50 years will be five times the total that was needed over the last 50 years. (page 5) Not only this, but illogically, we're doomed to have an even bigger ageing population in the future. Ponzi schemes are self-perpetuating unless there's a deliberate U-turn.

According to the report, Australia’s population is projected to rise to around 38 million by 2060, or around 15million more than the population in 2012

Sydney and Melbourne can be expected to grow by around 3 million each over this period. Australia’s population is projected to increase to more than 38 million by 20 60, more than 15 million above the population in 2012.
.
There's no overall aims or reasons given for this population target, or demographic ambition. The population aged 75 or more years is expected to rise by 4 million from 2012 to 2060, increasing from about 6.4 to 14.4 per cent of the population. So, despite all the immigration that's justified as an effort to keep our population “young”, the proportion of those aged 75 or more will keep rising!

Collectively, it is projected that Australian governments will face additional pressures on their budgets equivalent to a round 6 per cent of national GDP by 2060, principally reflecting the growth of expenditure on health, aged care and the Age Pension.

Australia’s labour and multifactor productivity (MFP) growth has languished in recent years. Without broader policy reforms, it appears that it will be difficult to return to the higher growth rates experienced in the 1990s.

Youth unemployment

At a time when neo-liberals use rising dependency ratios to justify their attacks on budget deficits but then fail to realise that our unemployed youth are a major casualty of the fiscal austerity – that is, our future workforce. (Bill Mitchell)

ABS released a report showing that the number of young people facing long-term unemployment has tripled since the 2008 global depression. The youth ratio dependency ratio is at 28.6% of the population.  As such, they are more than half the dependency population because the elderly dependency ratio is 21.5%, with a further 4.2% on support making up the difference.

Australia’s total dependency ratio – defined as the ratio of the non-working population, both children ( is worst under the ABS’ “high growth” scenario, which assumes Australia’s future total fertility rates will reach 2.0 babies per woman by 2026 and then remain constant, life expectancy at birth will continue to increase until 2061 (reaching 92.1 years for males and 93.6 years for females), and NOM will reach 280,000 by 2021 and then remain constant, thereby placing a question mark over claim that high immigration is required to mitigate the impacts of population ageing.

Macrobusiness: Bloxo calls for a bigger Population Ponzi

High rates of welfare unsustainable

Australian families, not specifically the aged, are believed to be receiving more in handouts than they pay in net income tax, new figures reveal.
Modelling for The Daily Telegraph by the National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling at the University of Canberra shows 48 per cent of Australia's 12.2 million "income units" pay no net tax.
The results show as many as 85 per cent of single-parent families pay no tax, once welfare benefits are deducted, while 55 per cent of single-person households pay no tax.

Our ridiculously high rates of population growth, due to “skilled” immigration and family reunion, has outpaced any jobs growth. The “welfare crisis” is a result of lack of government revenues, exacerbated by unemployment, on a landscape of declining industries and productivity.