While union adverts flood our radio waves and TV screens full of tales of fear and woe about events that seem to be purely a figment of the unions own worst nightmares rather than reality in the typical fear campaign we are used to seeing every election, labor is also ging down the same path with their adds also telling us of the dread we should all feel if we don't vote them in.
I hate negative advertising to be honest, I want to see what they intend to do, in detail, I want to make an informed decision about how well the party i chose to validate with my vote will represent the best intents of my wishes.
I want to see what you will do not how scared you are of the opposition.
There is one ad that caught my (and in fact almost everyones ) attention, the "kevin O lemon" add it was novel, humourous, and ironic and a mirror of the truth we all know,and it was the final straw that sealed Rudds fate: well it's back, with some changes, but just as funny.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Friday, July 30, 2010
The Greens ; Environmental warriors or extreemists in disguise.
When most people think of the Greens they would associate them with saving trees and Koalas and their habitat, and that going to probably be the majority of their supporters and candidates too, right?
I wonder how many of the candidates actually have gone through all the policies that the Greens stand for? because I'm damned sure the public almost knows none of them except for saving the environment and I think that's exactly the way the Greens want it to be too.
Population growth in Queensland and the resulting prosperity can be attributed to one thing almost above all others and that is the dumping of a draconian policy of taking from the dead by means of death taxes or death duties.
When they were abolished in Queensland retirees and older workers who wanted to leave their hard earned savings and assets to their chosen beneficiaries began moving into Queensland in their droves, they bought homes, they lived their life and they spent their money here in Queensland.
One of the policies in the Greens little known arsenal is the reintroduction of death taxes, sure they may claim to have some safeguards to the family home or farm and they may have a thresh hold at which the tax comes in that may mean those with little are not taxed, but it's still the most abhorrent, repugnant and divisive tax ever.
In the days of old it was required that an audit of a deceased persons asserts be taken, and the duty calculated and then by any and every means paid or a ghoul form the tax department would come to the home and do it and even order a sell up to retrieve the duty owed, as if those left behind after a death need that.
One wonders how they came up with some of the hair brained policies like reintroducing death duties, and not only cutting funding to private schools at Federal level but controlling the hiring and firing of staff and teachers there as well.
The only explanation is that the greens are not who they say they are (or deliberately allow you get the impression they are) which is the saviours of our environment, but rather they are the extreme left of labor, the ultimate Communist party and a sounding board for radical and extreme new policy.
I have a lot of time for those out there doing the hard yards in a one sided fight against progress which simply destroys our planet little by little, but I now believe the Greens have hoodwinked the majority of members and supporters and even some candidates by carefully and deliberately not coming out into the public with some of their policies.
Think twice before you put the greens into the balance of power in the senate because once that door is open, anything could go through it, even a return to death duties.
I also just want to add that anyone who thinks it's ok because it will only apply to the rich, think again because once that door is opened it's pretty easy to open it wider, also once you force those peoples relatives to sell up to pay the tax, what happens to the business they used to run now its' sold off, the people who worked there, and the future for the beneficiaries.
What happens to the self funded retirees, those who had no super, or none that has its' contributions doubled up the government, their families who are dependents on the income produced from a business or investments?
The greens have not thought this through, at all.
I wonder how many of the candidates actually have gone through all the policies that the Greens stand for? because I'm damned sure the public almost knows none of them except for saving the environment and I think that's exactly the way the Greens want it to be too.
Population growth in Queensland and the resulting prosperity can be attributed to one thing almost above all others and that is the dumping of a draconian policy of taking from the dead by means of death taxes or death duties.
When they were abolished in Queensland retirees and older workers who wanted to leave their hard earned savings and assets to their chosen beneficiaries began moving into Queensland in their droves, they bought homes, they lived their life and they spent their money here in Queensland.
One of the policies in the Greens little known arsenal is the reintroduction of death taxes, sure they may claim to have some safeguards to the family home or farm and they may have a thresh hold at which the tax comes in that may mean those with little are not taxed, but it's still the most abhorrent, repugnant and divisive tax ever.
In the days of old it was required that an audit of a deceased persons asserts be taken, and the duty calculated and then by any and every means paid or a ghoul form the tax department would come to the home and do it and even order a sell up to retrieve the duty owed, as if those left behind after a death need that.
One wonders how they came up with some of the hair brained policies like reintroducing death duties, and not only cutting funding to private schools at Federal level but controlling the hiring and firing of staff and teachers there as well.
The only explanation is that the greens are not who they say they are (or deliberately allow you get the impression they are) which is the saviours of our environment, but rather they are the extreme left of labor, the ultimate Communist party and a sounding board for radical and extreme new policy.
I have a lot of time for those out there doing the hard yards in a one sided fight against progress which simply destroys our planet little by little, but I now believe the Greens have hoodwinked the majority of members and supporters and even some candidates by carefully and deliberately not coming out into the public with some of their policies.
Think twice before you put the greens into the balance of power in the senate because once that door is open, anything could go through it, even a return to death duties.
I also just want to add that anyone who thinks it's ok because it will only apply to the rich, think again because once that door is opened it's pretty easy to open it wider, also once you force those peoples relatives to sell up to pay the tax, what happens to the business they used to run now its' sold off, the people who worked there, and the future for the beneficiaries.
What happens to the self funded retirees, those who had no super, or none that has its' contributions doubled up the government, their families who are dependents on the income produced from a business or investments?
The greens have not thought this through, at all.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
The greens have irrevocably shown their ties to Labor
The Greens leader Bob Brown has been in the media telling of his abhorrence for preference deals, and almost in the same sentence announcing a broad base deal to give preferences to Labor.
It's no secret that the greater majority of voters also believe there is no difference between Labor and the Greens as far as policy or ideology.
There is also a school of thought that the Greens are a product of the Labor brand as a tool to position radical policy elements in front of the community and a marketing bonanza to capture the widely growing environmental awareness among voters.
Personally I believe that Green candidates stand with all good intentions, they are more that likely environmentally aware, proactive and work in their various communities on real solutions to issues at a local level.
The real issue is that the Greens are a cast net designed to grab the votes of people who don't want to vote for a continuation of what the two major parties offer and would like to see real change to government that is for the betterment of Australia as a whole and in turn our planet, they want a government perhaps that can be an example of lower impact environmentally to governments across the world.
Unfortunately that's never going to happen whilst the current crop of leaders in the Greens continue to tie themselves to Labor nationally, because it does very little to give them credibility as a true independent party.
Of course the idea of the vote deal is to try to gain the balance of power in the senate, and to that end we see some now, very confident Greens candidates getting about the place telling us all sorts of radical policies.
So getting to the point, In the seat of Hinkler around Harvey Bay, the Greens candidate appears to have quit the party over the recent preference deal, and seems intent on running as an independent.
Adrian Wone, is probably not alone among candidates who may prefer to allow voters to chose their own preference choice, in fact I know there are others but the party structure and the Australian system does not reward individuals who stand up for their principles they are marginalised with "not a team player", "radical" and "loner" tags by a system that pays Parties very well for votes.
I commend Adrian Wone for his action, I'm not against a candidate giving preferences in a certain direction, but to make a national deal is certainly not in the best interests of people where they are suffering under the pressure of labor policy.
In my opinion, if the Greens want seats, get real policy. If they want the balance of power do it on their own , campaign hard on local issues and campaign all the time not just 5 weeks before the election. Consider the majority, not the minority in general policy, e.g. the Greens claim it's unfair for the federal government to fund Private schools, they have nothing to back that up and ignore some very compelling evidence to continue. Private schools take a huge number of kids out of the state funded system (yes, all schools are funded, and private schools get ZERO funding from the states,)and that means they don't have to build more and more schools, pay more and more teachers, supply more and more facilities. The fact is that this is a policy from the Greens that is illconcieved, uninformed, socialist and detrimental to peoples freedom of choice to school their children in the manner they wish.
A Greens senator, who gets the seat on the back of Labor preferences is beholding to Labor, they owe Labor, they are effectively part of Labor. Giving the Greens the balance of power in the senate is giving Labor control of the senate.
It's no secret that the greater majority of voters also believe there is no difference between Labor and the Greens as far as policy or ideology.
There is also a school of thought that the Greens are a product of the Labor brand as a tool to position radical policy elements in front of the community and a marketing bonanza to capture the widely growing environmental awareness among voters.
Personally I believe that Green candidates stand with all good intentions, they are more that likely environmentally aware, proactive and work in their various communities on real solutions to issues at a local level.
The real issue is that the Greens are a cast net designed to grab the votes of people who don't want to vote for a continuation of what the two major parties offer and would like to see real change to government that is for the betterment of Australia as a whole and in turn our planet, they want a government perhaps that can be an example of lower impact environmentally to governments across the world.
Unfortunately that's never going to happen whilst the current crop of leaders in the Greens continue to tie themselves to Labor nationally, because it does very little to give them credibility as a true independent party.
Of course the idea of the vote deal is to try to gain the balance of power in the senate, and to that end we see some now, very confident Greens candidates getting about the place telling us all sorts of radical policies.
So getting to the point, In the seat of Hinkler around Harvey Bay, the Greens candidate appears to have quit the party over the recent preference deal, and seems intent on running as an independent.
Adrian Wone, is probably not alone among candidates who may prefer to allow voters to chose their own preference choice, in fact I know there are others but the party structure and the Australian system does not reward individuals who stand up for their principles they are marginalised with "not a team player", "radical" and "loner" tags by a system that pays Parties very well for votes.
I commend Adrian Wone for his action, I'm not against a candidate giving preferences in a certain direction, but to make a national deal is certainly not in the best interests of people where they are suffering under the pressure of labor policy.
In my opinion, if the Greens want seats, get real policy. If they want the balance of power do it on their own , campaign hard on local issues and campaign all the time not just 5 weeks before the election. Consider the majority, not the minority in general policy, e.g. the Greens claim it's unfair for the federal government to fund Private schools, they have nothing to back that up and ignore some very compelling evidence to continue. Private schools take a huge number of kids out of the state funded system (yes, all schools are funded, and private schools get ZERO funding from the states,)and that means they don't have to build more and more schools, pay more and more teachers, supply more and more facilities. The fact is that this is a policy from the Greens that is illconcieved, uninformed, socialist and detrimental to peoples freedom of choice to school their children in the manner they wish.
A Greens senator, who gets the seat on the back of Labor preferences is beholding to Labor, they owe Labor, they are effectively part of Labor. Giving the Greens the balance of power in the senate is giving Labor control of the senate.
A contribution from a local.
There is only one record to break for Julia
Julia Gillard has made history as the first female Prime Minister of Australia, that will be her claim to fame, not how she got there and not as many believe for being the shortest serving PM in Australia’s history if the gamble of cutting her own leaders throat, with the backing of faction leaders and Union Power Brokers, goes awry and she is voted out.
For Julia to have been the shortest serving PM in Australia’s history, she would have to have been removed from her post any time before the early hours of July 2nd, 2010.
If she loses this election, she will become the 5th shortest serving Prime Minister.
Julia’s job has to be to convince the electorate that she is not the conniving backstabber who coldly executed PM Kevin Rudd, gave him the Judas kiss in a late night meeting which saw him not even contest the vote from the caucus in less that 24 hours and instead saw him blubber in front of media and his whole immediate family.
Julia also has been quick to use Rudd as the scapegoat (as expected) for all that ails in the vote winning process despite it being well known that she was one of the gang of four who with Rudd and swan made policy , publicized it and then handed press releases to the relevant Minister along with the media. What Rudd was, so was Gillard.
Julia will no doubt attempt to use the agreement with the miners, brokered through back downs in the new tax which served her masters in the unions who feared the loss of jobs in the mining sector to offshore operations and continue with the assertion that without her government in power we will get work choices returned by the current opposition.
Julia’s public announcement on calling the election for August 21 was very much lacking in substance, but I think we all got the campaign slogan, “Moving Forward” since she repeated it many times and spoke slowly as usual, interesting also was her appearance, a little smoother in the face (Botox maybe?) and with a fresh bright red shock and with highlights in the hair colour, her face and mouth barely moving during the delivery of the entire speech.
Julia went on the attack too, claiming knowledge about what is going to be policy from her opposite number Tony Abbott, and claiming that she knows what would have happened in an alternate reality with him as leader during the GFC where our big four made profit while the rest of the developed worlds banks lost, sometimes very heavily and that is to have our country in recession.
Julia actually looks to me to be a Star trek fan, so her claim makes perfect sense, that there could be a way of seeing into an alternate reality where the opposition didn’t support the stimulus packages in the senate, and allow Labor to claim the kudos for it and in fact be the government and not introduce it at all, in fact I can imagine Julia translating all her speeches into “Klingon” as a memory improving exercise.
Julia will probably get a big slice of the women’s vote because there is a large percentage of women who will vote for a woman just because it’s a woman, that’s in her favour, big time and she will, very much like Joh Bejelke Peterson feed the chooks and be of great interest to the various media scrums simply because she is the new kid in town.
Julia is like Joh in many ways, she talks differently almost like she is talking to first graders and her accent is broad and ockerish and almost unladylike more suited to an older country singer than a PM, she also repeats a lot sometimes more than once in case we are too slow to get it the first time.
It’s going to be a long 5 weeks.
BTW, the shortest serving PM was Francis Michael Forde, 8 days.
Earl Page 20 days, John McEwen 23 days and Arthur Fadden 40days.
Julia Gillard has made history as the first female Prime Minister of Australia, that will be her claim to fame, not how she got there and not as many believe for being the shortest serving PM in Australia’s history if the gamble of cutting her own leaders throat, with the backing of faction leaders and Union Power Brokers, goes awry and she is voted out.
For Julia to have been the shortest serving PM in Australia’s history, she would have to have been removed from her post any time before the early hours of July 2nd, 2010.
If she loses this election, she will become the 5th shortest serving Prime Minister.
Julia’s job has to be to convince the electorate that she is not the conniving backstabber who coldly executed PM Kevin Rudd, gave him the Judas kiss in a late night meeting which saw him not even contest the vote from the caucus in less that 24 hours and instead saw him blubber in front of media and his whole immediate family.
Julia also has been quick to use Rudd as the scapegoat (as expected) for all that ails in the vote winning process despite it being well known that she was one of the gang of four who with Rudd and swan made policy , publicized it and then handed press releases to the relevant Minister along with the media. What Rudd was, so was Gillard.
Julia will no doubt attempt to use the agreement with the miners, brokered through back downs in the new tax which served her masters in the unions who feared the loss of jobs in the mining sector to offshore operations and continue with the assertion that without her government in power we will get work choices returned by the current opposition.
Julia’s public announcement on calling the election for August 21 was very much lacking in substance, but I think we all got the campaign slogan, “Moving Forward” since she repeated it many times and spoke slowly as usual, interesting also was her appearance, a little smoother in the face (Botox maybe?) and with a fresh bright red shock and with highlights in the hair colour, her face and mouth barely moving during the delivery of the entire speech.
Julia went on the attack too, claiming knowledge about what is going to be policy from her opposite number Tony Abbott, and claiming that she knows what would have happened in an alternate reality with him as leader during the GFC where our big four made profit while the rest of the developed worlds banks lost, sometimes very heavily and that is to have our country in recession.
Julia actually looks to me to be a Star trek fan, so her claim makes perfect sense, that there could be a way of seeing into an alternate reality where the opposition didn’t support the stimulus packages in the senate, and allow Labor to claim the kudos for it and in fact be the government and not introduce it at all, in fact I can imagine Julia translating all her speeches into “Klingon” as a memory improving exercise.
Julia will probably get a big slice of the women’s vote because there is a large percentage of women who will vote for a woman just because it’s a woman, that’s in her favour, big time and she will, very much like Joh Bejelke Peterson feed the chooks and be of great interest to the various media scrums simply because she is the new kid in town.
Julia is like Joh in many ways, she talks differently almost like she is talking to first graders and her accent is broad and ockerish and almost unladylike more suited to an older country singer than a PM, she also repeats a lot sometimes more than once in case we are too slow to get it the first time.
It’s going to be a long 5 weeks.
BTW, the shortest serving PM was Francis Michael Forde, 8 days.
Earl Page 20 days, John McEwen 23 days and Arthur Fadden 40days.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Back up, . . . to Edwards Bridge.
After my previous post which indirectly pointed a finger at Logan council for not wanting to spend money on much needed infrastructure below the old ( pre amalgamation ) boundary, rather they spend it wastefully on cosmetic improvements like entrance statements and other such rubbish when pot holes that can break suspension and bridges fall into such a state of disrepair that they have to put a load limit on them.
So, Edwards Bridge, falls into this category, it is in a desperate condition and I have done a little research on it's current state and it's scary.
Edwards bridge is at Greenbank, Queensland on Old Goodna Road, near Ison Road intersection, and spans a creek which can during rain carry considerable water but is quite low during dry spells.
The Bridge, if I recall correctly from Beaudesert Shire Council discussions was constructed in about 1975 (or thereabouts ) to replace a single lane one which may have been (partially) washed away.
Its construction was typical of its day, timber, what amounts to big telegraph poles were used for the abutments, to hold the span (in the middle of the creek) and for the platform. The majority of those poles are still there.
In the late 80's the platform was upgraded, off came the pole platform and bitumen topping and after a layer of metal sheeting (it resembles shed siding) as a permanent formwork concrete was poured and again a bitumen topping applied.
As of right now the bridge supports are stuffed, simple, it needs replaced right now, YESTERDAY !!!
When trucks traverse that bridge, it is a scary sight from below, you wouldn't remain under there for long as it look like splitting posts and bearers are ready to give up at any moment.
This bridge came up for discussion after heavy rains in around 1996 when some bridges constructed in a similar fashion were washed away, and it was put into a list for further investigation due to its condition being bad for its age.
Later, during the last term of the Beaudesert Shire Council, a survey of all the wooden bridges revealed that Edwards Bridge needed urgent replacement. And then we were amalgamated with Logan by force, and Logan doesn't want to spend the money.
This bridge is on a main thoroughfare, and although it's not heavily used in comparison to nearby Teviot Road, peak hours see it full and it's the shortest way to and from either end, by far.
The question I put to Council is, does someone have to get hurt, seriously hurt before you guys accept that you have to spend money below the old Logan Boundary?
Come on Logan, before there is disaster, get off your butt and do something.
So, Edwards Bridge, falls into this category, it is in a desperate condition and I have done a little research on it's current state and it's scary.
Edwards bridge is at Greenbank, Queensland on Old Goodna Road, near Ison Road intersection, and spans a creek which can during rain carry considerable water but is quite low during dry spells.
The Bridge, if I recall correctly from Beaudesert Shire Council discussions was constructed in about 1975 (or thereabouts ) to replace a single lane one which may have been (partially) washed away.
Its construction was typical of its day, timber, what amounts to big telegraph poles were used for the abutments, to hold the span (in the middle of the creek) and for the platform. The majority of those poles are still there.
In the late 80's the platform was upgraded, off came the pole platform and bitumen topping and after a layer of metal sheeting (it resembles shed siding) as a permanent formwork concrete was poured and again a bitumen topping applied.
As of right now the bridge supports are stuffed, simple, it needs replaced right now, YESTERDAY !!!
When trucks traverse that bridge, it is a scary sight from below, you wouldn't remain under there for long as it look like splitting posts and bearers are ready to give up at any moment.
This bridge came up for discussion after heavy rains in around 1996 when some bridges constructed in a similar fashion were washed away, and it was put into a list for further investigation due to its condition being bad for its age.
Later, during the last term of the Beaudesert Shire Council, a survey of all the wooden bridges revealed that Edwards Bridge needed urgent replacement. And then we were amalgamated with Logan by force, and Logan doesn't want to spend the money.
This bridge is on a main thoroughfare, and although it's not heavily used in comparison to nearby Teviot Road, peak hours see it full and it's the shortest way to and from either end, by far.
The question I put to Council is, does someone have to get hurt, seriously hurt before you guys accept that you have to spend money below the old Logan Boundary?
Come on Logan, before there is disaster, get off your butt and do something.
Sunday, June 27, 2010
Barnaby Joyce : what's the Wright angle ?
When the preselected candidate for the Federal seat of Wright was found to have kept details of a case to answer from QCAT ( Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal ) of the department of Justice and the Attorney Generals office, relating to a matter where almost $2 million in proceeds from the sale of an ill man's property over whom she had power of attorney has been withdrawn from an account without satisfying the Adult Guardian that it was for the benefit of the man, caused the preselected candidate to be dis endorsed by the LNP and open the way for a new contest for what many believe is a safe seat for whom ever gains the nod to contest the election for the LNP.
Barnaby Joyce seemed to be a supporter of the initial candidate, and has been assisting her by appearing at events such as her recent wedding, and her campaign launch.
Barnaby Joyce a Queensland Senator, is currently the leader of the Nationals in the Senate and currently the shadow minister for Regional development, Infrastructure and water.
What is interesting is his push for his own chief of Staff to take over the seat of wright, and why?
We understand that a drover's dog would romp in for the LNP in that seat and it is considered a conduit seat to a career in Federal politics, and also that the new preselected candidate has run before and is quite experienced in both business and in political processes, that is not in question.
The question is why? what is it about Wright that is so interesting to Mr Joyce, why was he so supportive of the previous candidate, and why does it now seem he has put up his own candidate for preselection.
I suppose only Mr Joyce could answer, but even if he does, would we be able to understand?
Barnaby Joyce seemed to be a supporter of the initial candidate, and has been assisting her by appearing at events such as her recent wedding, and her campaign launch.
Barnaby Joyce a Queensland Senator, is currently the leader of the Nationals in the Senate and currently the shadow minister for Regional development, Infrastructure and water.
What is interesting is his push for his own chief of Staff to take over the seat of wright, and why?
We understand that a drover's dog would romp in for the LNP in that seat and it is considered a conduit seat to a career in Federal politics, and also that the new preselected candidate has run before and is quite experienced in both business and in political processes, that is not in question.
The question is why? what is it about Wright that is so interesting to Mr Joyce, why was he so supportive of the previous candidate, and why does it now seem he has put up his own candidate for preselection.
I suppose only Mr Joyce could answer, but even if he does, would we be able to understand?
Saturday, June 26, 2010
The Australia Card , . . . by stealth.
.
On one of the darkest days Labor has ever seen, when a serving Australian Prime Minister was politically executed by his deputy and her power base of Faction leaders and Trade Union power brokers within one night of number crunching and so seamless was the deed that the now ex PM declared the position of Labor Party Leader vacant to the caucus and did not even put his hand up as a potential candidate leaving Gillard as the only nominee and thusly elected leader of the Parliamentary Labor Party and therefore also the new Prime Minister, further business went almost unnoticed later that evening in the Senate.
LABOR'S controversial electronic healthcare identifier legislation passed in the Senate the same day as Julia Gillard did the devastatingly disloyal deed to her Party Leader, however without any of the media hysteria and against the wishes of the people in terms of it's close relationship with the Australia Card which was given a resounding no by the community.
Two bills -- Healthcare Identifiers Bill 2010 and Healthcare Identifiers (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2010 -- were passed with government amendments and after several delays.
Medicare will be equipped to start issuing a unique, 16-digit healthcare identifier to every Australian from July 1. Doctors, hospitals, healthcare organisations and allied health providers will receive similar identifiers.
So what does this mean?
It means that the government will effectively own your medical information as it will all be recorded against your number and be on their system, out on the public domain of the Internet for ease of access by the relevant people. Not You.
Those in government who are pushing it say it is needed so that the waiting lists in our hospitals will be shortened because doctors will have all our information at hand and won't be wasting time looking for it, Hello! sorry but that is all done at reception , . . before you get in the line and begin the hours of waiting.
They also say that it will stop people "doctor shopping" which means people who have a dependency on prescription drugs will go to several doctors and present with the same symptoms to get several prescriptions for their drug of choice, it won't while there are doctors who accept cash or credit cards this will continue to happen.
Further they claim that our personal health is not a privacy issue because we happily present when we are ill and the doctor and staff know us and what our ailment is, wrong, they may do , but they are not the government and they are not allowed to divulge the information to anyone else.
My Theory
One of the biggest industries in Australia would love to know our personal health history, the insurance industry.
Consider that all of our information is to be entered into the system eventually (I suspect that it will be a requirement for Doctor's offices to comply with an order to get everyone who visits their office onto the system immediately and upload their complete history at that time, and eventually upload the details of every patient they have ever seen over time) and the government permits access to that information for the purpose of verifying that the insurance claim they are about to pay out for does not stem from an undeclared pre existing condition, there's the start, they may now have access to your complete medical history, these are people (bean counters) who are not in the medical profession and who have no Hippocratic oath and are not bound by the same privacy code that medical professions are.
Further I suspect that the issuing of the 16 digit number with be followed by a card with a chip, and guess what, . . .no card, no treatment!
You will now have your Australia card. Like it or not.
.
On one of the darkest days Labor has ever seen, when a serving Australian Prime Minister was politically executed by his deputy and her power base of Faction leaders and Trade Union power brokers within one night of number crunching and so seamless was the deed that the now ex PM declared the position of Labor Party Leader vacant to the caucus and did not even put his hand up as a potential candidate leaving Gillard as the only nominee and thusly elected leader of the Parliamentary Labor Party and therefore also the new Prime Minister, further business went almost unnoticed later that evening in the Senate.
LABOR'S controversial electronic healthcare identifier legislation passed in the Senate the same day as Julia Gillard did the devastatingly disloyal deed to her Party Leader, however without any of the media hysteria and against the wishes of the people in terms of it's close relationship with the Australia Card which was given a resounding no by the community.
Two bills -- Healthcare Identifiers Bill 2010 and Healthcare Identifiers (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2010 -- were passed with government amendments and after several delays.
Medicare will be equipped to start issuing a unique, 16-digit healthcare identifier to every Australian from July 1. Doctors, hospitals, healthcare organisations and allied health providers will receive similar identifiers.
So what does this mean?
It means that the government will effectively own your medical information as it will all be recorded against your number and be on their system, out on the public domain of the Internet for ease of access by the relevant people. Not You.
Those in government who are pushing it say it is needed so that the waiting lists in our hospitals will be shortened because doctors will have all our information at hand and won't be wasting time looking for it, Hello! sorry but that is all done at reception , . . before you get in the line and begin the hours of waiting.
They also say that it will stop people "doctor shopping" which means people who have a dependency on prescription drugs will go to several doctors and present with the same symptoms to get several prescriptions for their drug of choice, it won't while there are doctors who accept cash or credit cards this will continue to happen.
Further they claim that our personal health is not a privacy issue because we happily present when we are ill and the doctor and staff know us and what our ailment is, wrong, they may do , but they are not the government and they are not allowed to divulge the information to anyone else.
My Theory
One of the biggest industries in Australia would love to know our personal health history, the insurance industry.
Consider that all of our information is to be entered into the system eventually (I suspect that it will be a requirement for Doctor's offices to comply with an order to get everyone who visits their office onto the system immediately and upload their complete history at that time, and eventually upload the details of every patient they have ever seen over time) and the government permits access to that information for the purpose of verifying that the insurance claim they are about to pay out for does not stem from an undeclared pre existing condition, there's the start, they may now have access to your complete medical history, these are people (bean counters) who are not in the medical profession and who have no Hippocratic oath and are not bound by the same privacy code that medical professions are.
Further I suspect that the issuing of the 16 digit number with be followed by a card with a chip, and guess what, . . .no card, no treatment!
You will now have your Australia card. Like it or not.
.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Winners are grinners, losers can please themselves.
In one of the most creative pre-emptive campaign adds, which definitely struck a chord with the electorate and was hated by Labor diehards, I think because they know it's true, the Kevin O Lemon add only had to be aired for a couple of weeks before the federal Labor was gathering this morning to dump Rudd in favour of the Deputy Leader and first female PM of Australia Julia Gillard.
The slow talking Ms Gillard has been criticised for her ambitions and for being a single woman of age. She has also been criticised for her leftist leanings and for her inability to effect constructive policy during her deputy leader role where she is seen as part and parcel of the inaction that has been one of the main factors in the downfall of Rudd.
Kevin Rudd was elected on the Anti Work Choices platform, it was a vote against the previous (Howard) government and a policy in workplace relations that put the advantage firmly in the hands of employers and left employees powerless and without union backup in enterprise bargaining.
Rudd was probably the most popularly elected PM in some many years, but broken promises and back flips ( the ETS which he described as the most important moral decision, and the government paid advertising that he claims was a cancer on democracy) have seen his standings both with the community and within the party plummet recently.
Rudd is one of a very few PM's to have been put to the knife by the Party, and quite possibly will make history as the weakest PM ever, not only deposed by the party, but in his first term, and going out by not even contesting a party poll but allowing Gillard to be the only candidate after declaring the position vacant and elected unopposed.
Rudd will not be missed, and in future episodes of "Millionaire Hot seat" there will be defeated contestants saying "oh yeah I forgot about him."
It's a sad end for one so glib, one who has revelled in his world tour with his wife at the taxpayers expense, gushing like schoolgirls and basking in their self anointed world leader of importance status which did not go down well with the electorate and has gone down the same way with the party it seems.
Monday, June 21, 2010
Budget backhander to Logan ratepayers
Whatever Logan is thinking I'll never know, with what could very be the largest rate rise of any council in Quieensland to smash working families finances without any real increase in service provision to justify it and if anything in our area cuts to services which have been evident since the amalgamations becoming thread bare if any.
The increase well over 7% is something that many ratepayers will struggle to afford and something that make you wonder how they (the council bean counters and councillors who vote for it)rationalise that we can afford to just keep on paying more rather than making council more efficient and cheaper to run.
A breakdown of the increase :
The residential general rate in the dollar has increased from 0.3076c to 0.3237c (as part of Council’s three-year
policy to counter-act valuation increases).
• The minimum general rate has increased $48 from $551 to $599.
• The increase of general rates and levies for the majority of ratepayers is $73, after discount. Residents who
also have garbage, will pay an additional $79 after discount.
The absolute slug to ratepayers, using what everyone knew would be used, the property valuation increases, as an excuse and the slug of the extra bin that no one wants will be a bone in the throat for many ratepayers who will consider very carefully how they vote next time around.
Our three representatives especially.
The increase well over 7% is something that many ratepayers will struggle to afford and something that make you wonder how they (the council bean counters and councillors who vote for it)rationalise that we can afford to just keep on paying more rather than making council more efficient and cheaper to run.
A breakdown of the increase :
The residential general rate in the dollar has increased from 0.3076c to 0.3237c (as part of Council’s three-year
policy to counter-act valuation increases).
• The minimum general rate has increased $48 from $551 to $599.
• The increase of general rates and levies for the majority of ratepayers is $73, after discount. Residents who
also have garbage, will pay an additional $79 after discount.
The absolute slug to ratepayers, using what everyone knew would be used, the property valuation increases, as an excuse and the slug of the extra bin that no one wants will be a bone in the throat for many ratepayers who will consider very carefully how they vote next time around.
Our three representatives especially.
Magistrate Rodney Crisp ; Draconian and Drunk on Power ?
.
When cases come before a magistrate it is assumed that there will be both fairness and justice albeit within the framework of the the Magistrates jurisdiction and the limited scope of cases brought before a Magistrate.
What has come to the attention of media recently is the case of an apprentice painter who came before Rodney Crisp on a matter and was then detained in custody on the draconian charge of contempt of court relating to blowing a bubble gum bubble during the case.
Mr Crisp, charged the man with contempt and jailed him for 30 days. The man has subsequently been released on appeal to the high court by his lawyers who are pursuing his rights and entitlements on his behalf.
The charge sheet alleges the man had "scandalised" the court and "challenged its authority" by looking in the magistrate's direction and deliberately blowing and popping a bubble.
This is a case, in my opinion of a magistrate drunk on power, where it seems he is so out of touch with reality that I would question his ability to be just and fair and to hold the position of magistrate at all.
In my opinion he would have served the court better to have asked an officer to remove the man to dispose of the gum, which would have made the man look like the fool he was attempting to be rather than make a mockery of the whole court by what I believe is a draconian abuse of power and a dummy spit by a flaccid and powerless individual outside of the court.
We have to rein in the costs of holding court procedures, not increase them by making more work for more lawyers and imposing costs of detainment upon the taxpayers because some pathetic magistrate looses it.
Further, the case will more than likely have to be continued which also adds to the court costs and increases the workload of magistrates and lawyers unnecessarily.
I firmly believe that the charge of contempt needs to go, there is little doubt that quite a large number of people in the community already have contempt for the legal system and this sort of rubbish from a magistrate who already has several controversial decisions to his name is not helping.
.
When cases come before a magistrate it is assumed that there will be both fairness and justice albeit within the framework of the the Magistrates jurisdiction and the limited scope of cases brought before a Magistrate.
What has come to the attention of media recently is the case of an apprentice painter who came before Rodney Crisp on a matter and was then detained in custody on the draconian charge of contempt of court relating to blowing a bubble gum bubble during the case.
Mr Crisp, charged the man with contempt and jailed him for 30 days. The man has subsequently been released on appeal to the high court by his lawyers who are pursuing his rights and entitlements on his behalf.
The charge sheet alleges the man had "scandalised" the court and "challenged its authority" by looking in the magistrate's direction and deliberately blowing and popping a bubble.
This is a case, in my opinion of a magistrate drunk on power, where it seems he is so out of touch with reality that I would question his ability to be just and fair and to hold the position of magistrate at all.
In my opinion he would have served the court better to have asked an officer to remove the man to dispose of the gum, which would have made the man look like the fool he was attempting to be rather than make a mockery of the whole court by what I believe is a draconian abuse of power and a dummy spit by a flaccid and powerless individual outside of the court.
We have to rein in the costs of holding court procedures, not increase them by making more work for more lawyers and imposing costs of detainment upon the taxpayers because some pathetic magistrate looses it.
Further, the case will more than likely have to be continued which also adds to the court costs and increases the workload of magistrates and lawyers unnecessarily.
I firmly believe that the charge of contempt needs to go, there is little doubt that quite a large number of people in the community already have contempt for the legal system and this sort of rubbish from a magistrate who already has several controversial decisions to his name is not helping.
.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
You think free speech is free, think again.
In a recent case, that wasted expensive court time , a lot of taxpayers dollars and ended up with a result not expected by the police prosecutor, the Judge found that a common term used by a citizen would have been heard by police at the very least in fact that they would have heard and used far worse, so in that regard he found the citizen not guilty of swearing at the police officer.
This decision has incensed the Police union and the humiliated the actual officer involved (who should have just hardened up and given the citizen a quiet polite word of advice and let it go at that) and also caused the police lobbyists in Queensland to go for gold with their efforts to have police able to defend their (ears) person from verbal abuse in the form of swearing.
It appears they have been successful because it looks like the police will from late this year or early 2011, have the power to issue on the spot $100 fines for swearing in public, and between $100 and $300 for other public nuisance offences which means they no longer need to carry the burden of proof of an offence and take the matter to court, just write out a ticket potentially raising huge amounts of revenue for the state government in the process.
The burden is then on the citizen issued with the infringement notice and fine to prove to a magistrate that they did not commit the offence, which will be pretty difficult unless you happen to be in the presence of several credible and motivated (so they will come to court and make a statement on your behalf) witnesses.
This is really becoming a police state when in a one on one encounter with police you can be fleeced on the strength of the officers say so that what you may have said was considered swearing in public.
So the question remains , what ever happened to free speech? did we actually ever have it or was it just something we imagined would be good?
In effect the legislation will make the spoken word up to the interpretation of a police officer as to whether it constitutes a public nuisance or not.
Now I'm no rocket scientist but I hardly think police are qualified to establish the context of a cuss, the syntax of a cuss within a sentence or distinguish swearing from a word in a foreign language, in fact they leave themselves wide open to racism allegations if they ticket an ethnic Australian who has a name or word that an officer thinks is a swear word, but in the ethnic language clearly is not.
You have to wonder at how soft police are getting when they can't get over the fact that a judge decided that they should be used to hearing words like "prick" from the general public and that it was not offencive for a citizen to call a police person by that term.
I think Bligh is on a winner with this one because people swear all the time, and think nothing of it, in fact it's part of every tradies vocabulary if you go onto a building site.
I'm not in any way advocating that we as a society accept swearing as part of our daily verbose, or that we remove the unspoken rule that we keep it for the boys, but this seems over the top and another revenue raiser to me.
.
This decision has incensed the Police union and the humiliated the actual officer involved (who should have just hardened up and given the citizen a quiet polite word of advice and let it go at that) and also caused the police lobbyists in Queensland to go for gold with their efforts to have police able to defend their (ears) person from verbal abuse in the form of swearing.
It appears they have been successful because it looks like the police will from late this year or early 2011, have the power to issue on the spot $100 fines for swearing in public, and between $100 and $300 for other public nuisance offences which means they no longer need to carry the burden of proof of an offence and take the matter to court, just write out a ticket potentially raising huge amounts of revenue for the state government in the process.
The burden is then on the citizen issued with the infringement notice and fine to prove to a magistrate that they did not commit the offence, which will be pretty difficult unless you happen to be in the presence of several credible and motivated (so they will come to court and make a statement on your behalf) witnesses.
This is really becoming a police state when in a one on one encounter with police you can be fleeced on the strength of the officers say so that what you may have said was considered swearing in public.
So the question remains , what ever happened to free speech? did we actually ever have it or was it just something we imagined would be good?
In effect the legislation will make the spoken word up to the interpretation of a police officer as to whether it constitutes a public nuisance or not.
Now I'm no rocket scientist but I hardly think police are qualified to establish the context of a cuss, the syntax of a cuss within a sentence or distinguish swearing from a word in a foreign language, in fact they leave themselves wide open to racism allegations if they ticket an ethnic Australian who has a name or word that an officer thinks is a swear word, but in the ethnic language clearly is not.
You have to wonder at how soft police are getting when they can't get over the fact that a judge decided that they should be used to hearing words like "prick" from the general public and that it was not offencive for a citizen to call a police person by that term.
I think Bligh is on a winner with this one because people swear all the time, and think nothing of it, in fact it's part of every tradies vocabulary if you go onto a building site.
I'm not in any way advocating that we as a society accept swearing as part of our daily verbose, or that we remove the unspoken rule that we keep it for the boys, but this seems over the top and another revenue raiser to me.
.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
ISRAEL, NOW ADDS PIRACY TO IT'S ARSENAL
If the reports from international and Australian journalists are correct, and I believe they probably are, then Israeli military people aboard gunship helicopters and with support vessels boarded whilst armed with automatic assault weapons, a ship in international waters, and that is piracy.
There has been video of the boarding in which the Israel military drop down from the gunship on ropes with guns in their hands onto the deck of a peace envoy headed for the coast, but still in international waters, their mission to deliver aid supplies and make the world aware of the unbearable hardship the Israeli (and more recently Egypt) Blockade is forcing upon civilians in Gaza, particularly women and children.
Reports are that there are 19 who have been shot by Israeli military personnel and of course the Israelis are claiming only 9.
There is no doubt that the Israelis went out to the ship with the intent to make an example or at the very least an incident that would deter others from doing the same.
The video is said to show soldiers dropping to the deck and being mobbed by protesters who used deckchairs and metal objects even sticks to try and force the soldiers to rethink the boarding, apparently even throwing one pathetic soldier overboard.
I have received some very nasty emails responses to my previous blogs about the Israel war on its neighbour, and have had accusations of anti semitism, of purporting a hate crime, and even of using this issue to attack a local person, all of which I strenuously deny, and to that end i removed each comment as they came and did not reply to the emails. However I defend my right to take a position as an independent observer, and report stories as they occur and unfortunately they seem to occur more about Israel attacking Gaza than the other way around.
I have to say I believe Israel's sinking to this new low, an act of international piracy, surely must have the USA looking to withdraw some of its military backing that makes the Israeli attacks on Gaza seem like Godzilla stepping on an ants nest.
There has been video of the boarding in which the Israel military drop down from the gunship on ropes with guns in their hands onto the deck of a peace envoy headed for the coast, but still in international waters, their mission to deliver aid supplies and make the world aware of the unbearable hardship the Israeli (and more recently Egypt) Blockade is forcing upon civilians in Gaza, particularly women and children.
Reports are that there are 19 who have been shot by Israeli military personnel and of course the Israelis are claiming only 9.
There is no doubt that the Israelis went out to the ship with the intent to make an example or at the very least an incident that would deter others from doing the same.
The video is said to show soldiers dropping to the deck and being mobbed by protesters who used deckchairs and metal objects even sticks to try and force the soldiers to rethink the boarding, apparently even throwing one pathetic soldier overboard.
I have received some very nasty emails responses to my previous blogs about the Israel war on its neighbour, and have had accusations of anti semitism, of purporting a hate crime, and even of using this issue to attack a local person, all of which I strenuously deny, and to that end i removed each comment as they came and did not reply to the emails. However I defend my right to take a position as an independent observer, and report stories as they occur and unfortunately they seem to occur more about Israel attacking Gaza than the other way around.
I have to say I believe Israel's sinking to this new low, an act of international piracy, surely must have the USA looking to withdraw some of its military backing that makes the Israeli attacks on Gaza seem like Godzilla stepping on an ants nest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)