LIB-NATS HAVE YET TO PRODUCE A REPUTABLE BUDGET : MEANWHILE THE RICH, POWERFUL & CORPORATE ARE REFINING THE ART OF TAX DODGING. READ MORE.

Australia doesn’t have a spending problem, it has a revenue problem. Over 30% of corporations based in Australia in the last financial year paid NO TAX, while the majority of those that paid tax paid less than 5% tax. 

It is obvious to everyone, except our Federal politicians, that Australia has a revenue problem. While on a daily basis the corporate owned media carries on about welfare fraud and the burden carried by the community because 33% of Australians rely on old age, disability, unemployment and single parents benefits to survive. How many Australians know that Murdoch owned News Corporation (which owns over 70% of Australia’s newspapers) received an 886 million dollar tax refund during the 2013/2014 financial year and paid NO TAX during the 2014/2015 financial year, while 21st Century Fox, Murdoch’s other media arm, paid less than 1% tax during the same period?

It seems, in Australia, there is one set of taxation laws for corporations and another set for the rest of the community. Unless Federal politicians, of all political hues, are willing to make corporate taxation revenue their number one priority during 2016, we can expect to be told, ad nauseam, there is not enough money for 

PUBLIC HEALTH,

PUBLIC EDUCATION, 

PUBLIC HOUSING, 

PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE,

SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS.

Read and/or download the full article below 

There is still community in Millers Point in Sydney. People are still fighting. Rally to save Millers Point. Fight against consigning it to the wealthy only.

Rally for Millers Point

POSTED BY COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 0SC ON MARCH 04, 2016

Join the people of the Millers Point as they march to save their community.

Saturday 19th March 12.00 - 4.00 pm

WE WILL MARCH FOR MILLERS POINT

We will gather on the forecourt of the Fire Station in Kent Street 

and march down Kent Street to the Village Green.

Below is a report from Patricia Corowa on the current state of affairs in Miller's Point, Sydney.  Many people have left.  Many, like Patricia, are still there but are being disturbed every night by the noise and carelessness of the security workers in the half-empty suburb.

There are about 70 of us left here now. Most of the infrastructure, apart from the gentrified restaurant and coffee shop in the Lend Lease development of Barangaroo, has disappeared. One bus that runs every half hour.. No post office.. No butcher shop.. No Bakery.. No servo.. No affordable supermarket.. Lotsa pubs of course, mainly for the yuppy set and their late night disgusting behaviour.. lotsa cars parked, some double, even triple and motor cycles of the workers on the Lend Lease developments and other NSW government restoration, maintenance and repairs of public properties where the tenants have been forcibly removed and are now being made ready for sale.. As you know I am a relatively recent resident compared to many others who have been born here or lived here for generations and decades in the purpose-bullt workers' housing; and are now grown old, with age-related unwellness and vulnerabllity. My Great Grandparents lived in The Rocks in 1881 and that's why the area was a preference when I applied for public housing in 1986, but was given the first and only offer here in 2012 on a current lease that is until 2022.. one of the reasons why I do not consent to the NSW governments' removal of the people and sale of the properties, apart from my age, and other extenuating circumstances.. As the notice indicates, the remnant of us continue to fight the capitalist delusion and folly of the NSW Government, do not consent to what they are doing to public assets, and are determined not to surrender..

American-style food stamps on the way for Australian pensioners? A bit rich from a very rich Prime Minister?

Cross-posted with Advocacy

One-third of Australian pensioners live in poverty: 

OECD report

January 8, 2016 - 9:10AM

Rachel Browne

Social Affairs Reporter

View more articles from Rachel Browne

Follow Rachel on Twitter Email Rachel

More than one-third of Australian pensioners are living below the poverty line, making the country among the worst performers in the world for the financial security of older people.

The findings of the OECD report, Pensions at a Glance 2015, compared Australia to 33 other countries.

Australia was ranked second lowest on social equity, with 36 per cent of pensioners living below the poverty line, which the report defined as half the relevant country's median household income.

One-third of Australian pensioners live in poverty, according to a report by the OECD. 

Photo: Greg Newington

Australian pensioners fared better than their counterparts in South Korea, where 50 per cent live below the poverty line but performed poorly against the OECD average of 12.6 per cent.

The report, released last month, found the Australian government contributes less to old-age benefits than other OECD countries. The Australian government spends 3.5 per cent of GDP on the pension, below the OECD average of 7.9 per cent.

The findings are backed up by the Global Age Watch Index 2015 report card which rates countries by how well their older populations are faring. It ranked Australia lowest in its region on income security, due to the high rate of old age poverty and pension coverage which is below the regional average.

 

Paul Versteege , senior research and advocacy adviser with the Combined Pensioner and Superannuants Association, said the base Australian pension rate was low compared to median household incomes.

"There are huge discrepancies among retirees in various countries," he said.

"In Australia there is quite a large group that has to subsist on the age pension as its only source of income. In spite of pension reform and recent increases to the pension, the base pension is still quite low for singles."

The annual payment for a single person is about $22,000 and $34,000 for a couple, with 2.25 million Australians claiming the pension.

Council on the Ageing chief executive Ian Yates said the report challenged perceptions that the entitlement was too high.

"Claims that the age pension is somehow too extravagant and unsustainable do not bear out," he said.

"We have always argued for progressive improvements to the pension but at the moment an increase to the pension is highly unlikely and more focus ought to go towards building superannuation contributions."

Chief executive of Vision Super Stephen Rowe said he was "staggered" by the findings of the OECD report, saying it painted a bleak picture for many older Australians.

"Are we generous enough with the pension? I don't think so."

He said that Australians retiring now have not received the full benefit of compulsory superannuation contributions, introduced in 1992, but were grappling with rising living costs.

"The basic cost of living in Australia is quite high, compared with  some other OECD countries," Mr Rowe said.

Chief executive of National Seniors Michael O'Neill said the pension had gone backwards in real terms and many older people had not accumulated enough superannuation to supplement the benefit.

"In terms of sustainability, the report confirms that Australia spends substantially less than the OECD average on pensions," he said.

"In fact, our pension spend has dropped and plateaued since 2000. Against other countries, our proportion of pensioners living below the poverty line is startling."

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/national/onethird-of-australian-pensioners-live-in-poverty-oecd-report-20160106-gm0uno#ixzz3wbUL4jxn 
Follow us: @theage on Twitter | theageAustralia on Facebook

ACOSS: Proposals for a higher GST and any unequal outcome.

Using a higher GST to pay for income tax cuts is a ‘recipe for more inequality': new report Thursday 5, November 2015 The Australian Council of Social Service today released new modelling from the National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling (NATSEM) to show what an increase in the GST to 15% would mean for households across the community. The NATSEM modelling also shows what  it would mean if the Federal Government used the revenue from an increase in the GST to fund a reduction in personal income taxes across different income groups. The NATSEM modelling, commissioned by ACOSS with support from the Carnegie Foundation, confirms that using an increase in the GST to fund income tax cuts will mean households on low and modest incomes are significantly worse off and higher income households are the winners, paying less tax overall as a proportion of their income. DOWNLOAD Report A higher GST? “The NATSEM modelling of an increase to 15% on the existing base of the GST or a broadening of the GST base to fresh food, health and education confirms that either change would be regressive. Low and modest income households would clearly pay a higher proportion of their income, in comparison to higher income households through an increase in the GST, whether by increasing the rate or broadening the base by removing the exemptions,” said ACOSS CEO, Dr Cassandra Goldie. Ben Phillips of NATSEM said, “An increase in the GST has a much bigger impact on low and modest income households because they spend more of their overall income to meet their living costs, in comparison to people on higher incomes who are better able to save. An increase in the rate of the GST to 15% would require people in the lowest 20% of the income brackets to pay 7% more, people in the middle 20% 4.2% more, and people in the highest 20% income bracket just 3% more of their income.” Mr Phillips said, “A broadening of the base of the GST to fresh food, health, water and education would also be regressive, with people on lower incomes paying proportionately more of their incomes on these essentials. The relative impacts are clear: 4.6% of income for people in the lowest income brackets, 2.7% for people in the middle, and just 1.7% for the highest income earners. A higher GST to fund income tax cuts? “NATSEM has also modelled the impact of raising the GST to 15% to pay for a cut of 5% in all personal income tax rates to demonstrate how this would change who pays what proportion of tax, in reference to their incomes. The results are stark: two thirds of households, on incomes up to about $100 000 would be worse off and the top 40% would gain at the expense of the bottom 60%. The lowest 20% of households by income would lose $33 a week (6.6% of income) on average while the top 20% would gain an average of $69 a week (2.1% of income),” Mr Phillips said. Dr Goldie said, “Increasing the GST to fund income tax cuts is a also a big, complicated revenue ‘churn’ that would do nothing to ease the pressure on State health, education and welfare budgets, particularly as it would clearly require a major compensation package to ameliorate its impacts on people who are hit the hardest.  If it’s not about raising more revenue, the Government has to justify why this option is being considered at all.” “Raising the GST to fund cuts to personal income tax across the board, as some advocate, is a recipe for more inequality, not a stronger economy,” said ACOSS CEO Dr Cassandra Goldie. A better approach to tax reform?  “ACOSS is a strong supporter of comprehensive tax reform to improve economic efficiency to support jobs growth, to increase simplicity and fairness, and to secure a more sustainable revenue base for essential services and infrastructure.  We agree with business and the unions that tax reform should remove tax concessions that are no longer fit for purpose, shift away from clearly inefficient tax bases such as stamp duties towards efficient bases such as land taxes, and remove distortions in the tax treatment of investment incomes. This was clear common ground from the National Reform Summit Group, and consensus between the Business Council of Australia and ACOSS. “We welcome the Federal Government’s preparedness to put changes to superannuation tax concessions, negative gearing and capital gains and other tax concessions and loopholes, such a discretionary trusts and other tax shelters, back on the table. “However, if the Federal Government’s main game for tax reform is to shift the responsibility for paying taxes away from personal incomes towards consumption, it would fail on all grounds.  Fairness and simplicity would be undermined and it would do little or nothing to improve economic efficiency. It would be a recipe for driving inequality. The Government’s own Tax Reform Discussion Paper highlighted that the most inefficient taxes are stamp duties and other business and transaction taxes, not personal income tax. This is where the serious effort to shift taxes should be focussed. “ACOSS does not rule out any increase in the GST. However, an increase in the GST should not be our starting point, when low and modest incomes earners carry the greatest risk. “There is no doubt that governments will need more revenue to continue to provide the health, education and welfare services the community expects. ACOSS supports efforts to reform the tax system to do this in the fairest and most efficient way. This research confirms our view that increasing the GST should be one of the last options considered to raise revenue for those services, when low and modest incomes earners will carry the greatest risk. “ACOSS will continue to work with government, business, unions and the community to help make this happen. We cannot afford not to reform the tax system, but tax reform is not all about raising the GST,” Dr Goldie concluded. Media Contact: For interviews with Dr Goldie, CEO ACOSS or Ben Phillips, NATSEM, contact Fernando de Freitas (ACOSS) - 0419 626 155. DOWNLOAD Report Key Findings: Increasing the GST: Raising the GST to 15% without removing exemptions would raise $29 billion in 2016, increase the CPI by 2.8%, and reduce the spending power of the lowest 20% by 7%, the middle 20% by 4.2%, and the top 20% by 3%. Removing the exemption for fresh food and leaving the GST rate at 10% would raise $7 billion, increase the CPI by 0.7%, and reduce the spending power of the lowest 20% by 2%, the middle 20% by 1%, and the top 20% by 0.6%. Removing the exemption for health and community services and leaving the GST rate at 10% would raise $6 billion, increase the CPI by 0.6%, and reduce the spending power of the lowest 20% by 1.6%, the middle 20% by 0.8%, and the top 20% by 0.6%. Removing the exemption for education and leaving the GST rate at 10% would raise $5 billion, increase the CPI by 0.4%, and reduce the spending power of all household income groups by a uniform 0.6%. Removing the exemption for water and sewerage and leaving the GST rate at 10% would raise $1 billion, increase the CPI by 0.1%, and reduce the spending power of the lowest 20% by 0.4%, the middle 20% by 0.2%, and have a negligible impact on the top 20%. Increasing the GST to pay for income tax cuts: Increasing the GST to 15% without removing exemptions and using all of the revenue to pay for a 5% cut in all marginal personal income tax rates would result in losses for most of the lowest 60% of households up to around $100,000 in household income to pay for gains for most of the highest 40%: * 99% of the lowest 20% would lose an average of 6.7% of spending power, as any tax cuts would be offset by higher prices; * 91% of the second 20% would lose an average of 3.3% * 67% of the middle 20% would lose an average of 2.4% * 64% of the fourth 20% would gain an average of 1.8% * 75% of the top 20% would gain an average of 3.2%

Sustainability Victoria community engagement events in the Grampians Region : #Horsham & #Ballarat :

Sustainability Victoria is hosting a series of ‘Community Conversations on Climate Change’ across regional Victoria throughout October and November 2015.

The purpose of these events is to bring together representatives from across the community sector (community groups, not-for-profits, schools, local government) to connect with each other, share lessons and exchange knowledge about leading climate change projects in the region and from across the state, and to inform Sustainability Victoria’s future program design and community engagement offer.

In the Grampians region, there will be 2 events:

Horsham, Thursday 22 October – 9.45am to 1pm (concluding with lunch)

Ballarat, Wednesday 28 October – 9.45am to 1pm (concluding with lunch)

Please put one of these dates in your diary.  

An invitation including all the event details with a full agenda will be sent shortly.

URGENT: Galilee Basin Mines impact on water : Statutory right to groundwater for mines proposed to commence!

Picture above from here 

URGENT MESSAGE FROM THE GALILEE BASIN ALLIANCE

Statutory right to groundwater for mines proposed to commence!

1 October 2015

What is proposed?

The loss of your public rights of appeal on underground water licences for mining companies. This amendment affects a significant amount of our underground water.

The proposed Alpha and Kevin’s Corner Coal Mines alone would involve taking an estimated 176GL, or 70,400 Olympic swimming pools worth of underground water over 30 years.

Currently mining companies have to apply to get a water licence, the application is publicly notified and then submitters (for example graziers or community groups concerned about water) have the right to appeal the decision on the water licence to the Land Court.[1]

These community rights would be lost if the proposed amendments are commenced. Our current Ministers want this removal of rights to go ahead!

We support the positive changes WROLAA introduces – including obligatory make good agreements (although with some improvements needed), cumulative impact management, adequate monitoring and reporting obligations – but let’s not lose community appeal rights with respect to water licences.

Why is this bad?

• We need full public scrutiny of the impacts of major mines on groundwater. Removing water licence requirements seriously undermines that scrutiny. The decisions made by the Land Court in cases like Alpha Coal [2] and other Galilee Basin mines assume there will be later public scrutiny of an application for a water licence and the potentially major impacts on groundwater. And it’s simply unfair to change the rules when projects are part way through assessment and when citizens have made decisions as to whether to participate based on an existing array of rights.
• Even for development applications for shopping centres, our legal system provides the community with submission and appeal rights to the Planning and Environment Court for independent merit assessment. Impacts to our precious groundwater by large scale mining activities deserve the same scrutiny against community concerns.
• It’s contrary to Labour statements, as quote above. This State Government has further committed to open, accountable, transparent governance. This move is contrary to those commitments; silencing those concerned with impacts to groundwater in Queensland.

TAKE ACTION: 

Help save our groundwater resources!

1. Spread the word – share this news and why it is bad with your networks.

2. Speak to your local parliamentarian about this issue and tell them what you think.

3. Write to Minister Lynham and Minister Miles and tell them your concerns, even a short email will do:

Hon Dr Anthony Lynham Minister for State Development and Minister for Natural Resources and Mines PO Box 15216, CITY EAST QLD 4002 statedevelopment@ministerial.qld.gov.au

Hon Dr Steven Miles Minister for Environment and Heritage Protection and Minister for National Parks and the Great Barrier Reef GPO Box 2454, BRISBANE QLD 4001 environment@ministerial.qld.gov.au

4. Keep an eye on EDO Qld Facebook, Twitter or website for updates.

Whose idea was this?

By way of background, in late 2014 the LNP government introduced the Water Reform and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2014 (Qld) (WROLAA) which proposed to drop public rights of appeal on water licences and instead provide the mining industry with a statutory right to take associated underground water (water that is necessary to remove for the extraction of the actual resource)[3].  Prior to being elected ALP opposed this idea, committing to:

“Repeal the Newman Government’s water laws which will have a detrimental effect on the Great Barrier Reef catchment systems and allow for over allocation of Queensland’s precious water resources.”[4]

And further stating:

“The Water Reform and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2014 takes the errors of the Murray-Darling Basin and seeks to repeat them by facilitating the over-allocation of water for large ‘coordinated projects’ and mines. This legislation passed while 75 per cent of Queensland was drought declared and landholders are struggling to find water. 

The Opposition also does not support make good arrangements being dependent on a resource company coming to the conclusion that they have impacted on a landholders’ water bore. If water is extracted on an unsustainable basis from the Great Artesian Basin it will be lost forever.

Only a Labor Government will ensure the sustainable management of our State’s water resources based on the principles of ecologically sustainable development. By repealing this legislation a Labor Government will restore the fundamental legal right to object and say no to a nearby mining development.”^[5]

Apparently their position has changed. 

We can’t allow this to go ahead.

[1] Water Act, s206(4)(i) and Water Regulation, Sch 2, allows a holder of a mineral development licence or mining lease (or listed entity) to apply for a water licence. Water Act, s208 provides for public notice of water licence applications (limited exceptions to public notification in s209).  For people who have made a properly made submission there are rights of internal review (s862(1)(a)) and appeal to the Land Court (s877(1)(b)).

[2] Hancock Coal Pty Ltd v Kelly & Ors and Department of Environment and Heritage Protection(No. 4) [2014] QLC 12.

[3] WROLAA s11 proposes to insert Chapter 12A Part 1 in the Mineral Resources Act which includes s334ZP ‘Entitlement to use underground water’ and s334ZR associated authorisation. WROLAA s10 proposes to delete s235(3) of the Mineral Resources Act which states there is no entitlement to water.

[4] Queensland Labor, Saving the Great Barrier Reef: Labor’s plan to protect a natural wonder, January 2015.

[5] Letter Tim Mulherin former Labor MP to Kate Dennehy, Lock the Gate, 22 January 2015.

http://www.edoqld.org.au/news/urgent-statutory-right-to-groundwater-for-mines-proposed-to-commence/

Mt Druitt - the "stardom" of this western Sydney suburb is unable to save its Aboriginal health service

Picture above is from here

Picture above from here

An Aboriginal Community Health Service in Western Sydney is being forced to close after a Federal Government decision to cease its funding.
Posted by NITV on Saturday, 4 July 2015

Protesting the gag on health professionals on Nauru and Manus? Here's some material which may assist.

Brigid O'Carroll Walsh

8 mins · Ballarat · 

Are you protesting about the silencing by the Abbott Government of the health professionals on Manus and Nauru? Are you writing letters and social media? Below are links to media from the RACGP which might be helpful: 

http://www.racgp.org.au/…/news/media-rel…/world-refugee-day/  

http://www.racgp.org.au/…/medi…/australian-border-force-act/

RACGP - RACGP calls for gag on health professionals to be lifted on World Refugee Day