Cross-posted with Advocacy
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Showing posts with label Inquiries and Commissions. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Inquiries and Commissions. Show all posts
Tuesday, 19 May 2015
Part 4: 'Slaving Away' outfall and fall-out : Woolworths admits moral responsibiity at Senate Inquiry : still refusing to meet workers and the National Union of Workers
Friday, 8 May 2015
More exploitation: Employment and Work practices in the mining industry
Picture at right from here
Once upon a long ago, mining companies were major contributors to the working and social life of remote and regional Australia. Not any more. Mining companies are major destroyers of working conditions and social fabric in remote and regional Australia.
Miss Eagle is now living in her third mining town and her second gold town. First was the company town of Mount Isa - 1997-86. A great place to be when it was owned by Mount Isa Mines. True, there was a colourful past involving the eight month long strike in 1964 and the consequent declaration of a State of Emergency.
Then there was Tennant Creek from 1993 to 1997. TC likes to bill itself as the site of the last gold rush in Australia. Miss Eagle was there when the last of the major mining corporates closed down. But there is always hope in the heart of a mining and there are always prospectors and geologists and there are smaller 'shows' around the Tennant these days. And now Ballarat since 2012 - home to the beginnings of Australian democracy with the events surrounding Eureka and the ensuing lives of its proponents - and now finding itself, through a freeway and a good rail service, almost a western suburb of Melbourne with mining still going on below the cities streets.
Mining has been a major component in the history of Australia: enriching the nation's economy; building strong social cultures; contributing to a strong union movement - particular through two major unions: the Australian Workers Union, and the CFMEU.
All this rich history has now been superceded by what is, arguably, a sterile social and working culture imported from that place of many poor working conditions, the USA. It is called, FIFO. There is no building of community and social fabric. Such tolerance of unions that may have existed and which was embedded in the community life of mining towns as dissipated. Mining companies return more to their international shareholders than they do to the communities or states surrounding the mine sites from which they are extracting riches and leaving behind dubious environmental legacies.
In some cases, such as Moura and Moranbah in Queensland there has a risen a sharp contrast between the old mining culture and the new - and, as it works itself out, never the twain shall meet. This has a huge impact on the commercial hearts of the old mining towns. The new mining ventures are full of single people, not families. The employees of the new mining ventures shop elsewhere - except perhaps for those who go to local pubs, clubs and bars. And now the question is - how long will the old mining towns last.
There is nothing new about mining towns being swallowed up by the dust of history as the riches have been exhausted. An example of this is Mary Kathleen in north-west Queensland which had a life of approximately thirty years. But running out of resource is one thing. Chewing up, swallowing, and then spitting out human labour, creativity and capital is another - and that is what FIFO is doing.
That is one story. Now there is another. Huge environmental destruction - of the Galilee Basin and the Great Barrier Reef and its environs. It seems that where once a community might have become united as it strove for better wages and safer working conditions, now the community becomes united against the environmental mess and destruction which is being thrust upon them.
The recently elected Queensland Labor Government is fulfilling its election promise of a FIFO inquiry. The Inquiry is being led by Jim Pearce a former miner. The terms of reference for the Inquiry are here. As well, they are published below. Submissions MUST be in by 25 May.
As if this is not sufficiently controversial, Pearce spoke in the Queensland Parliament this week of the exploitative work practices of the mining companies - causing even more furore.
A big thanks to the Galilee Basin Alliance
who emailed the Pearce speech and set off this post.
~~~~
Fly in, fly out and other long distance commuting work practices in regional Queensland
Terms of Reference
The inquiry was referred to the committee by the Legislative Assembly on 27 March 2015.
The Legislative Assembly has requested the committee:
1. Inquire into and report on fly-in, fly-out (FIFO) and other long distance commuting work practices in regional Queensland.
2. That, in undertaking this inquiry, the committee should consider the following issues:
- The health impacts on workers and their families from long-distance commuting, particularly mental health impacts, and the provision of health services in mining communities;
- The effects on families of rostering practices in mines using FIFO workforces;
- The extent and projected growth in FIFO work practices by region and industry;
- The costs and/or benefits and structural incentives and disincentives, including tax settings, for companies choosing a FIFO workforce;
- The effect of a 100% non-resident FIFO workforce on established communities; including community wellbeing, the price of housing and availability, and access to services and infrastructure;
- The quality of housing provided in accommodation villages for FIFO workforces;
- Strategies to optimise the FIFO experience for employees and their families, communities and industry;
- The commuting practices for FIFO workforces, including the amount of time spent travelling, the methods of transportation, and adequacy of compensation paid for commuting travel times;
- The effectiveness of current responses to impacts of FIFO workforces of the Commonwealth, State and Local Governments; and
- Any other related matter.
3. Further, that the committee seek public submissions and consult with key stakeholders including local communities, resource companies, unions and local government.
4. Further, that the committee report to the Legislative Assembly by 30 September 2015.
Submissions
The Committee invites submissions addressing the terms of reference, from all interested parties. Guidelines for making a submission to a parliamentary committee are available here: Guide to making a submission.
Closing date for written submissions is Monday 25 May 2015 by 4.00pm. Submissions should be sent to:
Email: ipnrc@parliament.qld.gov.au
Post: Research Director
Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources Committee
Parliament House
George Street
Brisbane Qld 4000
Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources Committee
Parliament House
George Street
Brisbane Qld 4000
Inquiry timeline
| Submissions close: | Monday 25 May 2015 |
| Public departmental briefing: | Wednesday 20 May 2015 |
| Public hearing in Brisbane: | Wednesday 3 June 2015 (tbc) |
| Regional public hearings | June 2015 (tbc) |
| Reporting due: | Wednesday 30 September 2015 |
 |
Sunday, 22 July 2012
Are the people of Victoria interested in safe food with regulatory responsibility? The Lib Nats are not...
Australian Food News reports that the Victorian Parliament is to review meat and dairy regulations. Now, Networkers, I am most suspicious about this. The Baillieu Government in Victoria has allowed grazing by cattle in significant national parks. It is bending over backwards, it seems to me, to satisfy its conservative and corporate constituency.
The chair of the Rural and Regional Committee, Mr Paul Weller (MP for Rodney) said the enquiry needed to investigate the cost competitiveness of food safety laws on regulated businesses.
To my wary mind, Networkers, the word of Mr Weller are code for advantaging corporates, farmers, and small business with regard to cost while cutting regulation to the bone.
Check out the language used in the Terms of Reference below:
cost competitiveness, regulatory burden, support businesses, promote business continuity, non-regulatory methods, costs of implementation for business and government, and the facilitation of market access and exports.
Please note that there is no mention of something such as regulatory responsibility to protect the interests of the consuming public. Ah no. This is an Inquiry to advantage and empathise not with the public but with corporations, businesses and farmers.
Check out the language used in the Terms of Reference below:
cost competitiveness, regulatory burden, support businesses, promote business continuity, non-regulatory methods, costs of implementation for business and government, and the facilitation of market access and exports.
Please note that there is no mention of something such as regulatory responsibility to protect the interests of the consuming public. Ah no. This is an Inquiry to advantage and empathise not with the public but with corporations, businesses and farmers.
Submissions close on Monday 3 September 2012
Terms of Reference
That, under s33 of the Parliamentary Committees Act 2003, an inquiry into the impact of food safety regulation on farm and other businesses regulated under the Dairy Act 2000, the Meat Industry Act 1993, and the Seafood Act 2003 be referred to the Rural and Regional Committee for consideration and report no later than 30 March 2013, and the Committee is asked to:
(1) explore the cost competitiveness to regulated businesses of food safety laws administered by PrimeSafe and Dairy Food Safety Victoria (DFSV);
(2) have a particular focus on small business;
(3) investigate and assess:
(a) the extent and appropriateness of regulatory burden impact of national primary production and processing standards on regulated businesses in Victoria ;
(b) the comparison of alternative methods to assess compliance with required standards and food safety outcomes;
(c) incentives for improved performance to reduce regulatory burden such as ‘earned recognition’ systems;
(d) how regulators can support businesses to understand and achieve compliance with regulations;
(e) how regulators can promote business continuity and improved compliance where non-compliance with regulations is identified;
(f) non-regulatory methods for achieving required food safety outcomes;
(g) the comparison of requirements under legislation administered by PrimeSafe and DFSV with existing regulatory requirements under theFood Act 1984 for businesses with equivalent food safety risks;
(h) the comparison of requirements under legislation administered by PrimeSafe and DFSV with regulatory requirements administered by the Australian Quarantine Inspection Service for exports;
(i) the application of food safety regulations to farm-gate sales of unprocessed and on-farm processed produce, given the desire for some agricultural producers to innovate and value-add on farm;
(4) consider the findings of other relevant reviews and evidence from other systems implemented either in Australia or internationally; and
(5) have regard to public health outcomes, the costs of implementation for business and government, and the facilitation of market access and exports.
 |
Monday, 25 June 2012
C'mon, Aussie, come on! Support a fair go, a fair crack of the whip, a fair suck of the sauce bottle for all of us.
The Greens are endeavouring to get an Inquiry into Newstart, Australia's unemployment benefit scheme, up and running. Read their briefing paper below.
Australia has, for at least the last forty years, supported a living income for unemployed people. However, it is dwindling and the gap is widening between Newstart and other forms of social security. The Greens suggest that the declining value of the Newstart income support may actual be hindering the ability of people to apply successfully for work. My view is that if Australia does not provide meaningful social inclusion and income support for its people, particularly for those who need to be in work, we are going down the American path of foodstamps and little or no support in many social fields. C'mon, Aussie, come on! Support a fair go, a fair crack of the whip, a fair suck of the sauce bottle for all of us.
Australia has, for at least the last forty years, supported a living income for unemployed people. However, it is dwindling and the gap is widening between Newstart and other forms of social security. The Greens suggest that the declining value of the Newstart income support may actual be hindering the ability of people to apply successfully for work. My view is that if Australia does not provide meaningful social inclusion and income support for its people, particularly for those who need to be in work, we are going down the American path of foodstamps and little or no support in many social fields. C'mon, Aussie, come on! Support a fair go, a fair crack of the whip, a fair suck of the sauce bottle for all of us.
Thursday, 9 June 2011
Ludwig skewered? A Royal Commission on #LiveExports? A #timeline on #whoknewwhatwhen?
Minister for Agriculture Senator Joe Ludwig
with RSPCA's Heather Neil and Animals Australia's Lyn White.
Photo: Alex Ellinghausen. From The Age
The Live Export trade to Indonesia becomes murkier and murkier as the days go by. The Four Corners program, A Bloody Business, aroused the horror and indignation of the nation. Australians cannot let this slide – as we can do very easily with so many issues.
It is a complex issue but, as more and more comes to light,one thing is clear. This issue has many sides to it. It seems to me that only some of the people and organisations who might be connected with this have come into public view. Michelle Grattan gives some clues.
It is a complex issue but, as more and more comes to light,one thing is clear. This issue has many sides to it. It seems to me that only some of the people and organisations who might be connected with this have come into public view. Michelle Grattan gives some clues.
Another place to explore is the Hansard report of the Estimates session of the Senate Rural Affairs and Transport Legislation Committee held on 24 May 2011 in the week prior to the 4 Corners telecast.
I have made provision below for downloading this report. I have also taken some extracts from the Hansard for Networkers who don’t want to download such a large document. Details in these extracts can keep you researching for a substantial time.
I have made provision below for downloading this report. I have also taken some extracts from the Hansard for Networkers who don’t want to download such a large document. Details in these extracts can keep you researching for a substantial time.
Meat & Livestock Authority is the organisation that is front and centre in all this and who certainly has a great deal of explaining to do – and so far any explaining they have done is not all that wonderful.
Among the people and organisations we need to hear from are:
- The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and the units within that department.
- Animal Health Australia could have something to contribute. Steve Vizard’s brother, Associate Professor Andrew Vizard, is a vet and a direct of AHA.
Ass Prof Vizard’s bio says that he has and interest in the“production risk in the grazing industries”. Perhaps he considers that his interest does not extend to live export of sheep and cattle and does not include the slaughter of exported animals in Indonesia. However, as someone close to the industry and with a professional interest animals, it might be a good idea to hear from him.
My view is that we need some extensive research on this which could provide, as an end result, a timeline of who knew what when leaving no one out whether that be governments, political parties, political representatives, bureaucrats, industry organisation.
The Howard Government held a Royal Commission under the heading of an Inquiry into certain Australian companies in relation to the UN Oil-For-Food programme in connection with alleged corruption connected to the Australian Wool Board (AWB). Do Networkers think that the animal cruelty exhibited in the live export trade warrants a Royal Commission? Let me know your views in the comments section as well as in the poll at the top of the sidebar.
I am aware of the old adage which says to governments not to call a Royal Commission unless they know what the answer is going to be. I know, particularly after the revelations and non-revelations from the AWB and bureaucrats within the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, that the end result of Royal Commissions is not always what one might wish.
What a Royal Commission does provide is judicial coercion to appear and answer. In the hands of a determined judicial investigator (I think more of Fitzgerald than Cole). Even when there is papering over and obfuscation – as happened with much testimony before the Cole Inquiry – the general public can still make up its own mind. The material and evidence presented provides signposts to a concerned and committed government about changes, necessary legislation, bureaucratic duck-shoving and so on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)