Coalition MPs and senators have been well-primed for their first week back in Parliament, with a comprehensive set of talking points delivered to each by the Prime Minister's office last night.

The accompanying note on the email encourages backbenchers to "focus on being proactive and getting our message out about innovation, jobs and economic growth".

It includes "talking points, social media pics and questions to help you promote the Government's record".

All of the material was leaked shortly after it bounced into Coalition inboxes — a sign of the deep disquiet still lurking in the ranks after September's leadership coup.

The talking points include notes on:

• Jobs and growth

• The Government's innovation plan

• Proposed changes to pathology services

• School funding

• The trade union royal commission

 

read more: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-02/shorten-turc-appearance-targeted-in-leaked-pm-talking-points/7131692

 

Overworked America: 12 Charts That Will Make Your Blood Boil

 

Why "efficiency" and "productivity" really mean more profits for corporations and less sanity for you.

—By Dave Gilson

Want more rage? We've got 11 charts that show how the superrich spoil it for the rest of us.

In the past 20 years, the US economy has grown nearly 60 percent. This huge increase in productivity is partly due to automation, the internet, and other improvements in efficiency. But it's also the result of Americans working harder—often without a big boost to their bottom lines. Oh, and meanwhile, corporate profits are up 20 percent. (Also read our essay on the great speedup and harrowing first-person tales of overwork.)

read more: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/06rts

 

I am glad you asked (you didn't but who cares): what is a "blueprint"? From my experience working in factories, a blueprint was the "3D drawing in 2Ds of the plan to build something"... The term "blueprint" came from the final process of duplicating the image by marrying the draughtsman pen drawings on tracing paper with a special paper under a UV light. Then the paper was bathed in an ammonia solution and a duplicated image on the special paper was revealed as a "blue drawing" thus the name "blueprint". It stank like hell (the ammonia).

 

These days, most drawings for whatever engineered is done on computers and the printout is not needed. Most of the time, the engineering department sends info and plans directly to automated machines or to overseers with iPads...

 

Here the blueprint of economic management from the US — to be adopted in Australia by the CONservatives — is to make you sweat a lot more and earn less, while your masters are tallying the cash. Nothing new.

 

 

We don’t know much about donations to political parties in Australia, but what little has been revealed is disturbing. Alan Austin lifts the lid on the lurks, dodges and rorts.

TRANSURBAN is a great Australian company. Its operations over the year to June 2015 were extraordinary. Revenue from ordinary activities – building and running toll roads – increased 61.7%. Dividends rose 14% over the previous year to the highest payout in seven years. The share price soared.

So a profitable company? Not at all. Due to ‘significant transaction and integration costs (including stamp duty) related to the acquisition’ of another company, Transurban recorded a huge loss. Hence it paid no tax and actually gained a credit from the tax office.

It did manage, however, despite this vast loss, to donate $17,940 to various branches of the Liberal Party.

The release by the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC) of information this week about political party donations uncovers several intriguing secrets.

Things are not always as they seem.

Companies paying politicians instead of tax

Nickel miner Panoramic Resources had a tough year in 2014-15 with the drop in the nickel price. It recorded a hefty loss, paid no tax, but maintained its steady dividend to shareholders, as well as high executive salaries. It also managed to pay $22,881 to the Liberal Party.

We don’t know yet how many companies made political donations in 2015 but paid no tax. We have the AEC disclosure for 2014-15, but not the revealing list from the Australian Tax Office which shows company tax paid — or not paid. That is still about ten months away.

But we do know that 14 companies that paid little or no tax in 2013-14 were generous party donors in 2014-15. These include Bluescope Steel, Chevron Australia, Healthscope Limited and Foxtel Management.

read more: https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/political-party-donations--what-we-know-and-what-we-should-know,8639

 

See image at top...

 

Labor pressures the PM to consider sacking the Human Services Minister over mining deal

Human Services Minister Stuart Robert says he was not acting on behalf of the then Abbott Government when he attended a meeting in China where a prominent Liberal donor finalised a mining deal.

The former Assistant Minister for Defence attended the August ceremony in Beijing, where an agreement was signed between Chinese company Minmetals Exploration & Development Co. Ltd and Australia’s Nimrod Resources Ltd.

Nimrod Executive Chairman Paul Marks donated a total of $340,000 to the Liberal Party over the past financial year.

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-08/federal-politics-live-blog-february-8/7147548

 

Did he salute?...

Wednesday 30 March 2016 8:05PM (view full episode)

Corruption is one of the biggest threats to global security because it unsettles local populations and radicalises them. Sarah Chayes witnessed that in Afghanistan and believes the same patterns operated during the Arab spring, in the rise of Boko Haram in Nigeria and, more recently, in Ukraine. She’s looked at the systematic structures behind and the drivers for corruption and presents what civil society can do about it.

A conversation in the series Ethics Matter presented by the Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs. 1 March 2016

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/bigideas/corruption-and-glo...

 

The mainstream media are relentlessly – frenetically – in pursuit of Senator Sam Dastyari over a meagre $1,600 donation — but why? Managing editor David Donovan explains.

TURNBULL IS IN TROUBLE. Falling in the polls and beset upon on every side. Then suddenly the mainstream media are fascinated ‒ obsessed, even! ‒ with a political donations scandal.

But which one? There are so many to choose from…

Is it Parakeelia? Money-laundering and rorting on a huge scale? Where Liberal Party MPs fraudulently funnelled their IT allowances, worth collectively hundreds of thousands of dollars every year, through a wholly owned subsidiary into their political party?

No, no-one of the media is at all interested in that outrageous scam.

Was it the NSW ICAC Operation Spicer report being finally handed down last week, which found about a dozen Liberal Party MPs in NSW had flagrantly violated NSW's donation laws. Allegedly committed crimes and engaged in corruption, in other words — although NSW Premier Mike Baird calculatedly changed the definition of corruption in NSW last December so ICAC couldn't call it corruption in the report. Which is even worse corruption, when you think about it.

Operation Spicer also, as Sydney bureau chief Ross Jones reported on Friday, far from cleared forgetful Arthur Sinodinos, despite the self-serving Senator’s squeaks in Parliament last week about ICAC "exonerating" him. 

No, although they did report on this matter a little early last week, the media really isn't very interested in that scandal either.

The donations scandal the media are relentlessly fascinated with is, of course, the one relating to Sam Dastyari. Someone in the media found that Dastyari had, on his register of interests, a bill for about $1,670 having been paid for by a Chinese company. This matter has not become so vital, so key to our national interest, we even saw accomplished wedding singer Leigh Sales move out from under her ABC Ultimo desk to confront Dastyari at an outdoor press conference.

We've been asking @samdastyari to come on #abc730. He refused our requests so today@leighsales went to him. #auspol pic.twitter.com/rYYcIoIbDo

— abc730 (@abc730) September 6, 2016

Now, IA wouldn't for a minute advocate a politician having an expense paid for by anyone, let alone a foreign corporation. But then, we don't think politicians should collect donations from any organisation. And we think donations should be limited in amount — perhaps to less than $1,000 from any one individual. Or failing that, MPs should be forced to wear their sponsors' logos on their suit jackets so we can all see who they are really representing. And, most importantly, we think that all donations should be declared in real time — so we can’t be fooled before elections regarding who is really pulling a politicians’ strings.

And as for organisations responsible to shareholders to deliver a profit, there is obviously an expectation the business will receive something in return from its political donation. Otherwise, wouldn’t it would be in breach of its fiduciary duties to its shareholders to make these payments? This system of quid pro quo is a barely concealed, seldom discussed, but nevertheless extremelyreal feature of Australian politics. An appallingly undemocratic feature. It is something we have talked about over and over again on these pages. The influence of big business on the Liberal Party is well known, as is the influence of unions on the ALP.

But the media isn't talking about any of that. Well, on the margins, a little, quietly — but not really.

Distinguished former journalist Jim Parker summed it up well on Twitter this morning:

The media piling on Dastyari is like cops giving tickets to cyclists without helmets while waving on road trains driven by psychos on speed

— Mr Denmore (@MrDenmore) September 6, 2016

Yes, this is just a typical "pile-on", where the media smell blood in the water and thrash around until they reach fever pitch. They drag the mob along to make every ill-informed and gullible person see, vividly, just exactly who the monster is and make them forget about anything else. Anything at all. Truth, moderation, perspective, context all go right out the window, as the media, public and opposing politicians first throw their arms up in the air in a sanctimonious moral panic — and then fall upon their victim in a vicious shark-like feeding frenzy.

We saw it with Peter Slipper. We saw it with Craig Thomson. Neither were the devils the media painted them. The media overlooked or ignored the real criminals. And now we are seeing it all again.

But here's the kicker. Dastyari did nothing illegal. He didn't break any rules — not as they currently stand, anyway. He did declare the donation. A gift for a relatively small amount. I'm not sure how many favours $1,670 gets you as a donor on the free market of Australian politics, but I can't imagine it would be many. The whole "scandal" would appear to be little more than a political beat-up. And one, moreover, with a distasteful whiff of anti-Chinese bigotry. A storm in a green tea cup, you might say.

So why are they going after Dastyari when, for instance, a Chinese businessman with links to Foreign Minister Julie Bishop gave over half a million dollars to the WA branch of the Liberal Party — even though his business doesn't even operate in Western Australia? Could it be because Dastyari has been the main one advocating for corporations to start paying their taxes? Speaking out against rich people like Malcolm Turnbull dodging tax through Cayman Island tax avoidance schemes? Had been the main proponent for a banking royal commission? Had said in February, in a “fiery speech”, ten big corporations had taken control of Australian politics?

Ten companies have taken control of Australian politics, says Labor senator Sam Dastyari (5/2/16) https://t.co/vOYlS7wJ65 via @smh

— Dave Donovan (@davrosz) September 7, 2016

Is it possible that the big corporations he talked about – the ones who donate large sums to the Liberal Party and really run Australia – have decided that Dastyari must be punished? Preferably sacked and silenced, but at the very least discredited?

And, of course, it has given Turnbull, humiliated last week in Parliament and beset upon by even his own side, some cover from which to attack the Opposition.

How very, very convenient.

You can follow Dave Donovan on Twitter @davrosz. Independent Australia supporters and members can also listen to managing editor Dave Donovan in his weekly podcasts in IA'sMember's Only Area. In the most recent podcast, Dave speaks to Dr Evan Jones about political and financial corruption.

 

https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/the-sharks-the-scent-of-blood-and-sam-dastyari,9444

 

 

Since the 1980s Australia has become known for its laissez-faire or lackadaisical attitude to the role of money in politics. At the federal level Australia introduced public funding for political parties to reduce reliance on private donations, but corporate donations have continued to grow – reaching $202 million in 2013–14.

Disclosure to the Australian Electoral Commission is required for donations of over $13,200 but there are no source restrictions or limits for donations.

So we have the situation where companies seeking access to government and favourable treatment of bids for contracts or licenses are quite lawfully making large donations to political parties. Australia’s political finance regulation falls way behind international standards, as can be seen in the global database maintained by the Institutional Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA).

To take just the issue currently in the headlines, Australia has not even taken the step of banning donations from foreign interests, unlike 114 other democracies.http://www.idea.int/political-finance/bans-and-limits-on-private-income.cfm

Recent media emphasis has been on Chinese companies, currently the largest foreign donors to Australian political parties, but the problem is much broader.

At the federal level, momentum for reform was lost after the departure of Senator John Faulkner from the Special Minister of State portfolio. Great expectations were raised by his 2008 Electoral Reform Green Paper on Donations, Funding and Expenditure <australianpolitics.com/2008/12/17/electoral-reform-green-paper.html> 

However, ‘the Minister for Democracy’ was up against Labor State Premiers who had been successfully raising large sums of money from corporate Australia and were opposed to the kind of donation and spending caps found in comparable democracies. Senator Faulkner attempted more modest reforms to at least improve the disclosure regime for political donations. His 2009 Bill would have banned ‘gifts of foreign property’, lowered the disclosure threshold for political donations to $1000, closed the loophole whereby different branches of a party were treated as separate entities and made disclosure more timely. Even this Bill was defeated in the Senate when Family First Senator, Steve Fielding, joined the Coalition to vote it down.

read more: http://johnmenadue.com/blog/?p=7644

 

See toon at top...

 

A ban on receiving foreign donations should apply across the board to Australian political parties, associated entities and activist groups, the Liberal party has submitted to a parliamentary committee.

The Liberal party’s federal director, Tony Nutt, told the committee on Wednesday that a level playing field would mean applying the ban to groups such as GetUp. 

Labor’s assistant national secretary, Paul Erickson, supported the level playing field in principle and consideration of extending the ban to associated entities or third parties undertaking campaign activities.

...

Nutt said that a foreign donation ban was a necessary prudential measure to prevent interference in elections by foreign entities, including states, who have “no legitimate role in our democratic society”.

The Liberal senator Linda Reynolds, the committee’s chair, asked both about the need for a level playing field and noted GetUp and the Australian Conservation Foundation received foreign donations.

read more:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/feb/15/liberals-boss-ton...

 

Yes GetUp gets some funding from Soros via various means. Getup is designed to fight against the ridiculous KONservatives (Australian "Liberals") and to support "liberal" (US terminology) causes. In Australia thus GetUp is more in tune with Labor and the "left".

see toon at top.