Search

Labor Senator dies following health battle

Labor Senator Linda White has passed away following a health battle. Just last month, the ALP Senator for Victoria announced that she would be taking leave from the senate to "deal with some health issues". "For the next while I will be focusing on getting well again so I can return to my full duties representing the people of Victoria," the statement read. However, today Prime Minister Anthony Albanese confirmed her death and led a wave of tributes for the senator. "All of our hearts in the Labor family are broken at the passing of Senator Linda White last evening," Albanese said. "Linda was formidable. A beloved friend, a valued colleague, a dedicated parliamentarian and, through all her efforts in the wider labour movement, a devout supporter of working Australians." "Linda believed in a better, fairer and more compassionate Australia," Albanese added "A belief that was always backed by her energy and action." <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Vale Senator Linda White. <a href="https://t.co/b70CTMWMJU">pic.twitter.com/b70CTMWMJU</a> — Anthony Albanese (@AlboMP) <a href="https://twitter.com/AlboMP/status/1763340992403681721?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 29, 2024</a></blockquote> Labor MP Tony Burke also paid tribute to White and praised her achievements. "Linda campaigned for years in the union movement for paid family and domestic violence leave. As a senator she helped make it law so no one would have to choose between safety and pay. RIP," he wrote. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Linda White leaves an extraordinary legacy for working people in Australia. Linda campaigned for years in the union movement for paid family and domestic violence leave. As a Senator she helped make it law so no one would have to choose between safety and pay. RIP — Tony Burke (@Tony_Burke) <a href="https://twitter.com/Tony_Burke/status/1763331902856155521?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 29, 2024</a></blockquote> Fellow senator and Foreign Minister Penny Wong praised White for modelling "integrity, persistence, and skill". "Linda fought the illness that has now claimed her life privately, but with all the tenacity and determination that has marked not just her short time in the Senate, but her decades of commitment to the Labor movement and Australian workers," she said. The leader of the opposition in the Senate, Liberal Simon Birmingham also offered his condolences and praised her work. "The Senate has lost a determined and passionate sitting senator far too soon," Birmingham said in a statement. "A senator who clearly had much more to contribute, but who will be remembered with respect by those who had the privilege to serve with her." White was elected the ALP Senator for Victoria in 2022. Prior to this she had a long career in law as a trade union official. She served as vice president of the Australian Council of Trade Unions for 10 years, and was assistant national secretary of the Australian Services Union (ASU) from 1995 to 2020. The ASU also shared their condolences after the loss of "one of our great warriors". "We wish Linda could have taken up this fight for longer. However, we are so fortunate to have had Linda in our lives for as long as we did, and that she dedicated so much of her life to building up the next generation of activists and change makers," the statement read. "Her strength, smarts, and determination for equality will live on through them." Image: X

Caring

What explained the seismic 2022 federal election?

The 2022 Australian federal election was distinctive in two ways. First, it was held in the wake of a major crisis – the COVID-19 pandemic. While the salience of the pandemic had subsided by the time of the election, voters’ assessments of the Coalition government’s performance on the pandemic proved to be a major factor in their voting decision, as did the cost of living crisis it helped create. Second, almost one in three voters cast their ballots for a minor party or independent candidate, the highest since the 1930s. Of the two major parties, the Liberals fared worst, winning their lowest seat share since 1946 (the first election the party contested). But Labor didn’t reap the benefits of this Liberal decline, with the party recording its lowest primary vote since the 1930s. What explains this seismic result, and what does it tell us about the future of electoral politics in Australia? Using the just-released 2022 Australian Election Study (AES) – a comprehensive post-election survey conducted at each election since 1987 – we can answer these questions. <h2>Why the Coalition lost</h2> A perception of poor government performance played a key role in the Coalition defeat. In 2022 there were three performance explanations for the Coalition’s defeat – the economy, the pandemic, and Scott Morrison’s leadership. With rising inflation and a cost of living crisis, around two-thirds of voters thought the economy had worsened in the 12 months leading up to the election. This was the most pessimistic view of the economy in over three decades. In previous elections, voters have usually preferred the Coalition over Labor on economic issues. In 2022, however, voters preferred Labor over the Coalition on the cost of living – the single biggest issue in the election. The Coalition’s performance on the pandemic was also regarded as unsatisfactory. Just 30% of Australians thought the federal government had handled the pandemic well. Indeed, voters had much more favourable views of their state governments’ performance. Because virtually the whole period between the 2019 and 2022 elections was dominated by the pandemic, the public’s evaluations of the Morrison government’s performance were therefore closely associated with the pandemic. The third reason for the Coalition defeat was the negative opinions many voters formed of Morrison’s leadership. While Morrison was generally popular when he won the election in 2019, by 2022 he had become the most unpopular major party leader since at least 1987. Morrison wasn’t considered honest and trustworthy, two of the traits most closely associated with how favourable we view leaders. The public’s dislike of Morrison has its origins in his Hawaii holiday during the 2019-20 bushfires, and was strengthened by a perception of poor performance in the second year of the pandemic. <h2>Labor’s ‘victory by default’</h2> Labor won the election despite their record low vote and a 0.8% swing against them. Indeed one newspaper <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/anthony-albanese-wins-but-its-a-victory-by-default-for-labor/news-story/75b7d87c9b61157a16dc6d772c306deb" target="_blank" rel="noopener">described</a> it as a “victory by default”. During the election campaign, Labor adopted a “small target” strategy. While Labor fought the 2019 election on ambitious proposals for tax reform, in the 2022 election they avoided putting forward policies that would deter voters, and emphasised their policy agreement with the Coalition – even promising to keep the Coalition’s stage three income tax cuts. The effects of this change in Labor strategy are evident in the AES data. Fewer voters cast their ballots based on policy preferences than in 2019, and the proportion of voters who saw “a good deal of difference” between the parties declined from 40% in 2019 to 28% in 2022. Labor also entered the election with Anthony Albanese as leader, who was more popular than both Scott Morrison and Labor’s predecessor, Bill Shorten. The previous majority government win for Labor in 2007 was one that generally inspired voters. Indeed in 2007, Kevin Rudd was the most popular prime minister in the history of the AES, and satisfaction with democracy was at a record high at that time. By contrast, Labor’s 2022 win was more about directing attention to the Coalition’s weak performance, rather than putting forward a policy agenda that was really attractive to voters. <h2>The big movers: women and young people</h2> The 2022 election brought into sharp focus two major changes in party support that have been slowly eroding the social bases of the major parties: gender and generation. There’s a significant gender gap in voter behaviour – since the early 2000s, fewer women have voted for the Coalition than men. Labor has the opposite gender voting gap, attracting more votes from women than men (though to a lesser extent). Since 2016, the gender gap in voting has been greater than in all previous elections covered by the AES. In 2022 just 32% of women voted for the Coalition, the lowest share ever. One contributing factor to this collapse in female support for the Coalition is the treatment of women within the Liberal party. The divide between how younger and older generations of Australians vote is more pronounced than the gender gap. Millennials (the oldest of whom are now in their 40s) and Generation Z (those born after 1996) make up an increasing proportion of the electorate, greatly outnumbering Baby Boomers. These younger generations have different voting patterns to previous generations at the same stage of life, and are also much further to the left in their party preferences. Just 27% of Millennials said they voted for the Coalition in 2022. At no time in the 35-year history of the AES has there been such a low level of support for either major party among younger people. The assumption that Millennials and Gen Z will shift to the right as they age hasn’t been supported by the evidence thus far. Which generation one is in seems to have a much more significant effect on voting behaviour than one’s age. Therefore, the implication is the electorate is moving further to the left and becoming more progressive across a range of policy areas. <h2>Increasing voter volatility</h2> As the traditional social bases of the major parties have gradually changed, so too have the political ties that have bound voters to parties. Around one in four voters say they don’t have an attachment to a political party, the highest figure ever recorded in the AES. The proportion of voters who considered voting for another party during the election campaign, at 36%, has at no time been higher. This is reflected most dramatically in the proportion of voters who said they had always voted for the same party. In 1967 this figure was 72%, and in 2022 it declined to an all-time low of 37%. <h2>What now for the party system?</h2> If voters are drifting away from the major parties, who are they choosing instead and what are the implications for the party system? The “teal” independents were obviously an important beneficiary. However, most teal voters were former Labor and Green voters casting a tactical vote to unseat a Liberal candidate. The medium-term fate of the teals will depend on how far they can create a distinct political identity to hold their support together at the 2025 election. More broadly, support for minor parties and independent candidates will continue to increase. The gradual changes in voting behaviour that are taking place, and which were especially pronounced in the 2022 election, represent an existential crisis for the Liberals. With their support base declining through generational replacement, they must not only attract new voters but also stem defection to give themselves a chance of election. As the political agenda moves towards support for action on climate change, constitutional recognition for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, and (perhaps) moving to a republic – all issues on which the Coalition is divided – it’s unclear where these new voters will come from. This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-explained-the-seismic-2022-federal-election-the-australian-election-study-has-answers-195286" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>. Images: Getty

Legal

Pensioners slam budget that “left them behind”

Two Aussie pensioners have slammed Labor’s budget saying they have been left behind as the cost of living continues to soar. Lyn and Des Wicks from the Gold Coast recalled how Labor was meant to be helping low and middle income earners but have instead abandoned them in the 2022 Budget. Ms Wicks said she was “angry” at the government for not looking after pensioners and is worried about the future. "You don't want handouts, but - we're speaking on behalf of pensioners who are really doing it hard. We've got savings but we are dipping into it,” she told The Today Show. "It's just not fair. It's just the low income and the people, they haven't given us any hope and, you know, hope is happiness, happiness is health, you know, they are being - it's a false economy as far as I'm concerned." The couple’s biggest concern is the increase in prices of electricity and fuel which were barely mentioned in the budget. She explained that the budget did not look at those on the full pension, only those who are partially retired. Because of their health issues, Mrs and Mr Wicks are unable to take heed from the government’s advice of going back to work. "Even if I could I wouldn't, because I have worked 52 years and I think I'm entitled to a few years of retirement,” she said. Click <a href="https://oversixty.com.au/finance/money-banking/big-winners-and-losers-of-the-2022-federal-budget" target="_blank" rel="noopener">here</a> for the winners and losers of the 2022 Budget. Image: Today Show

Retirement Life

Big winners and losers of the 2022 federal budget

The Albanese government has shared their first budget since being in power, with little to be done to help everyday Aussies with the ongoing cost of living crisis. Treasurer Jim Chalmers said Australia cannot afford to “spray money around indiscriminately”, although there were real winners in Labor's first Federal Budget in almost a decade. Parents, students, seniors, first home buyers and Australians needing medication have been put forward in the budget, with the government assuring to spend the money needed to help Aussies doing it tough. When it comes to losers, low and middle income earners, renters and young Australians won’t be receiving any handouts from the government. Winners Australians who need medication From the beginning of next year, the minimum cost of each script will drop from $42.50 to $30, with the government picking up the difference. The Budget estimates this will save about 3.6 million Australians more than a combined $190 million a year Dozens more prescriptions will also be added to the scheme at a cost of $1.4 billion to the Budget, saving patients who need them thousands of dollars. First home buyers As Australia’s population grows, the government wants a million new homes built over the next five year. For its part, a $10 billion grant to a Housing Australia Future Fund will be set up, interest from which will be used to deliver 30,000 social and affordable homes over the half a decade. A more limited assistance scheme will help 10,000 first homebuyers in regional areas by guaranteeing up to 15 per cent of the purchase price. Seniors Homeowners aged 55 and over are eligible for a tax break on a one-off post-tax contribution to their superannuation of up to $300,000 after selling their home. The Budget also extends the asset test exemption for pensioners to downsize their homes without losing any of their payments. Age and veteran pensioners will also get a one-off $4,000 tax credit to increase how much they can earn, from $7,800 to $11,800 without having their payments cut so they can work longer hours if they choose to go back to work. Climate change efforts The government has pledged over $30 billion in climate-related spending. Some $20 billion will be allocated to rewire the nation for renewable energy takes the lion's share, along with $630 million for a new disaster ready fund. Some $1.9 billion for a Powering the Regions fund, $275 million for driving the use of electric cars, and $224 million for community batteries to support household solar are also on the climate books. Women A record $1.7 billion will be spent over six years to end violence against women and children and an initial $3.4 million will be set aside to introduce a program offering 10 days of paid domestic and family violence leave. Education for consent and respectful relationships will receive $83.5 million over six years, with $42.5 million set aside for sexual harassment at work, to implement recommendations of the Respect@Work report. Losers Low and middle income earners The government has chosen not to extend the popular Lower and Middle Income Tax Offset (LMITO) for the 2022-23 financial year. Known as 'the Lamington' scheme, the offset saved Aussies up to $1500 in tax in the last financial year - meaning taxpayers will feel the pinch once they have lodged their annual taxes. Motorists Despite public outcry, the government discontinued the 22c cut to the fuel excise implemented by the Morrison Government that cost $3 billion over six months. The cost of petrol remains above $2 a litre and shows no signs of falling. Renters Landlords have already started raising rental prices to accommodate for the price of inflation and the surge of mortgage repayments. Treasury forecasts rental costs will spike over the next couple of years, Budget documents said. Getting a rental is already extremely difficult in most capital cities and there was nothing in the Budget to specifically address the concerns of tenants. Young Australians Australia's debt levels are expected to surpass the $1 trillion mark for the first time ever and someone is going to have to pay for it. Gross government debt is expected to reach $1.004 billion in 2023-24, making up 40.8 per cent of gross domestic product or economic output. This was expected to rise to $1.091 trillion in 2024-25, comprising 42.5 percent of GDP, and $1.159 billion by 2025-26 comprising 43.1 percent of the economy, which will inevitably fall to the next generation to solve. Image credits: Getty Images

Money & Banking

Paid parental leave extended to 26 weeks by 2026

Government-funded paid parental leave will be extended, and more pressure placed on fathers to share caring for babies, under an initiative to be unveiled by Anthony Albanese on Saturday. Parental leave will be lengthened by six weeks, phased in, to total 26 weeks by 2026, with use-it-or-lose-it provisions directed to having fathers undertake a greater part of the early parenting. Leave will be able to be taken in blocks between periods of work. Single parents will be entitled to the full 26 weeks. The present scheme is for 18 weeks government-funded leave to care for a newborn. There is a separate “Dad and Partner” payment for two weeks. <div data-id="17"> </div> The government says it will introduce reforms to modernise the system and improve flexibility from July next year. From July 1 2024 the time will start lengthening, with two extra weeks put on each year until the scheme reaches 26 weeks from July 2026. The government’s women’s economic equality taskforce, chaired by Sam Mostyn, will advise on details of the model, including what mix of flexible weeks and the use-it-or-lose-it component for each parent are considered best. Details will be in the October 25 budget. Albanese will formally announce the initiative when he addresses the NSW ALP conference on Saturday morning. In his speech, an extract of which was released ahead of delivery, Albanese says that, like the government’s child care policy, extending PPL is an economic reform. “By 2026, every family with a new baby will be able to access a total of six months paid leave, shared between the two parents,” he says. “We will give families more leave and more flexibility, so people are able to use their weeks in a way that works best for them. "Our plan will mean more families take up this leave, share in that precious time – and share the caring responsibilities more equally. "This plan will support dads who want to take time off work to be more involved in those early months. "It’s a modern policy, for modern families. It delivers more choice, it offers greater security – and it rewards aspiration.” Albanese says that extended leave was one of the clearest calls that came out of the recent jobs summit. “Businesses, unions, experts and economists all understand that providing more choice, more support and more flexibility for families and more opportunity for women boosts participation and productivity across the economy.” He says the government sees this as “the baseline, a national minimum standard. "We are encouraged that there are already employers across Australia competing to offer working parents the best possible deal. And we want to see more of it. "Because a parental leave system that empowers the full and equal participation of women will be good for business, good for families and good for the economy.” Minister for Women Katy Gallagher said that “having a child shouldn’t be an economic barrier for families or indeed act as a handbrake on the broader economy. "Right now, this burden is borne disproportionately by women but we know that good women’s policy is also good economic policy and this decision is evidence of that.” Minister for Social Services Amanda Rishworth said: “This will benefit mums, it will benefit dads, it’s good for children, and it will be a huge boost to the economy. "We know that treating parenting as an equal partnership helps to improve gender equality.” This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/paid-parental-leave-extended-to-26-weeks-by-2026-with-pressure-on-dads-to-share-more-early-caring-192506" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>. Image: Shutterstock

Legal

Labor’s climate change bill is set to become law – but 3 important measures are missing

Labor’s climate change bill was <a href="https://www.afr.com/policy/energy-and-climate/climate-bill-all-but-certain-after-pocock-reiterates-support-20220906-p5bftz" target="_blank" rel="noopener">poised</a> to pass the Senate after the government agreed to <a href="https://www.davidpocock.com.au/climate_bills_and_jobs_skills_consultation" target="_blank" rel="noopener">amendments</a> proposed by independent senator David Pocock to improve accountability and transparency. <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r6885" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The law</a> would set a national emissions target for 2030 and define a process to ratchet it up over time, as well as enshrining the goal of net-zero emissions by 2050. The independent <a href="https://www.climatechangeauthority.gov.au/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Climate Change Authority</a> will recommend future targets. These are sound and useful elements and will serve Australia’s climate policymaking well. Yet three important elements are not in the bill: a long-term roadmap, securing the future of the Climate Change Authority, and measures for a proper national conversation on our journey to net-zero emissions. And the 43% emissions reduction target should be considered only a starting point. <h2>Is 43% emissions reduction enough?</h2> The bill mandates that Australia reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 43% by 2030, compared to 2005 levels. Labor took that target to the federal election and has been unwilling to negotiate on it since winning office. <div data-id="17"> </div> Is a 43% reduction in Australia’s emissions adequate in the context of the Paris Agreement? There is no single objective yardstick for which country should do how much towards a global goal. And the trajectory of global emissions after 2030 – as well as before – matters greatly for longer-term global warming. But an assessment is nevertheless possible, and it suggests that strengthening the target, perhaps by a lot, would be appropriate. Emissions reductions <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2022/04/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_PressRelease_English.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">in this broad range</a> are what’s needed globally to limit warming to 2℃ compared to pre-industrial levels. But high-income, high-emitting countries – Australia prominent among them – are rightfully expected to reduce their carbon footprint more quickly than developing countries, or countries where the economy is already relatively low-carbon. What’s more, the effort needed by Australia to meet the 43% target is less than that required by many other countries. This is due to <a href="https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/australias-emissions-projections-2021" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reductions</a> in emissions from the land use and forestry sector more than a decade ago, and because we have <a href="https://ideas.repec.org/p/een/camaaa/2021-78.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">lots of opportunities</a> to cut emissions easily. <a href="https://ccep.crawford.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/uploads/ccep_crawford_anu_edu_au/2021-10/afr_energy-climate_keynote_jotzo_oct2021.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Big further reductions</a> can be made by accelerating the shift from coal to renewables, better energy efficiency, electrifying transport, and cleaner processes in industry and agriculture. An Australian reduction of the present order is definitely incompatible with limiting global warming to 1.5℃ – the global aspiration for limiting climate change. And it would be a contortion to argue it’s somehow in line with “well below 2℃”, the Paris Agreement’s <a href="https://www.climatecollege.unimelb.edu.au/files/site1/docs/%5Bmi7%3Ami7uid%5D/ClimateTargetsPanelReport.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">long-term goal</a>. All that said, a 43% emission reduction target improves a lot on the previous government’s target. And enshrining it in law sends an important message. It makes zero-emissions options much more investable, and signals internationally that Australia is back on climate change action. <h2>A trajectory to net-zero</h2> Attention will soon shift to Australia’s 2035 emissions target. The bill commits the <a href="https://www.climatechangeauthority.gov.au/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Climate Change Authority</a> to recommend that target, and new targets every five years from then on. If the government of the day does not accept that advice, it will need to explain its dissent to parliament. That is good process. But Australia also needs to plot a forward trajectory beyond the next five-year period, because the investments that matter most are made on longer timescales. Such “roadmapping” would shed light on questions such as: <ul> <li> what are the indicative targets for 2040 and beyond, on the way to net-zero emissions? </li> <li> what might be the balance between remaining greenhouse gas emissions and removing emissions from the atmosphere, whether through forests and land-based carbon, or technological solutions? </li> </ul> The Climate Change Authority may choose to do such an analysis, mapping out scenarios and possible trajectories. But such advice would have stronger standing if there was a legal requirement for it. <h2>Securing the Climate Change Authority</h2> The bill puts the Climate Change Authority centre stage, but it doesn’t make sure it will always be properly equipped to do its job. A future government might not like to hear a strong independent voice, and could quieten it by starving it. It’s happened before, following the Abbott government’s attempt to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/dec/08/abbott-government-accused-of-trying-to-set-up-climate-change-talks-for-failure" target="_blank" rel="noopener">abolish</a> the authority. The Climate Change Authority needs to run a deeply inclusive and very extensive consultation process for future recommendations on the target. Not just roundtables and submissions to a website, but a really big effort to take the analysis to groups right across Australian society and take their views into account. Let’s hope this and future governments will give their political backing for an inclusive process, and fund the authority to do so. <h2>A proper national conversation</h2> In any case, Australia needs a national long-term emissions reduction strategy. It should answer questions such as: <ul> <li> what will the shift to net-zero emissions mean for our economy, both nationally and regionally? </li> <li> what needs to be done to prepare for the changes, maximise the upsides and deal with the downsides? </li> </ul> Such a strategy must be much more than just another report based on modelling with some stakeholder discussions along the way. What’s needed is a proper national conversation about how we tackle the transition to net-zero emissions. This would bring out all available information and the many different perspectives, opportunities and vulnerabilities. It requires people coming together to really understand the issues and, where possible, to forge agreement. That conversation should involve all major groups: businesses and business associations, non-government organisations, unions, community leaders, youth groups and so forth. The research sector would provide data and analysis, and the media would make the debate a public one, in many formats and dimensions. Governments at all levels would be involved – but they would not control the process. Some political instincts run against such truly open processes. But they’re essential – and the climate change bill doesn’t directly provide for them. This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/labors-climate-change-bill-is-set-to-become-law-but-3-important-measures-are-missing-190102" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>. Image: Shutterstock

Legal

Has Labor learnt from the failure of the cashless debit card?

Legislation passed through the House of Representatives this week to wind down the cashless debit card (CDC), which was introduced into the East Kimberley and Ceduna in 2016 and since applied at other trial sites around Australia. The card compulsorily quarantines 80% of social security payments received by working-aged people. Implementing the CDC has cost more than <a>$170 million</a>. Yet <a href="https://www.uq.edu.au/news/article/2020/02/compulsory-income-management-disabling-study-shows" target="_blank" rel="noopener">research</a> shows it does more harm than good to people forced to use it. First Nations organisations, social service organisations, and others have consistently <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/nov/03/cashless-welfare-card-fewer-than-10-of-senate-inquiry-submissions-back-bill" target="_blank" rel="noopener">argued against its expansion</a>. The Albanese government says winding back the CDC will “leave no one behind”. But its legislation leaves more than 23,000 mainly First Nations people in the Northern Territory – as well as people in other parts of the country – on the <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/FlagPost/2017/June/BasicsCard_and_Cashless_Debit_Card" target="_blank" rel="noopener">BasicsCard</a>, a longer-standing compulsory income management scheme run by the Department of Social Services. We have known since 2014 that the BasicsCard <a href="https://caepr.cass.anu.edu.au/highlights/evaluating-new-income-management-northern-territory-final-evaluation-report-and-summary" target="_blank" rel="noopener">fails to meet its stated objectives</a>. Research published by the ARC Centre of Excellence for Children and Families over the Life Course found its use correlated with <a href="https://www.lifecoursecentre.org.au/research/journal-articles/working-paper-series/do-welfare-restrictions-improve-child-health-estimating-the-causal-impact-of-income-management-in-the-northern-territory/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reductions in birth weight</a>, falls in <a href="https://www.lifecoursecentre.org.au/research/journal-articles/working-paper-series/the-effect-of-quarantining-welfare-on-school-attendance-in-indigenous-communities/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">school attendance</a> and other negative impacts on children. These are significant findings. The research suggests several possible explanations for reduced birth weight, including income management’s potential role in increasing stress on mothers, disrupting financial arrangements within the household and creating confusion about how to access funds. <h2>Strong opposition</h2> Given the government’s talk of <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/anthony-albanese-s-speech-at-garma-festival-annotated-20220729-p5b5sp.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">respect and reconciliation</a>, it’s hard to know why it would continue a program introduced as part of the Howard government’s racially discriminatory and widely criticised <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/sep/02/northern-territory-intervention-violates-international-law-gillian-triggs-says" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Northern Territory Emergency Response</a>. When the Morrison government attempted to move people in the Northern Territory from the BasicsCard onto the CDC, <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Community_Affairs/CashlessCardTransition/Submissions" target="_blank" rel="noopener">First Nations</a> leaders were clear about how damaging the BasicsCard has been, and recommended <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Community_Affairs/CashlessCardTransition/Submissions" target="_blank" rel="noopener">genuinely voluntary schemes</a> instead. As shadow minister, Linda Burney supported that position. “Our fundamental principle on the basics card and the cashless debit card [is that] it should be on a voluntary basis,” she <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2022/apr/19/cashless-welfare-labor-vows-to-end-compulsory-use-of-basics-card">said</a> earlier this year, adding: <blockquote> If people want to be on those sorts of income management, then that’s their decision. It’s not up to Labor or anyone else to tell them what to do. At the moment it’s compulsion and that’s not Labor’s position. </blockquote> Yet the legislation introduced into the house last week maintains compulsory income management via the BasicsCard, promising only consultation. It leaves the door wide open for continued compulsory income management. As social security minister Amanda Rishworth said in her second reading speech, the bill allows her: <blockquote> to determine, following further consultation with First Nations people and my colleagues, how the Northern Territory participants on the CDC will transition, and the income management arrangements that will exist. </blockquote> <h2>Policy from above</h2> We have learnt a lot from the CDC, including how government claims that communities can decide about who goes on and off income management are often used to legitimise the continuation of compulsory income management. Both the CDC and BasicsCard are ideas that were developed and lobbied for by the Australian political and business elite. They never came from the “community”. The BasicsCard was one of many measures implemented under the Northern Territory Emergency Response, which included the suspension of the Racial Discrimination Act and the use of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/ten-years-on-its-time-we-learned-the-lessons-from-the-failed-northern-territory-intervention-79198" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Australian Defence Force</a>. The CDC, on the other hand, was a key recommendation of mining billionaire Andrew Forrest’s 2014 <a href="https://www.niaa.gov.au/resource-centre/indigenous-affairs/forrest-review" target="_blank" rel="noopener">National Indigenous Jobs and Training Review</a>. Since it was introduced, Forrest and his Minderoo Foundation have advocated for its extension. The government used much-needed funding for local services as a sweeetener to gain communities’ agreement for the CDC to proceed. In some cases, the threat of <a href="https://caepr.cass.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/docs/Working_Paper_121_2017.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">funding cuts</a> was used in negotiations. In contrast, proposals from communities themselves for appropriate community- and Aboriginal-controlled services had long been overlooked. <h2>Real consultation?</h2> Governments routinely use “consultation” as a label for what are essentially information sessions, with no alternatives on the table, in an effort to signal broad-based support. In the case of the CDC, <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi__I3yoKf5AhU9R2wGHSjBAuwQFnoECC8QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aph.gov.au%2FDocumentStore.ashx%3Fid%3D9e59ccc9-b9e6-4fad-9fb6-2a992d84fd44%26subId%3D516467&usg=AOvVaw19C21P3oIBS4l5A1b2pr0R" target="_blank" rel="noopener">calls for the program to be aborted</a> or changed dramatically were long ignored. Those who were forced onto the BasicsCard as part of the intervention were not offered a consultation process by the Howard government. And now, the Labor government has also failed to embrace their views and opted for a path of more consultation. If Labor forces people to stay on the BasicsCard, what has it learnt from the CDC? Governments have spent more than $1 billion implementing the two failed compulsory income management schemes, and the new government has implicitly committed to spending more. Imagine what else this money could be going towards. This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/has-labor-learnt-from-the-failure-of-the-cashless-debit-card-188065" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>. Image: Shutterstock

Legal

The Great Barrier Reef – what does a new Labor government mean for its future?

The Great Barrier Reef was inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage list in 1981, and with good reason – it’s the world’s largest single structure made by living organisms. It’s an Australian icon intrinsically tied to our national identity, but the reef is in danger due to the effects of climate change. Just this past summer it experienced its fourth mass-bleaching event in seven years, with 91% of the reef experiencing some level of bleaching according to the summer 2021-22 Reef Snapshot report. Every Federal election, the Great Barrier Reef becomes a bit of a poster child for climate change, but what does the recent change in government actually mean for its future? The Labor government’s climate policies are more ambitious than those of the Coalition, but will it be enough to save the reef from devastation? Are we finally taking steps in the right direction? <h2>Climate change and its impact on the reef</h2> The effects of climate change are being felt majorly by the Great Barrier Reef already. Especially apparent are the mass coral-bleaching events caused by increasing ocean temperatures as a result of global warming. “Corals can (and frequently do) recover from bleaching, but just like forest recovery after a bushfire, they need time, and the speed of the recovery can vary depending on the severity of the heatwave and the types of corals growing on the reef,” explains Dr Emma Kennedy, a research scientist in Coral Reef Ecology at the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS). But according to Dr Jodie Rummer, associate professor at the Australian Research Council (ARC) Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies at James Cook University, these events are only going to become more frequent. “With the trajectory that we’re on right now, what we’ll seeing by even the year 2044 is annual mass-bleaching events on the Great Barrier Reef, and coral reefs worldwide,” she says. “Even our more robust coral species require eight to 10 years to fully recover from these repeated heat waves. “We’re just losing that window of recovery for not only the coral reef and the coral organisms, but also all the other organisms that the coral reef supports.” Current greenhouse gas emissions trajectories indicate that globally we’re tracking towards an increase in global temperatures approaching 3°C above pre-industrial levels, by 2100. This is incompatible with healthy, thriving reefs. If warming exceeds 1.5°C “we would lose the reef altogether,” warns Rummer. <h2>Labor’s Great Barrier Reef policies</h2> With a new government comes new targets and policies that affect the reef. To start with, let’s look at the funding. The Labor government has promised to invest almost $1.2 billion in reef preservation and restoration by 2030 – that’s an extra $194.5 million on top of the LNP’s existing $1 billion reef package. This money will be used to tackle issues such as pollution from agricultural runoff, a more sustainable fishing sector, funding scientific research into thermal-tolerant corals, and funding protection and restoration work by Indigenous ranger organisations. The government also plans to continue and double the funding of the Reef 2050 Plan, which was initially released in 2015 to address the concerns of the World Heritage Committee. “It’s an awful lot of money, but it actually isn’t a lot of money when you think of it like $100 million each year,” says Dr Maxine Newlands, political scientist at James Cook University, Australia. “That’s not very much given the size of the Great Barrier Reef and what needs to be done.” It’s also important to keep in mind that the electorates that fringe the Great Barrier Reef in Queensland are Liberal seats. It remains to be seen whether there will be any opposition to funds being directed at the Great Barrier Reef – or calls for it to be redirected elsewhere, such as to farming, instead. But while it’s important to be mindful of these second and tertiary stressors to the reef, and to be acting on them, if we’re not addressing the number-one stressor that the Great Barrier Reef is facing – climate change – we’re not getting to the heart of the problem. “No more band aids on arterial wounds,” emphasises Rummer. “So, the money is great,” she adds. “And in terms of research, management and policy, we absolutely need it right now.” But the ideal is money being allocated toward reducing impacts of climate change – like the triple threat of global warming, ocean acidification and declining ocean oxygen levels. <h2>Emissions reductions targets must be increased</h2> Speaking of the reef’s number-one stressor, the outcome of this election has started Australia moving towards more action on climate change. The Labor government’s energy plan includes a target of a 43% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels by 2030, which is far more ambitious than the previous 26% to 28% target set by the Coalition. The previous government’s policies were consistent with 3˚C of warming, whilst Labor’s policy is consistent with 2˚C, according to a report by Climate Analytics. It’s definitely a step in the right direction, but not enough to ensure the survival of the reef. Instead, the Greens’ target of a 74% emissions reduction, and teal independents’ targets of a 60% reduction, are consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C. With an unprecedented number of Greens candidates and the “teal wave” of independents elected into the crossbench, it’s a sign of shifting public sentiment. “It’s put a bit of a magnifying glass onto the policies of the two major parties, because while I think climate change is always an issue, it’s become more prominent in this election,” says Newlands. According to Newlands, the presence of these climate-forward members is likely to “either expedite the current target of net zero by 2050, or at least have that conversation of ‘well, that’s not enough but what is?’ “Having those independents in will keep climate change on the political agenda. So, it puts pressure on particularly Labor, but Liberals as well, to address that.” The 2020s are a critical decade for climate and we’re already two years in. But we have the opportunity to catalyse action on climate change and take the necessary steps to ensure the continued survival of the Great Barrier Reef. “No other developed country in the world has more to lose from inaction on climate change than we do,” says Rummer. “But we also have the most to gain. “It’s important to look forward into the future with a lot of optimism.” This article originally appeared on <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/earth/great-barrier-reef-labor-government/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">cosmosmagazine.com</a> and was written by Imma Perfetto. Image: Shutterstock

Domestic Travel

How Australia’s gig workers may remain contractors under Labor’s reforms

Uber Australia’s historic <a href="https://www.twu.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/Statement-of-Principles-28-June-2022.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">agreement</a> with the Transport Workers’ Union, on the need to regulate the gig economy, is the first step in fundamental reform of gig work. It suggests the direction the Albanese government will to take to deliver better conditions for gig workers. The “statement of principles” agreed to between Uber and the union supports “regulatory certainty for platforms” and “minimum benefits and standards for platform workers who aren’t engaged as employees”. It does not agree that gig workers should be classified as employees instead of independent contractors. The response of federal workplace relations minister Tony Burke to <a href="https://ministers.dese.gov.au/burke/important-step-rights-gig-workers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">the agreement</a> suggests the government will take the same route – not changing the classification of gig workers but giving the federal industrial relations umpire, the Fair Work Commission, the power to set minimum standards for any workers in designated sectors. A precedent for this approach comes from <a href="https://www.ntc.gov.au/sites/default/files/assets/files/Safe-payments-report-October-2008.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">New South Wales provisions</a> enabling regulation of payments to owner-drivers of trucks. Those provisions have been in place for more than 40 years, and have inspired the proposal <a href="https://statements.qld.gov.au/statements/95479" target="_blank" rel="noopener">before the Queensland parliament</a> to regulate the work of independent courier drivers. <h2>Leaving gig workers as contractors</h2> There are good reasons to aim to regulate gig economy workers as contractors, rather than attempting to bring them under the umbrella of being employees. Yes, their relationship with platforms can look an awful lot like an employment relationship – hence the reason for <a href="https://theconversation.com/an-employee-not-a-contractor-unfair-dismissal-ruling-against-deliveroo-is-a-big-deal-for-australias-gig-workers-161173" target="_blank" rel="noopener">court cases</a> supported by the Transport Workers’ Union seeking to have gig workers deemed employees. As the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test" target="_blank" rel="noopener">saying goes</a>, if it looks, swims and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck. But the outcome of trying to define gig workers as employees has been mixed. Around the world these attempts have sometimes <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/feb/10/pimlico-loses-appeal-against-plumbers-worker-status-in-gig-economy-case" target="_blank" rel="noopener">succeeded</a>, <a href="https://btlaw.com/insights/blogs/currents/2018/philadelphia-u-s-district-court-determines-uber-drivers-are-independent-contractors" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sometimes not</a>. <h2>Roadblocks to becoming employees</h2> Platform companies have worked against these attempts, leveraging the fact quite a number of gig workers like to imagine themselves as <a href="https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/to-gig-or-not-to-gig_2017-stories-from-the-modern-economy_tcm18-18955.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">independent</a>, self-employed people, as well as customers’ preference for cheap services. The best (but not only) example is their success against California’s <a href="https://www.acslaw.org/expertforum/ab5-regulating-the-gig-economy-is-good-for-workers-and-democracy/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">AB5</a> law, passed in 2019, that tightened the rules for companies to hire workers as independent contractors. Uber and rival Lyft first <a href="https://calmatters.org/economy/2020/08/california-gig-work-ab5-prop-22/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">threatened to suspend operations</a> in California rather than comply with the law. They then teamed up with other platform companies such as DoorDash and spent a reported <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/nov/12/uber-prop-22-law-drivers-ab5-gig-workers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">US$200 million</a> in 2020 to secure and a win a “ballot proposal” (known as Proposition 22) <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/04/technology/california-uber-lyft-prop-22.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">exempting</a> app-based transportation and delivery companies from the new law. A Californian court has since found <a href="https://www.nelp.org/blog/prop-22-unconstitutional/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Proposition 22 unconstitutional</a>, but it remains in place pending an appeal. Even when a rule is devised to interpret the contracts that gig workers sign as employment contracts, gig companies could <a href="https://www.hcamag.com/au/specialisation/industrial-relations/uber-eats-announces-new-business-model-and-contracts-for-riders/245068" target="_blank" rel="noopener">amend their contracts</a> to get around that. But in the end, a company such as Uber will adhere, grudgingly, to most standards that are imposed on it — other than defining its workers as employees. Thus it has accepted <a href="https://www.uber.com/ca/en/drive/montreal/get-started/training-requirement/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">training requirements in Quebec</a> (after first <a href="https://www.thedrive.com/article/14652/uber-threatens-to-leave-quebec-over-new-driver-training-requirements" target="_blank" rel="noopener">threatening to quit</a> the Canadian province), <a href="https://www.masslive.com/politics/2016/08/gov_charlie_baker_signs_law_regulating_uber_and_lyft_in_massachusetts.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">fare regulation in Massachusetts</a> and driver accreditation requirements in <a href="https://www.transport.nsw.gov.au/newsroom-and-events/media-releases/transport-for-nsw-statement-regarding-ride-sharing-apps" target="_blank" rel="noopener">several</a> <a href="https://www.intellinews.com/uber-reaches-agreement-with-the-czech-government-138071/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">jurisdictions</a>. <h2>Regulating contractors as contractors</h2> Regulating gig work without redefining gig workers as employees is not just politically easier, and hence more sustainable. It is also more effective policy. It enables regulation to be <a href="https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au/bitstream/handle/10072/405187/Peetz498000-Accepted.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y" target="_blank" rel="noopener">tailored to circumstances</a>. For example it may mean applying an hourly wage rate in one sector, and a piece rate of some sort in another. For example, a New York state inquiry into how to regulate passenger transport came up with an amount expressed like taxi charges – that is, dollars per kilometre travelled – drivers needed to be paid to earn the <a href="https://news.yahoo.com/judge-rules-lyft-must-york-rules-driver-minimum-010416081.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">equivalent of the state’s minimum wage</a> (taking into account waiting times, average speeds and so on). Different panels of the Fair Work Commission could determine different forms of gig economy regulation for different industries. Legislation does not need to specify how regulation should be expressed. It just needs to make sure that the Commission has all the power it needs, to regulate in whatever way it sees fit. <h2>Levelling the playing field</h2> The Transport Workers’ Union – which has a number of former officials in the Albanese government – has a long history of successfully promoting regulation of safety conditions for independent contractors (such as truck owner-drivers) without rebadging workers as employees. In the 1970s, for example, it persuaded the Wran government in NSW to introduce amendments to the NSW Industrial Relations Act that have made roads safer. The Albanese government does not need to legislate specific regulation. It just needs give the Fair Work Commission the power it needs to regulate in whatever way it sees fit, setting a minimum hourly rate or something else. The law must also direct the commission to set minimum standards in a way that ensures gig workers are paid as much as comparable award-covered employees, taking account of expenses. (Contractors often pay for costs that, if they were employees, would be covered by their employer.) This sort of direction is important to ensure neutrality between the costs of using employees or contractors. This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-australias-gig-workers-may-remain-contractors-under-labors-reforms-186197" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>. Image: Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Labor details plans for Australia to leave the monarchy

Prime Minster Anthony Albanese and his newly appointed Assistant Minister for the Republic have hinted at the difficult task ahead to shift Australia to a republic after being under the rule of the monarch since Federation in 1901. Matt Thistlethwaite has been tasked with overseeing the change, with the new minister saying there are lessons to be learnt from the failed 1999 referendum of the same issue. Australians rejected the proposition that the nation become a republic with a president appointed by parliament 23 years ago, with Thistlethwaite saying he wants to avoid the same mistakes of the past campaign that he was also involved in. He said been that the failure of the previous campaign was due to the “division” among party republicans, who were unable to unanimously come to a decision on how to best install a head of state. “I’m deeply conscious of that. And I want to avoid that in the future,” he told ABC Radio on Thursday. “So we don’t have a preference for a model that we’re going to seek to force on Australians. We’re going to take this slowly and methodically.” Albanese has promised that under his new government, a first term priority will be a referendum on an Indigenous voice to parliament and constitutional recognition for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Mr Thistlethwaite said Australia cutting ties with the British monarchy would be the “next natural step” and to have “one of our own” as head of state, with a referendum possible in a second term of a Labor government. “(The Prime Minister) wants me to make sure this issue comes back on the public agenda in discourse in Australia,” he said. “There is a whole generation of Australians, newly arrived migrants, who don’t understand this issue. I think my role is one of education." “We have a proxy representative in the Governor-General. But we can have an Australian as our head of state.” Mr Thistlethwaite said it was time to consider whether Australia should remain a constitutional monarchy with Queen Elizabeth II, who is now 96 years old, as the head of state. “As the Queen comes to the twilight of her reign we should pay respect for her for the wonderful job she’s done, but I think Australians are beginning to think about what comes next for our nation,” he said. “It’s time we start the serious conversation once again … and looking to have one of our own as our head of state, to recognise that independence and maturity going forward.” Image credits: Getty Images

News

The who's who of the new Labor government

Anthony Albanese has unveiled his new government, with many senior Labor politicians finally stepping into prominence as they take on more ministerial roles. The cabinet ministers will be responsible for implementing Prime Minister Anthony Albanese's campaign promises, from legislating an Indigenous Voice to Parliament to establishing a federal anti-corruption commission. The new cabinet has already made history in the walls of Parliament House, with more women being sworn in than ever before, and Australia's first ever Muslim ministers joining the cabinet. "I want to see us move towards 50/50 representation across all of the spectrum," Albanese said on Monday. "I also want to see a parliament and a government that reflects the diversity that is there of the Australian people themselves." "This is an exciting team, it's a team which is overflowing with talent, with people who are absolutely committed to making a difference as ministers and assistant ministers in my government," he said. So, who are the new Labor ministers? And what are their roles? First up (behind Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, of course) is Richard Marles, the deputy prime minister and minister for defence. As deputy leader, Marles was able to choose his portfolio, opting for defence over his previous shadow ministries of national reconstruction, employment, skills and small business and science. In his new roles, Richard Marles will step in as acting Prime Minister when Albanese is out of the country, and will also be responsible for the organisation, implementation, and formulation of government policy in defence and military matters. Next, Senator Penny Wong, the minister for foreign affairs. The foreign affairs minister is the minister who is responsible for overseeing the international diplomacy section of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Jim Chalmers is stepping into the role of Treasurer, and will be responsible for handing down the Labor government's first budget later this year. The Treasurer plays a key role in the economic policy of the government. Next up is Katy Gallagher, the minister for finance, minister for the public service, and minister for women. Gallagher will have three varied roles with her new titles, as she will be responsible for Australia's overall finances, handling non-corporate agencies, and delivering policies and programmes to advance gender equality and improve the lives of Australian women. Senator Don Farrell, minister for trade and tourism and special minister of state, will work closely with Senator Wong to establish relationships with foreign countries to strengthen Australia's trade agreements. He will also be responsible for special administrative matters within the government. Tony Burke, the minister for employment and workplace relations and minister for the arts, will advocate for the rights of workers in Australia. He will also be responsible for obtaining funding and sponsors to keep Australia's art scene alive. Mark Butler, the minister for health and aged care, is responsible for national health and medical research policy, providing direction and oversight of the Department of Health. He will also be tasked with the reform of Australia's aged care facilities. Chris Bowen, the minister for climate change and energy, will be a key player in enacting Albanese's campaign promises of radical action on climate change. Tanya Plibersek, the minister for the environment and water, provides direction and oversight of the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment to develop and implement national policy, programs and legislation to protect and conserve Australia's environment and heritage. Catherine King, the minister for infrastructure, transport, regional development and local government, will be responsible for all of the matters falling within the Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Communications portfolio, including regulation, safety and funding. Linda Burney, minister for Indigenous Australians, will ensure that Indigenous programs and services are delivering for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as intended, while also aiding the constitutional reform to include the Uluru Statement of the Heart. <div> Amanda Rishworth, the minister for social services, will oversees government social services, including mental health, families and children's policy, and support for carers and people with disabilities, and seniors. Bill Shorten, the minister for the National Disability Insurance Scheme and minister for government services, will oversee the NDIS funding and operation, while also overseeing government services such as Medicare and Centrelink. Mark Dreyfus, the attorney-general and cabinet secretary, will protect the rule of law and the integrity of the Courts, while also being in charge of cabinet administration. Brendan O'Connor, the minister for skills and training, will advocate for vocational training funding programs to keep the workplace moving. Jason Clare, the minister for education, will oversee policies and programs in the education system, while also advocating for student support. Julie Collins, the minister for housing, minister for homelessness, and minister for small business, will serve to explain and prevent the further rising of housing prices, while also advocating for small business owners. Michelle Rowland, the minister for communications, will be responsible for telecommunications in Australia, as well as broadcasting and the information economy. Madeleine King, the minister for resources and minister for Northern Australia, will oversee agricultural resources in Australia. Senator Murray Watt, the minister for agriculture, fisheries and forestry and minister for emergency management, will advocate for the preservation of Australia's diverse lands that can often be threatened by environmental factors. Ed Husic, the minister for industry and science, works with environmental government agencies to bring together industries for an economic boost. Clare O'Neil, the minister for home affairs and minister for cyber security, will be responsible for Australia's cyber policy coordination and setting the strategic direction of Government's cyber effort. Image credits: Getty Images </div>

News

Labor forms majority government after securing 76 seats

The Labor party has secured a majority government in the federal election after gaining the 76 seats they needed in order to govern in their own right. The formation of the Labor majority government means the party will not have to negotiate with an expanded crossbench in order to get legislation through the lower house. The majority government was formed as Labor MP Josh Burns was reelected in the Melbourne seat of Macnamara, bringing the seat count to the target number of 76. Given the Coalition was so far behind on the seat count, having lost legacy seats to teal independents, it was practically impossible the Liberal and National parties could use the crossbench to form a minority government. The crossbench will have 16 members, with an ideological spectrum that ranges from Queenslander Bob Katter on the right to the Greens on the left. Sources have suggested that it is likely that the new government will strike deals with the teals, independents and Greens to strengthen the passage of its legislation. Labor still needs to find a new deputy leader in the Senate to replace Kristina Keneally, who lost the seat of Fowler to independent candidate Dai Le in an embarrassing loss. The Labor caucus will determine who will serve in the cabinet when it meets later on Tuesday. The proportion of Left and Right members on the frontbench will be determined based on how many seats each faction wins. Image credits: Getty Images

News

“Above and beyond”: Mum gives baby unusual name after mid-flight birth

A mother has gone into early labor and delivered her healthy baby on board a flight with the help of an attendant. The passenger was on board a Frontier Airline flight on May 17 from Denver (DEN) to Orlando (MCO) when she went into labor. Flight attendant Diana Giraldo helped the mother to the bathroom where she assisted in delivering the healthy baby. The airline shared the incredible news on Facebook commending Ms Giraldo’s quick thinking during delivery. “Diana again went above and beyond after the completion of the flight to coordinate our return to Orlando,” Captain Chris Nye said. “The whole crew really did a great job. I transferred controls and flying duties to my First Officer as I coordinated the diversion. “Dispatch did a great job as well by suggesting Pensacola Airport and getting a gate and paramedics ready for us. “This was a job well done, and I was happy to see everyone working together to successfully deliver a newborn on an aircraft!” The airline revealed that the mother named the baby’s middle name “Sky” because she was born on the “mother and daughter plane tail, Luna and Lilly the Wolves”. Images: Frontier Airline

International Travel

Peter Dutton frontrunner for leader of Liberal Party

As Anthony Albanese is sworn in as the 31st Prime Minister of Australia and announces his cabinet, the Liberal Party is now looking to vote for another person to lead the party in the opposition. Peter Dutton, former defence minister, has emerged as a likely candidate to lead the opposition for the next three years. A most-likely contender to run against Dutton would also be outgoing Treasurer Josh Frydenberg. Others that may put their name in the running include outgoing energy minister Angus Taylor, home affairs minister Karen Andrews and trade minister Dan Tehan. They are however not seen as a threat. “Until we have a field of candidates I don’t know who the leader will be but I can only assume Peter Dutton is in the ranks,” Liberal Senator Hollie Hughes told <a href="https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw/peter-dutton-to-contest-leadership-of-liberal-party-angus-taylor-dan-tehan-and-karen-andrews-rivals/news-story/1359124cdc0d8dddd2229e4a0831b45d" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Daily Telegraph</a>. “He’s an absolute star performer and a terrific defence minister. “He, like Scott, has been unfairly maligned, but those of us who know him know what an amazing guy he is.” Former ABC political analyst Barrie Cassidy opposed the idea of Dutton leading opposition and that the party needs to move to the centre to win back seats. “That's a debate that will go on within the party now, and I think the answer to that probably depends on the leadership and who is the next leader of the party,” he said on The Project on Sunday. “The party has been going more to the right and more so by the minute.” He explained that one of their issues is that they have a problem with women, climate change, and integrity. “Who are you going to call? Peter Dutton to fix those issues when he's ideologically opposed, not to women, but to the other issues. But if it's not him. Who else?” “Even though it seems illogical, it could be Peter Dutton, because now, when you look at the fresh numbers, 30 or 40 per cent of the Liberal Party in the parliamentary party are now from Queensland, the LNP is not going to change its spots.” Image: Getty

News

Readers respond: If you were prime minister, what would your first rule be?

Millions of Aussies will be heading to the polling booth on May 21st to vote for either the same government or a new one. There is also a possibility of a hung parliament with many Aussies furious with the two major parties. So the balance of power could be held by the Greens or Independent candidates. However, with the election just around the corner, we asked you to tell us what your first rule would be if you became prime minister. Dianne received the comment with the most likes calling for a cut in all wages for politicians by up to 25 per cent. She said this cut is not limited to certain politicians but goes to all at local, state and federal levels. Dianne went a step further but also called for their pensions to be cut by at least 50 per cent and that politicians must serve at least two full terms to be eligible and that they should pay all their own expenses unless they are for government events. Grahame responded to Dianne’s comment and said that politicians should in fact not receive a pension until they reach the pension age “just like the rest of us”. The second most supported comment came from Donna who called for the abolishment of pension entitlements and make politicians self-funded retirees. She explained that by doing this, politicians will face the same pension entitlements as all other Australians. Fellow Aussie Carol supports the scrapping of perks for all politicians, having to be means tested to receive their pension like everyone else. “They are after all employees of the Australian people,” she said. Edith responded to Carol’s perk comment saying politicians have to stop with increasing their pay while not doing anything to support the rest of the country. She also said politicians should use their own cars, pay for their own fuel and have their daily spending rate cut. Another topic that received a lot of traction came from Carmen who called for pensioners to be brought above the poverty line. “Everyone cries about the minimum wage, forgetting that pensioners are below it! I would raise the pension to affordable living so the elderly don't have to suffer In many ways for being poor!” On the other side, Robyn said she would ensure that all politicians would actually be qualified in the position they are given. “Finances should have an economic degree, medical should be a doctor.” “Agree it has always believed this should be a prerequisite,” Dorrell replied. Australians will head to the polls on May 21. Image: Getty

Legal

Body language expert dissects third leaders' debate

The third and final leaders’ debate is finally over just a few days out from the Federal Election. A body language expert has weighed in on Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese’s performance during the debate that was aired on Channel 7 on Wednesday night. Connection and body language expert Katia Loisel pointed out the very obvious “agitation” coming from the leaders. “As the final debate opened, both leaders displayed signs of discomfort and nervousness,” she told <a href="https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/body-language-expert-weighs-in-on-third-leaders-debate/news-story/5a5196f3314ffc994ca28d57d4dac97a" target="_blank" rel="noopener">news.com.au</a>. “Despite an open, wide leg stance, Albanese’s ducked head and turtling of the neck, restless legs, and hands clasped in front, fingers interlaced fingers indicated vulnerability and emotional discomfort. “In contrast Morrison appeared more confident, his hands resting lightly on the podium, an asymmetric dominance smile dancing on his lips. Whilst his body language says, ‘I’ve got this,’ a fleeting attempt to lubricate his mouth suggests that he was feeling far from confident.” Katia noted that both leaders would occasionally use the lectern, as a non-verbal clutch, to grasp on when making a point She explained that Morrison was clutching the lectern and would then use single hand gestures before resorting to clasping his hands which indicated the discomfort and nerves. Albanese was occasionally shifting his weight from one foot to another before interlacing his fingers in front of his body to ease up the stress. When it came to exerting dominance, Ms Loisel said that came later on in the debate with Morrison “jaw jutting, finger pointing and dominance smile”. On the other hand, Albanese showed “increased frustration, agitation and dominance display”. The Federal Election will be held on Saturday May 21. Image: Twitter

News

"Painful": ScoMo and Albo slammed for shouty debate performance

Scott Morrison and Anthony Albanese have been slammed for their unruly behaviour toward the host of the second political debate. The Prime Minister and Opposition Leader butted heads in the fiery debate that was broadcast on Channel 9 on Sunday evening and hosted by Sarah Abo. The pair were not only speaking over each other, but completely disregarded Abo’s moderating as she asked them again and again to stop as there was another question. “I think we are getting more questions … Excuse me. I think we’re getting more questions between the two of you than from our panel,” Abo struggled to say. The leaders, however, completely ignored Abo and continued firing comments at one another – forcing her to butt in once again. “Mr Morrison and Mr Albanese, this is enough, we do need to move on.” However, it seemed that both party leaders wanted to get the last word in and continued to speak over Abo, who finally snapped. “You all agreed to the rules this evening. Chris Uhlmann has a question, and we will move on to his question,” she said. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> "That is NOT right." Moderator Sarah Abo had to step in after the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/LeadersDebate?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#LeadersDebate</a> heated up over energy policy. Stream LIVE on <a href="https://twitter.com/9Now?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@9Now</a>. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/60Mins?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#60Mins</a> <a href="https://t.co/gIRAYcOxzG">pic.twitter.com/gIRAYcOxzG</a> — 60 Minutes Australia (@60Mins) <a href="https://twitter.com/60Mins/status/1523262191167688704?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 8, 2022</a></blockquote> After the question was asked and both Morrison and Albanese were given time to respond, Abo once again had to interject and inform the Opposition Leader it was time to move on. “Something that – Mr Albanese, we have a question. Mr Albanese, we have given you more than enough time,” she said. “The pair of you have had more than enough time. You agreed … You agreed to these rules before coming on the program tonight.” Abo concluded the evening by summing up what many viewers must have been feeling: “The truth is, the voters are feeling disenchanted. Neither of them are thrilled with either of you as a choice for prime ministers." Viewers slammed the leaders for ignoring Abo, who made every effort to keep the debate running as smooth as possible. “Nine's Sarah Abo could have done with a whistle at this point as both leaders spar on national security,” someone wrote. “OMG...did Morrison just dismiss a female speaking waving his hand at her to shut her up? how embarrassing for poor Sarah Abo,” another commented. “Royal Commission into the moderation of the debate,” another added. Others, however, called out Abo for not moderating the debate efficiently, while also calling out her bias. “Sarah Abo as moderator was supposed to hold the debate together! Instead Sarah Abo allowed the debate to fall apart and descend into chaos!” a comment read. “Sarah Abo is a terrible moderator. Allowing these two men to yell and talk over each other for over an hour is not a debate,” another added. “Top notch moderating by Sarah Abo. Let Morrison talk all over Albanese then cut Albanese’s time in response,” someone else commented. Image: Channel 9

News

Labor says power prices are going up. The Coalition says they aren’t. Who’s right?

“Power prices are going up”, shadow treasurer Jim Chalmers <a href="https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/reason-for-power-price-hike-revealed/news-story/0790c26e00ff2bc22525f5bc66300a65">declared last week</a>. But according to energy minister <a href="https://www.2gb.com/mate-they-are-power-clash-as-energy-minister-denies-prices-going-up/">Angus Taylor</a>, “No one’s household power prices have gone up.” So who is right? With the cost of living at forefront of the election campaign, the competing claims of the government and opposition are over <a href="https://www.aemo.com.au/-/media/files/major-publications/qed/2022/qed-q1-report.pdf?la=en&hash=981BA7016C0C9A25947F0F05198EDB96">a report</a> showing wholesale electricity prices in Australia’s National Electricity Market surged 67% in the first three months of 2022, and by 141% in the year to the end of March. Neither Chalmers nor Taylor were technically incorrect in their statements, but each focused on the facts that suited their preferred narrative. So let’s consider the full context. <h2>Increases in wholesale prices</h2> The National Energy Market supplies electricity to about 89% of the Australian population. Though it’s called a national market, it does not include Western Australia, the Northern Territory or western Queensland. The following graph shows the average wholesale price in the NEM since the first quarter of 2019. Prices in the first quarter of 2022 rose by $35 a megawatt hour (or 3.5 cents a kilowatt hour). This put wholesale prices at their highest level since the first half of 2019. The next graph shows prices by state since the first quarter of 2020. The three southern states – South Australia, Victoria and Tasmania – had similar increases. Queensland, already with higher average prices, had a bigger increase. New South Wales was in-between. The report sets out various factors contributing to these price increases. Higher demand for electricity than in the corresponding 2021 quarter was one factor. Most of the other factors, however, relate directly, or indirectly, to the differing mixes of generation in the National Electricity Market’s five state markets. <h2>Share of renewables</h2> The next graph, based on calculations using very detailed operational data, show renewables’ share of wholesale electricity generation by state for the first quarter of 2022. (These numbers exclude rooftop solar’s contribution to total generation.) Tasmania led the way, with renewables supplying 100% of the wholesale market. Next came South Australia (69%), Victoria (28%), New South Wales (24%) and Queensland (12%). This clearly shows a correlation between higher wholesale prices and higher reliance on coal-fired generation. In Queensland, coal-fired power stations still account for 70% electricity generation, compared with 66% in New South Wales and 63% in Victoria. In the first quarter, AEMO’s report notes there was “record low availability” from black-coal generators in New South Wales and Queensland – the lowest, in fact, “since at least 2002”. This was “due to increased outages (mostly unplanned)”. In other words, coal-fired generators broke down more. A sudden, unplanned outage will cause the wholesale price to shoot up dramatically. Even though such events are usually short-lived, the prices reached are high enough to materially affect average quarterly prices. <h2>Limited interconnectors between states</h2> A second important factor is limited connection between the National Electricity Market’s five state-based markets. Interconnector transmission lines allow generators in one state to bid to supply electricity in a neighbouring state. Victoria’s connectors with Tasmania and South Australia are why its prices aren’t more in line with New South Wales and Queensland. But there aren’t enough connections to equalise wholesale prices across all states. In particular, AEMO’s report identifies the inadequate connection capacity between Victoria and New South Wales. This is the main reason for such a price separation between the southern and northern states. Wind and solar farms in Victoria and South Australia simply can’t sell more to the higher-priced northern markets. This is, of course, good for consumers in Victoria and South Australia, because the wind and solar generators must instead sell to their local state markets, driving down prices. But it’s not good for consumers elsewhere, or for the owners of those wind and solar generators. AEMO says a further problem is insufficient transmission capacity within NSW itself. This means the market operator must sometimes intervene to instruct wind and solar generators in the state’s southwest to curtail output to avoid overloading local transmission lines, endangering system security. Reducing the supply from the lowest cost suppliers in the market will obviously push up average wholesale prices. A third factor has affected black-coal generators in New South Wales and Queensland, which compete for coal with buyers overseas. (Victoria’s coal-fired generators use poorer quality brown coal, which isn’t exported.) When international coal prices go up, as they have due to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the cost of generating electricity for Australian consumers at these power stations also goes up. Only some coal stations are affected but the effect is large enough to push up the general wholesale price. Renewable generators, by contrast, are unaffected by volatile international coal prices. Image credits: Getty Images This article originally appeared on <a href="https://theconversation.com/labor-says-power-prices-are-going-up-the-coalition-says-they-arent-whos-right-182234" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a>.

Real Estate

Russell Crowe lends his baritone to Albo's campaign

Anthony Albanese has kickstarted Labor’s campaign launch with a surprise (voice) appearance from Russell Crowe. The Opposition Leader was at Perth’s Optus Stadium over the weekend when the party’s campaign video began with the actor’s voiceover. “Australia, we can do better,” Crowe begins the video with. “All it takes is a better government, with better plans. Too many people are working multiple jobs just to keep their heads above water. We can do better than that. “Too many of our kids aren’t going to be able to buy a house. We can do better than that. “Too many people in regional Australia can’t get basic healthcare. We can do better than that. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Your vote is powerful. Your vote can change Australia. For the better. <a href="https://t.co/rIbGJuyhGA">pic.twitter.com/rIbGJuyhGA</a> — Anthony Albanese (@AlboMP) <a href="https://twitter.com/AlboMP/status/1520629919453114369?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 1, 2022</a></blockquote> “And our elderly are being mistreated every single day in a broken aged care system. We can do so much better than that. “We have to. Your vote is powerful. Your vote can change things. Your vote can change Australia for the better.” The video ended with a slogan reading: A better future. Russell Crowe has previously supported the Labor Party in 2013 when Bill Shorten was leader. Images: Facebook/Getty

News

NSW Labor branch deletes Facebook page over memes

The official Facebook page for a NSW branch of the Labor Party has come under fire after posting memes featuring prominent Liberal Party figures, references to Nazis, and offensive language. Balmain Labor, the “official” Facebook page for the Balmain Branch of the Labor Party, has posted several memes over the last several months that have targeted Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s Pentecostal faith, Treasurer Josh Frydenberg, and Tony Abbott’s former chief of staff. <img src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/2022/04/scomo-meme.jpg" alt="" width="1280" height="720" /> A meme about Mr Morrison’s Pentecostal faith, screen grabbed by the Daily Telegraph. Image: The Daily Telegraph The first post, dated January 16, was a picture of Mr Morrison from a Pentecostal service with the text, “Help me sky daddy, I f***ed up again” superimposed over the image. Another, posted in March 4 that depicts Mr Frydenberg in a Nazi uniform under the text “Bogan’s Heroes”, has caused particular ire due to the fact his mother was a Holocaust survivor and that serveral of his relatives died in Nazi concentration camps. <img src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/2022/04/fry5.jpg" alt="" width="768" height="1024" /> Josh Frydenberg was Photoshopped into a Nazi uniform in the meme. Image: The Daily Telegraph A third post from April 3 has been criticised for alluding to Peta Credlin, Mr Abbott’s former chief of staff, as being a witch. Other posts on the page have included official ALP posts and inoffensive memes created by Labor supporters. <img src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/2022/04/meme1.jpg" alt="" width="1280" height="720" /> A screengrab of the meme referencing Peta Credlin from Balmain Labor. Image: The Daily Telegraph The offensive posts emerged several hours after the Sky News debate between Mr Morrison and Labor leader Anthony Albanese, which was criticised for being “biased” against Mr Albanese by audience members, per <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10734965/Sky-News-slammed-live-air-bias-against-Anthony-Albanese-leaders-debate.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Daily Mail</a>. “I thought it was a little bit unfair that Sky News gave Scott Morrison more time to speak, and kept cutting off Anthony. So yeah, I’m a little bit disappointed with that,” one woman told debate host Paul Murray. Meanwhile, Labor officials have said the Balmain Facebook page wasn’t an official party page and that individual branches often run their own social media without oversight, as reported by <a href="https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/national" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Daily Telegraph</a>. “This is not an official Australian Labor Party page and its content is not authorised or endorsed by Labor,” a NSW Labor spokesman said. “The images should not have been posted.” At the time of publication, the Balmain Labor Facebook page has been deleted. Images: The Daily Telegraph

News

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Labor Senator dies following health battle

What explained the seismic 2022 federal election?

Pensioners slam budget that “left them behind”

Big winners and losers of the 2022 federal budget

Paid parental leave extended to 26 weeks by 2026

Labor’s climate change bill is set to become law – but 3 important measures are missing

Has Labor learnt from the failure of the cashless debit card?

The Great Barrier Reef – what does a new Labor government mean for its future?

How Australia’s gig workers may remain contractors under Labor’s reforms

Labor details plans for Australia to leave the monarchy

The who's who of the new Labor government

Labor forms majority government after securing 76 seats

“Above and beyond”: Mum gives baby unusual name after mid-flight birth

Peter Dutton frontrunner for leader of Liberal Party

Readers respond: If you were prime minister, what would your first rule be?

Body language expert dissects third leaders' debate

"Painful": ScoMo and Albo slammed for shouty debate performance

Labor says power prices are going up. The Coalition says they aren’t. Who’s right?

Russell Crowe lends his baritone to Albo's campaign

NSW Labor branch deletes Facebook page over memes

Our Partners