Red News Readers,
This case illustrates graphically what can happen when managers in the health system try to run services and staffing levels on minimum cost. Those managers should read this story and cringe. This is what can happen when you put young inexperienced staff in positions where they are required to perform duties beyond their level of knowledge, skill and experience and without adequate clinical supervision. Minimum cost care can equal minimum quality care.
Jenny Haines
Mother dies after chain of blunders
Alexandra Smith, smh
March 6, 2008
REBECCA MURRAY was pregnant and healthy when she was admitted to Bathurst Hospital, but a day after delivering her third baby by caesarean the 29-year-old was dead. She had hemorrhaged, but nurses only realised when they saw her bloodied sheets.
Two weeks earlier, the 36-week-pregnant mother and her husband, Jim, had posed for this family photo with their son and daughter, Emelia and Lachlan, who were awaiting the arrival of a brother or sister. On June 24 last year, however, Mr Murray was in the waiting room of the old Bathurst Hospital, relieved that his newborn daughter, Grace, was healthy but unaware that down the corridor his young wife lay dying after a series of preventable errors.
A NSW Health incident report reveals that Mrs Murray had been transferred to a recovery ward after a routine caesarean when her blood pressure dropped dangerously low. Nurses should have called a medical emergency team but instead left her bleeding.
The report admits that the nurses were so inexperienced they did not know how to recognise a postpartum hemorrhage.
It was more than 30 minutes before hospital specialists arrived, and Mrs Murray was taken back to theatre for surgery. She needed a blood transfusion after losing huge amounts of blood, but the incident report concedes that two vital blood-warming machines were faulty. Both "kept turning off for no identifiable reason".
Worse still, theatre staff did not know how to use one machine and didn't know the password to operate it, the report said. Soon after, Mrs Murray suffered a cardiac arrest in theatre and doctors decided to transfer her to a metropolitan hospital. She was taken to the intensive care unit at Nepean Hospital. But, by 10.50am on June 25, she was dead.
The report concluded the "inadequate information exchange between treating clinicians contributed to a delay in recognition of the obstetric emergency" and "the rural base hospital medical records did not include an accurate record of blood loss, blood product and fluid replacement".
A new $98 million Bathurst Hospital opened in January, but surgeons suspended routine elective surgery last month, warning that serious design and construction flaws - such as an inadequate emergency alarm system and a pipe that leaked raw sewage into the maternity ward - were putting patients at risk.
Mrs Murray's death has been referred to the Health Care Complaints Commission and the coroner. But Mr Murray, left alone to raise three children, is demanding an apology from NSW Health and has not ruled out legal action. "This isn't a Third World country where a woman who is healthy goes in to have a baby and never walks out of those hospitals to kiss their kids goodnight again," Mr Murray told a news conference at State Parliament with the Opposition yesterday.
"My kids have to grow up having no mother. I believe she should still be alive if things had been done properly."
The Opposition health spokeswoman, Jillian Skinner, said it was a tragic example of systemic problems. "How is it that massive blood loss goes unattended in a NSW hospital?"
In Parliament, the Health Minister, Reba Meagher, said her sympathies were with Mr Murray.
But she said the Opposition could not attack the entire health system because of one tragic case.
"I am advised that Mrs Murray suffered acute complications following the birth of her child and was transferred to Nepean Hospital, when her condition continued to deteriorate after extensive treatment," Ms Meagher said. "While any maternal death is tragic, it is also extremely rare."
Whenever Mr Murray takes his children to visit their grandparents, he says, they think they are going to visit their mother - "asleep" in the hospital.
Thursday, March 06, 2008
Monday, March 03, 2008
DRIVERS STRIKE AT DESALINATION PLAN
Message from the MUA sent out by IW YRAW, 3.3.08:
The Divers at the NSW Government's desalination plant project have
decided to go on strike in protest of the fact that they are the only
workers on this site that are not covered by a union collective
agreement. To make matters worse the MUA delegate on site was just
recently sacked after raising safety concerns.
The employer Dive Construction Services (aka Dempsey Industries) have
refused to negotiate with the MUA for a collective agreement. This
company insists on utilising WorkChoices even after the Australian
people have overwhelmingly rejected this anti-worker set of IR laws.
Divers on site have determined that they must take a stand to stop the
continued erosion of diving wages and conditions. Diving is an extremely
dangerous occupation and the rates of pay and conditions for this work
(particularly at the desalination plant) are completely out of step with
community standards for work of this nature.
The Divers have established a picket line at the desalination plant site
at Port Botany.
It can be found on Friendship Rd. Port Botany at the Molineux Point end.
Look for the flags.
The picket will begin at around 7am Monday March 3rd.
Your assistance in supporting the divers is greatly appreciated.
We will send out more information as this struggle progresses.
In Unity
Warren Smith
Branch Secretary
MUA Sydney
The Divers at the NSW Government's desalination plant project have
decided to go on strike in protest of the fact that they are the only
workers on this site that are not covered by a union collective
agreement. To make matters worse the MUA delegate on site was just
recently sacked after raising safety concerns.
The employer Dive Construction Services (aka Dempsey Industries) have
refused to negotiate with the MUA for a collective agreement. This
company insists on utilising WorkChoices even after the Australian
people have overwhelmingly rejected this anti-worker set of IR laws.
Divers on site have determined that they must take a stand to stop the
continued erosion of diving wages and conditions. Diving is an extremely
dangerous occupation and the rates of pay and conditions for this work
(particularly at the desalination plant) are completely out of step with
community standards for work of this nature.
The Divers have established a picket line at the desalination plant site
at Port Botany.
It can be found on Friendship Rd. Port Botany at the Molineux Point end.
Look for the flags.
The picket will begin at around 7am Monday March 3rd.
Your assistance in supporting the divers is greatly appreciated.
We will send out more information as this struggle progresses.
In Unity
Warren Smith
Branch Secretary
MUA Sydney
DOCTORS GIVE FREE CARE TO REFUGEES
Doctors rally to offer free care for refugees
Connie Levett Immigration Reporter, smh
March 3, 2008
RAMZI BARNOUTI is a quiet knight for asylum seekers in Sydney, organising free medical care which they cannot afford and the Federal Government does not offer.
The Iraqi specialist has gathered a small team of pro bono doctors to provide GP, specialist and dental services for between 80 and 100 families on the Red Cross Asylum Seeker Program who do not meet government benefits criteria. He wants drug companies and laboratories to come on board too.
Dr Barnouti, 70, a retired urologist who migrated in December 2005 but was unable to practise here, approached the Red Cross in 2006 and they developed the pro bono scheme together. "I chose refugees because these are people who need help very much," he said.
"I said 'just call doctors and they will agree, anywhere in the world, 99 per cent will say yes'."
He found his team through the Yellow Pages, sending out 500 letters asking for volunteers to treat asylum seekers unable to obtain medical benefits.
Twenty doctors - GPs and specialists - replied. He sent 600 letters to dentists, and heard back from 16.
"I met a family who have been like this [without access to free medical care] for the last seven years," he said.
Yet Dr Barnouti is not shocked. "When you are there [in Iraq] and see the '91 war you think being seven years here without medical care is nothing. I have seen much worse things."
He was in the United Arab Emirates during the 2003 bombardment of Baghdad.
Dr Dawood Haddad, 47, who practises in Fairfield, was one of the first GPs to sign up for the scheme. "A lot of my patients come from refugee countries," he said. "I know how much suffering they have been through.
"I don't want them to have more suffering by depriving them of very basic health needs. Taking one patient out of 30 without charging is no big deal."
He has one or two pro bono families on his books at any time.
Nicole Cunningham, the Red Cross's refugee services co-ordinator, said the value of the program was in making health care accessible.
"I am focused on early intervention rather than crisis intervention," she said. "I have met asylum seekers with very advanced stages of cancer and wondered what if we had treated them earlier."
Ms Cunningham said the Red Cross program provided $140 a month to asylum seekers who did not qualify for government assistance.
She said the most common reason they did not qualify was that they had not applied for asylum within 45 days of arriving in Australia.
Dr Barnouti is getting out the Yellow Pages again, this time to write to pharmaceutical, radiology and pathology companies, because after diagnosis, the patients are unable to pay for the prescription or tests.
"Drug companies will spend $10,000 on one lunch for doctors, to show them new products," Dr Barnouti said. "They can afford to help."
Dr Haddad backed the campaign. Most of the things needed, such as antibiotics, were not sophisticated, he said.
Connie Levett Immigration Reporter, smh
March 3, 2008
RAMZI BARNOUTI is a quiet knight for asylum seekers in Sydney, organising free medical care which they cannot afford and the Federal Government does not offer.
The Iraqi specialist has gathered a small team of pro bono doctors to provide GP, specialist and dental services for between 80 and 100 families on the Red Cross Asylum Seeker Program who do not meet government benefits criteria. He wants drug companies and laboratories to come on board too.
Dr Barnouti, 70, a retired urologist who migrated in December 2005 but was unable to practise here, approached the Red Cross in 2006 and they developed the pro bono scheme together. "I chose refugees because these are people who need help very much," he said.
"I said 'just call doctors and they will agree, anywhere in the world, 99 per cent will say yes'."
He found his team through the Yellow Pages, sending out 500 letters asking for volunteers to treat asylum seekers unable to obtain medical benefits.
Twenty doctors - GPs and specialists - replied. He sent 600 letters to dentists, and heard back from 16.
"I met a family who have been like this [without access to free medical care] for the last seven years," he said.
Yet Dr Barnouti is not shocked. "When you are there [in Iraq] and see the '91 war you think being seven years here without medical care is nothing. I have seen much worse things."
He was in the United Arab Emirates during the 2003 bombardment of Baghdad.
Dr Dawood Haddad, 47, who practises in Fairfield, was one of the first GPs to sign up for the scheme. "A lot of my patients come from refugee countries," he said. "I know how much suffering they have been through.
"I don't want them to have more suffering by depriving them of very basic health needs. Taking one patient out of 30 without charging is no big deal."
He has one or two pro bono families on his books at any time.
Nicole Cunningham, the Red Cross's refugee services co-ordinator, said the value of the program was in making health care accessible.
"I am focused on early intervention rather than crisis intervention," she said. "I have met asylum seekers with very advanced stages of cancer and wondered what if we had treated them earlier."
Ms Cunningham said the Red Cross program provided $140 a month to asylum seekers who did not qualify for government assistance.
She said the most common reason they did not qualify was that they had not applied for asylum within 45 days of arriving in Australia.
Dr Barnouti is getting out the Yellow Pages again, this time to write to pharmaceutical, radiology and pathology companies, because after diagnosis, the patients are unable to pay for the prescription or tests.
"Drug companies will spend $10,000 on one lunch for doctors, to show them new products," Dr Barnouti said. "They can afford to help."
Dr Haddad backed the campaign. Most of the things needed, such as antibiotics, were not sophisticated, he said.
Sunday, March 02, 2008
LAW TO CATCH DODGY DOCTORS
Law to catch dodgy doctors
By Linda Silmalis
March 02, 2008 12:00am, Sunday Telegraph
DOCTORS will be required by law to dob in their dodgy colleagues in an attempt to prevent a repeat of the Butcher of Bega.
The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the State Government will amend the Medical Practice Amendment Bill, which is already before parliament, to accommodate mandatory reporting in NSW hospitals.
The move follows the stories of hundreds of women about deregistered former doctor, Graeme Reeves, who is alleged to have mutilated them while practising at Bega and Pambula on the NSW South Coast.
The legislation will mean doctors will be required by law to report on their colleagues if they suspect their peers of having: committed sexual abuse; engaged in drug or alcohol abuse, or
engaged in gross misconduct .
NSW Health Minister Reba Meagher said it was clear the laws needed changing.
"I think the community wants more assurance that if a doctor is suspected of gross negligence or serious misconduct they will be reported and they will face the consequences,'' she said.
"Serious matters need to be brought to light and they need to be investigated. This is why we will create a legal obligation to ensure this happens.''
Ms Meagher said the bill would also force the professional disciplinary bodies such as the NSW Medical Board, the Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC) and the NSW Medical Tribunal to take into account a doctor's history of complaints when determining what prosecution and disciplinary decisions were necessary.
Under existing laws, the individual bodies focused on resolving individual complaints rather than looking at a doctor's history.
"We have seen recently that cases arise where a doctor has been subject to a number of complaints going back over many years, complaints which show a pattern of poor standards or inappropriate conduct,'' Ms Meagher said.
"The current legislation focuses on resolution and investigation of complaints on a one by one, case by case, basis rather than looking at a pattern of poor standards or inappropriate conduct.''
The bill would also make it easier for the NSW Medical Board to immediately suspend the registration of a doctor if it was believed a person's life was in danger.
Dr Reeves is alleged to have performed unnecessary and sometimes horrific gynaecological procedures over several months in 2002. Five of Dr Reeves' alleged victims visited NSW Parliament House last week to question why he was able to practise, despite a ban.
Ms Meagher has hinted at the State Government compensating the women if it was proven there had been a failing in the system. However, the State Government would first await the completion of the police inquiry, she said.
Since Friday, the HCCC has received 12 phone calls and four written complaints from women who had been patients of Dr Reeves. The complaints were in addition to 27 received over the past few years.
Ms Meagher apologised to the women who had come forward, and praised them for their courage.
"To the women who have come forward, I commend you for your courage and I am sorry to all of you for the awful experiences you suffered at the hands of someone who acted so despicably,'' Ms Meagher said.
Liberal MP for Bega Andrew Constance said the State Government had yet to explain to the women how Dr Reeves had come to be employed.
Mr Constance, who called for an urgent investigation into Dr Reeves in a speech to parliament made in September last year, said he had been approached by nine women with allegations of negligence against Dr Reeves, including three on Friday.
"I would have liked to have seen an independent inquiry into this issue to find out what the bureaucrats knew,'' he said.
"The women who have bravely come forward on this issue just want answers and to see some sort of justice.''
A telephone counselling and support service has been established by NSW Health to support former patients of Dr Reeves.
The State Government has also instructed NSW Health to ensure any medical negligence claims are promptly evaluated prior to the commencement of any formal legal proceedings.
By Linda Silmalis
March 02, 2008 12:00am, Sunday Telegraph
DOCTORS will be required by law to dob in their dodgy colleagues in an attempt to prevent a repeat of the Butcher of Bega.
The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the State Government will amend the Medical Practice Amendment Bill, which is already before parliament, to accommodate mandatory reporting in NSW hospitals.
The move follows the stories of hundreds of women about deregistered former doctor, Graeme Reeves, who is alleged to have mutilated them while practising at Bega and Pambula on the NSW South Coast.
The legislation will mean doctors will be required by law to report on their colleagues if they suspect their peers of having: committed sexual abuse; engaged in drug or alcohol abuse, or
engaged in gross misconduct .
NSW Health Minister Reba Meagher said it was clear the laws needed changing.
"I think the community wants more assurance that if a doctor is suspected of gross negligence or serious misconduct they will be reported and they will face the consequences,'' she said.
"Serious matters need to be brought to light and they need to be investigated. This is why we will create a legal obligation to ensure this happens.''
Ms Meagher said the bill would also force the professional disciplinary bodies such as the NSW Medical Board, the Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC) and the NSW Medical Tribunal to take into account a doctor's history of complaints when determining what prosecution and disciplinary decisions were necessary.
Under existing laws, the individual bodies focused on resolving individual complaints rather than looking at a doctor's history.
"We have seen recently that cases arise where a doctor has been subject to a number of complaints going back over many years, complaints which show a pattern of poor standards or inappropriate conduct,'' Ms Meagher said.
"The current legislation focuses on resolution and investigation of complaints on a one by one, case by case, basis rather than looking at a pattern of poor standards or inappropriate conduct.''
The bill would also make it easier for the NSW Medical Board to immediately suspend the registration of a doctor if it was believed a person's life was in danger.
Dr Reeves is alleged to have performed unnecessary and sometimes horrific gynaecological procedures over several months in 2002. Five of Dr Reeves' alleged victims visited NSW Parliament House last week to question why he was able to practise, despite a ban.
Ms Meagher has hinted at the State Government compensating the women if it was proven there had been a failing in the system. However, the State Government would first await the completion of the police inquiry, she said.
Since Friday, the HCCC has received 12 phone calls and four written complaints from women who had been patients of Dr Reeves. The complaints were in addition to 27 received over the past few years.
Ms Meagher apologised to the women who had come forward, and praised them for their courage.
"To the women who have come forward, I commend you for your courage and I am sorry to all of you for the awful experiences you suffered at the hands of someone who acted so despicably,'' Ms Meagher said.
Liberal MP for Bega Andrew Constance said the State Government had yet to explain to the women how Dr Reeves had come to be employed.
Mr Constance, who called for an urgent investigation into Dr Reeves in a speech to parliament made in September last year, said he had been approached by nine women with allegations of negligence against Dr Reeves, including three on Friday.
"I would have liked to have seen an independent inquiry into this issue to find out what the bureaucrats knew,'' he said.
"The women who have bravely come forward on this issue just want answers and to see some sort of justice.''
A telephone counselling and support service has been established by NSW Health to support former patients of Dr Reeves.
The State Government has also instructed NSW Health to ensure any medical negligence claims are promptly evaluated prior to the commencement of any formal legal proceedings.
US DESTROYS SMALLPOX VACCINE
US agency destroys smallpox vaccine
March 2, 2008 - 12:23PM, Sun Herald
The US government has announced that it has said goodbye to one of the world's greatest lifesavers - the original smallpox vaccine.
The US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention this month made arrangements to dispose of its 12 million doses of Dryvax, and notified other health departments and the military to do the same by February 29.
Dryvax - produced by scraping virus off the skin of infected calves - is being replaced in federal vaccine stockpiles by a more modern product manufactured in laboratories.
Dryvax was unusually dangerous for a vaccine, blamed in recent years for triggering heart attacks and a painful heart inflammation in some patients.
Still, attention should be paid on the occasion of its demise, said Dr William Schaffner, chairman of Vanderbilt University's department of preventive medicine.
It is a "historical moment, because it's our oldest vaccine," Schaffner said. "It was a vaccine that eliminated smallpox from the United States."
Smallpox is a deadly, infectious disease that plagued the world for centuries and killed nearly a third of the people it infected. Victims suffered scorching fever and body aches, then spots and blisters that would leave survivors with pitted scars.
Dryvax was created in the late 1800s, by the company that became Wyeth Laboratories. Wyeth was a primary US manufacturer of smallpox vaccine by the mid-1940s, and was the only company left making it by the early 1960s, said D.A. Henderson, a University of Pittsburgh vaccine expert who played a key role in international smallpox eradication efforts.
The United States was able to end routine childhood vaccination against the disease by the early 1970s. World health authorities declared the disease was eradicated from nature in 1980.
Wyeth stopped making the vaccine in the 1980s. But government officials kept a stockpile of about 15 million doses. The Dryvax came in handy in 2003, when it was used to help contain an outbreak of monkeypox in the United States.
© 2008 AP
March 2, 2008 - 12:23PM, Sun Herald
The US government has announced that it has said goodbye to one of the world's greatest lifesavers - the original smallpox vaccine.
The US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention this month made arrangements to dispose of its 12 million doses of Dryvax, and notified other health departments and the military to do the same by February 29.
Dryvax - produced by scraping virus off the skin of infected calves - is being replaced in federal vaccine stockpiles by a more modern product manufactured in laboratories.
Dryvax was unusually dangerous for a vaccine, blamed in recent years for triggering heart attacks and a painful heart inflammation in some patients.
Still, attention should be paid on the occasion of its demise, said Dr William Schaffner, chairman of Vanderbilt University's department of preventive medicine.
It is a "historical moment, because it's our oldest vaccine," Schaffner said. "It was a vaccine that eliminated smallpox from the United States."
Smallpox is a deadly, infectious disease that plagued the world for centuries and killed nearly a third of the people it infected. Victims suffered scorching fever and body aches, then spots and blisters that would leave survivors with pitted scars.
Dryvax was created in the late 1800s, by the company that became Wyeth Laboratories. Wyeth was a primary US manufacturer of smallpox vaccine by the mid-1940s, and was the only company left making it by the early 1960s, said D.A. Henderson, a University of Pittsburgh vaccine expert who played a key role in international smallpox eradication efforts.
The United States was able to end routine childhood vaccination against the disease by the early 1970s. World health authorities declared the disease was eradicated from nature in 1980.
Wyeth stopped making the vaccine in the 1980s. But government officials kept a stockpile of about 15 million doses. The Dryvax came in handy in 2003, when it was used to help contain an outbreak of monkeypox in the United States.
© 2008 AP
IEMMA SEEKS FUNDS FROM RUDD
Iemma after hand-outs from Rudd Government
Heath Gilmore, Sun Herald
March 2, 2008
PREMIER Morris Iemma will ask for billions of dollars from the Rudd Government to help jump-start stalled projects, including linking the M4 Motorway to Parramatta Road and the City West corridor.
Mr Iemma's wish list - the M4 East and associated projects, F3-M7 connection, Moorebank freight terminal and Southern Sydney Freight Line - will soon be presented to the new Infrastructure Australia group.
Last week federal Infrastructure Minister Anthony Albanese said that Sir Rod Eddington will head the new 12-member group, made up of state and federal government representatives and business leaders.
The group will compile a hit list of infrastructure projects covering transport, water, communication and energy within 12 months. It will also advise the Rudd Government of public and private funding priorities.
High on the list is the completion of a four-lane motorway linking Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne.
Yesterday Mr Iemma said he would push for the M4 East and associated public transport initiatives to relieve the problem of urban congestion.
He made the renewed bid for the M4 East while touting Sydney Water managing director Kerry Schott and infrastructure expert Bob Leece as being worthy of positions on the Eddington group.
"Forecasts for Sydney's future growth show the corridors from the CBD and Macquarie Park to the airport and Port Botany will experience amongst the highest population and employment growth," Mr Iemma said.
"An M4 East would complete the missing link between the current M4 and the Sydney CBD, and open up western Sydney to the east and south east with links to Sydney airport and Port Botany.
"This project would address the forecasts of Sydney's future growth, [the] problem of congestion and get the heavy trucks off our local and arterial roads."
NSW Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell said the NSW Labor Government had neglected the state's infrastructure.
"Over 13 years Labor has allowed the state's infrastructure to run down, everything from schools, hospitals to public transport," he said. "Not a single major public transport project is running on time or on budget. That's why we've announced the establishment of a single Transport Co-ordination Authority to better manage infrastructure delivery in that portfolio."
Federal and state government officials will meet in Brisbane on Thursday to work on a national audit of major infrastructure that Sir Rod will use to prioritise projects.
Mr Albanese said strategic investment was required to overcome the infrastructure backlog in the areas of land, transport, water, communication and energy, estimated to be worth $25billion.
The chief executive of the Civil Contractors Federation, David Elliott, said NSW "needs to forget about the nocturnal activities of Wollongong's political elite and focus on how we are going to stop Sydney being twinned with Port Moresby.
"The main challenge is to reassure investors that private-public partnerships are safe in this country, and the best way to do that is for the state to commit the proceeds from the sale of electricity to an infrastructure fund."
hgilmore@sunherald.com.au
Heath Gilmore, Sun Herald
March 2, 2008
PREMIER Morris Iemma will ask for billions of dollars from the Rudd Government to help jump-start stalled projects, including linking the M4 Motorway to Parramatta Road and the City West corridor.
Mr Iemma's wish list - the M4 East and associated projects, F3-M7 connection, Moorebank freight terminal and Southern Sydney Freight Line - will soon be presented to the new Infrastructure Australia group.
Last week federal Infrastructure Minister Anthony Albanese said that Sir Rod Eddington will head the new 12-member group, made up of state and federal government representatives and business leaders.
The group will compile a hit list of infrastructure projects covering transport, water, communication and energy within 12 months. It will also advise the Rudd Government of public and private funding priorities.
High on the list is the completion of a four-lane motorway linking Brisbane, Sydney and Melbourne.
Yesterday Mr Iemma said he would push for the M4 East and associated public transport initiatives to relieve the problem of urban congestion.
He made the renewed bid for the M4 East while touting Sydney Water managing director Kerry Schott and infrastructure expert Bob Leece as being worthy of positions on the Eddington group.
"Forecasts for Sydney's future growth show the corridors from the CBD and Macquarie Park to the airport and Port Botany will experience amongst the highest population and employment growth," Mr Iemma said.
"An M4 East would complete the missing link between the current M4 and the Sydney CBD, and open up western Sydney to the east and south east with links to Sydney airport and Port Botany.
"This project would address the forecasts of Sydney's future growth, [the] problem of congestion and get the heavy trucks off our local and arterial roads."
NSW Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell said the NSW Labor Government had neglected the state's infrastructure.
"Over 13 years Labor has allowed the state's infrastructure to run down, everything from schools, hospitals to public transport," he said. "Not a single major public transport project is running on time or on budget. That's why we've announced the establishment of a single Transport Co-ordination Authority to better manage infrastructure delivery in that portfolio."
Federal and state government officials will meet in Brisbane on Thursday to work on a national audit of major infrastructure that Sir Rod will use to prioritise projects.
Mr Albanese said strategic investment was required to overcome the infrastructure backlog in the areas of land, transport, water, communication and energy, estimated to be worth $25billion.
The chief executive of the Civil Contractors Federation, David Elliott, said NSW "needs to forget about the nocturnal activities of Wollongong's political elite and focus on how we are going to stop Sydney being twinned with Port Moresby.
"The main challenge is to reassure investors that private-public partnerships are safe in this country, and the best way to do that is for the state to commit the proceeds from the sale of electricity to an infrastructure fund."
hgilmore@sunherald.com.au
Friday, February 29, 2008
ALP LEFT COULD FIGHT COSTA
ALP Left ready to fight Costa
Andrew West, smh
February 29, 2008
IEMMA Government MPs are on the brink of rebellion after one of the Labor Party's most senior figures endorsed the right of ALP politicians to vote in Parliament against the planned privatisation of the state's electricity industry.
Luke Foley, the party's assistant general secretary who leads the Left faction, has told his MPs that if the Treasurer, Michael Costa, introduced privatisation bills before the issue is debated at the ALP conference in May, the Government would be breaching an agreement with unions.
Mr Foley declined to comment to the Herald, but three MPs, two union leaders and several delegates present at the Left's annual general meeting on Monday night have confirmed he made the statement.
Mr Foley reportedly told the meeting: "A commitment was given that no legislation would be introduced prior to the party conference. If privatisation legislation is introduced prior to the conference, then MPs would be within the their rights to tell caucus that they would not vote for it when it came before Parliament."
Mr Foley was responding to a question from the Sydney bookseller Bob Gould, one of 250 members at the gathering in the Haymarket auditorium of the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union. Another Left member, the Sydney solicitor James Shaw, said Mr Foley was even more explicit, arguing that loyalty to party policy, which opposes power privatisation, was more important than the rule demanding caucus members vote together in Parliament.
"Luke expressed the view that ALP rules on policy overrode the principal of caucus solidarity," Mr Shaw told the Herald.
"He said that he supported caucus solidarity in general but, because electricity privatisation was so obviously against party policy, Labor MPs were free to cross the floor - and everyone in the room totally supported Luke."
Mr Shaw said the delegates also passed a resolution unanimously opposing the privatisation.
Mr Foley's comments will embolden the 15 Labor politicians, including the right-wingers Paul Gibson and Grant McBride, who marched with 5000 unionists on Tuesday against the privatisation.
His statement also directly contradicts Wednesday's claim by the Energy Minister, Ian Macdonald, that no MP would cross the floor. Left MPs told the Herald they were only revealing the details of Mr Foley's comments to the meeting "because Macdonald has no influence and no support within the Left and is in no position to predict what will happen".
Mr Foley is walking a tightrope on the issue of privatisation. He and the party secretary, Karl Bitar, both confidants of the Premier, are trying to broker a compromise with the party members and unions before the issue reaches the conference. Mr Foley has already felt the heat from unions and activists, who elected him at the last ALP conference, for helping to thwart a special anti-privatisation conference.
The assistant secretary of the Public Service Association, Steve Turner, who also attended Monday's meeting, has vowed his union will support any Labor MP who crosses the floor to oppose power privatisation. "If any bill goes before Parliament before the conference it would violate written undertakings from the Premier and we would call on every MP to vote against it," Mr Turner said. "And we will support any MP who gets in trouble over the issue."
In December, the United Services Union leader, Ben Krause, pledged union resources for rebel MPs at the 2011 election.
Andrew West, smh
February 29, 2008
IEMMA Government MPs are on the brink of rebellion after one of the Labor Party's most senior figures endorsed the right of ALP politicians to vote in Parliament against the planned privatisation of the state's electricity industry.
Luke Foley, the party's assistant general secretary who leads the Left faction, has told his MPs that if the Treasurer, Michael Costa, introduced privatisation bills before the issue is debated at the ALP conference in May, the Government would be breaching an agreement with unions.
Mr Foley declined to comment to the Herald, but three MPs, two union leaders and several delegates present at the Left's annual general meeting on Monday night have confirmed he made the statement.
Mr Foley reportedly told the meeting: "A commitment was given that no legislation would be introduced prior to the party conference. If privatisation legislation is introduced prior to the conference, then MPs would be within the their rights to tell caucus that they would not vote for it when it came before Parliament."
Mr Foley was responding to a question from the Sydney bookseller Bob Gould, one of 250 members at the gathering in the Haymarket auditorium of the Liquor, Hospitality and Miscellaneous Workers Union. Another Left member, the Sydney solicitor James Shaw, said Mr Foley was even more explicit, arguing that loyalty to party policy, which opposes power privatisation, was more important than the rule demanding caucus members vote together in Parliament.
"Luke expressed the view that ALP rules on policy overrode the principal of caucus solidarity," Mr Shaw told the Herald.
"He said that he supported caucus solidarity in general but, because electricity privatisation was so obviously against party policy, Labor MPs were free to cross the floor - and everyone in the room totally supported Luke."
Mr Shaw said the delegates also passed a resolution unanimously opposing the privatisation.
Mr Foley's comments will embolden the 15 Labor politicians, including the right-wingers Paul Gibson and Grant McBride, who marched with 5000 unionists on Tuesday against the privatisation.
His statement also directly contradicts Wednesday's claim by the Energy Minister, Ian Macdonald, that no MP would cross the floor. Left MPs told the Herald they were only revealing the details of Mr Foley's comments to the meeting "because Macdonald has no influence and no support within the Left and is in no position to predict what will happen".
Mr Foley is walking a tightrope on the issue of privatisation. He and the party secretary, Karl Bitar, both confidants of the Premier, are trying to broker a compromise with the party members and unions before the issue reaches the conference. Mr Foley has already felt the heat from unions and activists, who elected him at the last ALP conference, for helping to thwart a special anti-privatisation conference.
The assistant secretary of the Public Service Association, Steve Turner, who also attended Monday's meeting, has vowed his union will support any Labor MP who crosses the floor to oppose power privatisation. "If any bill goes before Parliament before the conference it would violate written undertakings from the Premier and we would call on every MP to vote against it," Mr Turner said. "And we will support any MP who gets in trouble over the issue."
In December, the United Services Union leader, Ben Krause, pledged union resources for rebel MPs at the 2011 election.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
UNIONS SEEK 4% FOR LOW PAID
Unions seek 4% rise for low-paid workers
Mark Davis, Political Correspondent, smh
February 27, 2008
UNIONS NSW has called on the Federal Government to support pay rises of 4 per cent for the country's lowest-paid workers despite inflationary pressures in the economy.
The secretary of the peak union body, John Robertson, said yesterday that a looming wages review by the Fair Pay Commission would give the Rudd Government an opportunity to meet its election pledge to look after working families.
But the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry will ask the commission to award a minimum wage rise below the inflation rate this year.
The Fair Pay Commission is calling for submissions for its annual review of the minimum wage rates which set the pay levels of an estimated 1.2 million workers.
The Government has called for wage restraint to contain inflationary pressures and has decided that federal MPs will not have their pay increased at all this year to set an example.
But it has not announced its approach to the Fair Pay Commission review.
Mr Robertson said Unions NSW had lodged a claim with the NSW Industrial Relations Commission earlier this month for a $24 a week increase in state minimum wage rates.
He said the Fair Pay Commission should deliver a similar rise of 4 per cent for workers regulated by the federal minimum wage system. "The low-paid should not be the ones caught in the middle of dealing with inflation," Mr Robertson said. "They are already struggling, they need to be looked after and, frankly, that is what a Rudd Labor government was elected to do.
"This is a Government elected saying it was going to look after the interests of working families and people who rely on minimum wages are the most vulnerable working families in our community."
The acting chief executive of Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Peter Anderson, said the employer group would propose a wage rise for the low-paid slightly lower than inflation to help avoid a wage-price spiral.
Mr Anderson said the chamber would argue such a wage rise combined with the Government's planned tax cuts would still ensure low-paid workers had a real increase in after-tax income.
Mark Davis, Political Correspondent, smh
February 27, 2008
UNIONS NSW has called on the Federal Government to support pay rises of 4 per cent for the country's lowest-paid workers despite inflationary pressures in the economy.
The secretary of the peak union body, John Robertson, said yesterday that a looming wages review by the Fair Pay Commission would give the Rudd Government an opportunity to meet its election pledge to look after working families.
But the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry will ask the commission to award a minimum wage rise below the inflation rate this year.
The Fair Pay Commission is calling for submissions for its annual review of the minimum wage rates which set the pay levels of an estimated 1.2 million workers.
The Government has called for wage restraint to contain inflationary pressures and has decided that federal MPs will not have their pay increased at all this year to set an example.
But it has not announced its approach to the Fair Pay Commission review.
Mr Robertson said Unions NSW had lodged a claim with the NSW Industrial Relations Commission earlier this month for a $24 a week increase in state minimum wage rates.
He said the Fair Pay Commission should deliver a similar rise of 4 per cent for workers regulated by the federal minimum wage system. "The low-paid should not be the ones caught in the middle of dealing with inflation," Mr Robertson said. "They are already struggling, they need to be looked after and, frankly, that is what a Rudd Labor government was elected to do.
"This is a Government elected saying it was going to look after the interests of working families and people who rely on minimum wages are the most vulnerable working families in our community."
The acting chief executive of Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Peter Anderson, said the employer group would propose a wage rise for the low-paid slightly lower than inflation to help avoid a wage-price spiral.
Mr Anderson said the chamber would argue such a wage rise combined with the Government's planned tax cuts would still ensure low-paid workers had a real increase in after-tax income.
LABOR MPS REVOLT OVER PRIVATISATION
Andrew Clennell, Andrew West and Brian Robins
February 27, 2008, smh
FIFTEEN Labor MPs openly defied Morris Iemma yesterday and stood side-by-side with 4000 unionists protesting against the Premier's electricity privatisation plans.
As the MPs from the Left and Right factions revolted outside Parliament, Mr Iemma's Government came under sustained pressure in the Legislative Assembly over the Wollongong sex-and-development scandal.
Then, at a caucus meeting, the Government whip, Gerard Martin, and others spoke out against the Treasurer, Michael Costa, and the electricity reforms he is driving with Mr Iemma.
Later Mr Iemma said he would take no action against the 15 MPs in the protest organised by Unions NSW. One of the MPs, Blacktown MP Paul Gibson, wore a protest T-shirt into Labor's caucus meeting. Another, Ian West, took the red flag of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union into the meeting.
"There are bigger issues here to focus on, [such as] securing the state's future energy needs, not who participated in a march," said Mr Iemma's spokesman.
In question time, Mr Iemma accused Liberal MPs of having consorted with the corporate criminals Rodney Adler, Ray Williams and Steve Vizard as he attempted to defend his embattled Minister for Ports, Joe Tripodi, over his association with Joe Scimone, the former Wollongong planning official embroiled in the development scandal.
The Government is awaiting an Independent Commission Against Corruption report on Mr Scimone's appointment to NSW Maritime to see whether the minister should be stood down.
"He is entitled to a presumption of innocence," Mr Iemma told Parliament when asked if Mr Tripodi should be removed immediately. "You might tell us all of those Liberal Party ministers and members, branch members, all of those who have ever met, over the years … met Adler, Vizard, Williams - would you make a negative imputation on their character simply because they knew someone who at a later time might have been guilty of something wrong? … You want to come in here and hang the Minister for Ports without any evidence, without any basis of moving against him, simply because you want to smear him."
The MPs in the protest with Mr Gibson were Grant McBride, Alan Ashton, David Borger, Robert Coombs, Sonya Hornery, Kerry Hickey, Paul Pearce, Matthew Morris, Mick Veitch, Ian West, Helen Westwood, Penny Sharpe, Peter Primrose and Linda Voltz.
In caucus Mr Martin criticised the way party officials, such as Labor's state president, Bernie Riordan, had been targeted by Mr Costa and how the Treasurer had said he "didn't care" whether he was expelled from the ALP should its state conference reject the power sale, sources said. The implication by Mr Martin and others was that the Treasurer's attitude was not helping MPs promoting the $15 billion sale.
A Legislative Council member, Christine Robertson, who belongs to Mr Iemma's right-wing faction, said upper house MPs would face a dilemma if a bill endorsing the electricity sale proceeded despite a vote against it at Labor's state conference in May.
Two caucus sources said that Ms Roberston argued that Legislative Council members were selected by the state conference and owed loyalty to it. She declined to comment but did not deny she had warned colleagues of a possible upper house revolt.
At least four other MPs - Mr McBride, Mr West, Mr Pearce and Tony Catanzariti - spoke against the sale.
The secretary of Unions NSW, John Robertson, warned the Government it faced the same fate as the Howard government did over Work Choices, referring to yesterday's Herald/Nielsen poll showing 64 per cent of voters opposed the sell-off.
February 27, 2008, smh
FIFTEEN Labor MPs openly defied Morris Iemma yesterday and stood side-by-side with 4000 unionists protesting against the Premier's electricity privatisation plans.
As the MPs from the Left and Right factions revolted outside Parliament, Mr Iemma's Government came under sustained pressure in the Legislative Assembly over the Wollongong sex-and-development scandal.
Then, at a caucus meeting, the Government whip, Gerard Martin, and others spoke out against the Treasurer, Michael Costa, and the electricity reforms he is driving with Mr Iemma.
Later Mr Iemma said he would take no action against the 15 MPs in the protest organised by Unions NSW. One of the MPs, Blacktown MP Paul Gibson, wore a protest T-shirt into Labor's caucus meeting. Another, Ian West, took the red flag of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union into the meeting.
"There are bigger issues here to focus on, [such as] securing the state's future energy needs, not who participated in a march," said Mr Iemma's spokesman.
In question time, Mr Iemma accused Liberal MPs of having consorted with the corporate criminals Rodney Adler, Ray Williams and Steve Vizard as he attempted to defend his embattled Minister for Ports, Joe Tripodi, over his association with Joe Scimone, the former Wollongong planning official embroiled in the development scandal.
The Government is awaiting an Independent Commission Against Corruption report on Mr Scimone's appointment to NSW Maritime to see whether the minister should be stood down.
"He is entitled to a presumption of innocence," Mr Iemma told Parliament when asked if Mr Tripodi should be removed immediately. "You might tell us all of those Liberal Party ministers and members, branch members, all of those who have ever met, over the years … met Adler, Vizard, Williams - would you make a negative imputation on their character simply because they knew someone who at a later time might have been guilty of something wrong? … You want to come in here and hang the Minister for Ports without any evidence, without any basis of moving against him, simply because you want to smear him."
The MPs in the protest with Mr Gibson were Grant McBride, Alan Ashton, David Borger, Robert Coombs, Sonya Hornery, Kerry Hickey, Paul Pearce, Matthew Morris, Mick Veitch, Ian West, Helen Westwood, Penny Sharpe, Peter Primrose and Linda Voltz.
In caucus Mr Martin criticised the way party officials, such as Labor's state president, Bernie Riordan, had been targeted by Mr Costa and how the Treasurer had said he "didn't care" whether he was expelled from the ALP should its state conference reject the power sale, sources said. The implication by Mr Martin and others was that the Treasurer's attitude was not helping MPs promoting the $15 billion sale.
A Legislative Council member, Christine Robertson, who belongs to Mr Iemma's right-wing faction, said upper house MPs would face a dilemma if a bill endorsing the electricity sale proceeded despite a vote against it at Labor's state conference in May.
Two caucus sources said that Ms Roberston argued that Legislative Council members were selected by the state conference and owed loyalty to it. She declined to comment but did not deny she had warned colleagues of a possible upper house revolt.
At least four other MPs - Mr McBride, Mr West, Mr Pearce and Tony Catanzariti - spoke against the sale.
The secretary of Unions NSW, John Robertson, warned the Government it faced the same fate as the Howard government did over Work Choices, referring to yesterday's Herald/Nielsen poll showing 64 per cent of voters opposed the sell-off.
Saturday, February 23, 2008
UNITY IS POWER
Red News Readers,
Anti privatisation members of the ALP, this is what we are up against!
Jenny Haines
Unity is Power
By Kirk McKenzie, New Matilda
20.02.08
The Iemma Government's plan to privatise the State's electricity has divided the Labor Party and sidelined a vital support base, writes NSW ALP insider, Kirk McKenzie
Unity within the Australian Labor Party can lead to great things. During last year's election campaign, disputes within Labor's parliamentary and organisational wings, trade union affiliates, local branches and even factions were suspended. As a participant in some of these disputes in the past, it was good to see the result of everyone pulling in the same direction - the Rudd Government.
Alas, after the November poll, the incentive to co-operate receded and less than three weeks later conflict erupted over the electricity privatisation plans of the NSW Labor Government under Morris Iemma.
In essence, those plans are to lease out to the private sector the State's power stations, all of which are currently Government owned, although two have already been leased out. The Iemma Government also intends to sell off the retail arms of the electricity industry, which it also owns, but retain the "poles and wires" - the grid itself.
NSW Treasurer Michael Costa argues that this is necessary to avoid the State having to bear the cost of a new baseload power station which he says will be needed by approximately 2014. His argument goes that if the generators are (partially) privatised, a new market for electricity generation will be created and with it the incentive for the private sector to fund, build and operate the new power station.
Some of the Government's critics argue that there will be no net economic benefit in the sale and with the adoption of appropriate energy efficiency measures, a new baseload power station will not be necessary until 2020 or later. Perhaps the principal critic is Bernie Riordan, the Secretary of the Electrical Trades Union, who is also NSW Labor's President. Among other things, he is worried about the jobs of his members under new, private sector management. Any job losses would also affect his union.
The Government disputes that economic benefits will not accrue to the State and has attempted to counter the unions' argument by pointing out that in Victoria, where the whole industry was privatised some years ago, staffing ratios under privatised generation are now roughly the same as in the NSW power industry. The Iemma Government has also promised to guarantee the jobs of the workers affected, and to further sweeten the deal by offering compensation averaging $40,000 to the affected workers, even though their jobs are to be secured.
So why all the heat of recent weeks between the Government and the unions?
Partly it is a matter of process. NSW Labor party policy, often referred to as "the Platform", says that a privatisation proposal must be considered on a case by case basis. It prescribes that the Government appoint a committee to prepare an impact statement on any proposal, guided by 12 separate criteria. These criteria were added to the Platform some years ago after lengthy negotiations between various stakeholders. Part of the problem is that the Government announced its decision before the committee had even met to consider the matter.
The unions and the Party's local branches, which are traditionally suspicious of privatisation proposals, were unimpressed by this, particularly after both groups worked hard to re-elect the Iemma Government in March last year, and even harder in the lead up to Federal Labor's victory in November. Branch and union activists now claim a greater degree of ownership of the Party and its direction, because of that heavy and vital commitment.
The dispute has been worsened by personality clashes between the major participants. Costa, the Trostskyite turned Labor right-winger, would concede that he is not a natural diplomat. He occupies a role once filled by Paul Keating in the federal sphere - that of policy battering ram. As such he seems unaffected by his former role as Secretary of Unions NSW before entering Parliament.
Riordan on the other hand, is the son of Joe Riordan, a respected Whitlam Government Minister and former union Secretary. Bernie has been steeped in Labor politics all his life. He knows that both the NSW and Federal Labor Governments needed and received the strongest support of the trade unions and branches last year and he is determined to ensure that their views are not ignored in this debate.
The Iemma Government has other concerns. One is the likely value of the State's coal-fired power stations in 10 or 20 years time. If the proposed international carbon trading scheme has its intended effect, coal-fired electricity will become much less economic and therefore the value of those power stations may decline substantially in the medium to long term. Unless it divests itself of those assets now, the Government may lose its chance to extract real money from them.
A second concern is the financial position of the State of NSW. It was only in the last financial year that the revenue from the Goods and Services Tax passed on to the State by the Federal Government exceeded that expected from the State taxes abolished in 2000 when the GST was introduced. NSW has not had any significant GST windfall and the Howard Government ensured that none of the states shared in the enormous resources-boom revenues accruing to the Commonwealth over the same period.
Related to this is the highly elastic nature of revenues directly levied by the NSW Government. Almost two-thirds of these tax receipts comprise property transfer duties and land and payroll taxes which are heavily reliant on the level of economic activity, particularly of the property market. The NSW property market has gone off the boil over the last three years and although revenues have not declined as yet, there is a possibility they may decline very significantly with interest rates increasing, potentially stalling activity.
The Government is probably also worried that the expected transfusion of funds to the States from the Rudd Government will not materialise because of the need to maintain Federal surpluses to take the pressure off interest rates.
A final worry for the Iemma Government is the need for substantially increased capital spending in NSW. Critics, including the Property Council of Australia, have criticised the level of infrastructure spending in NSW over the last half century under all governments. The Iemma Government has made a fine start over the last two years with large increases in such expenditure, but with health, education and transport crying out for further public spending, depreciating assets like power stations are prime candidates for sale, if only to allow room for further infrastructure spending.
Both sides now await the impact statement from the committee considering the privatisation, headed by former Labor Premier Barrie Unsworth, and including MPs, trade union officials, environmentalist Jeff Angel, UnitingCare Director, Harry Herbert and two of the State's most senior public servants.
Meanwhile, NSW Labor's Finance and Economic Policy Committee, which I chair, is shortly to deal with resolutions from party branches on the issue, almost all of which, I predict, will oppose the sell-off. Our committee will report on the issue to NSW Labor's Annual Conference in May and we are not sure we are looking forward to it!
My view, which may or may not be shared by other committee members, is that the Government has adhered to party policy - albeit belatedly - by ensuring that the Unsworth Committee assesses the privatisation proposal. The Platform does not rule out privatisation in any industry and impliedly leaves the decision in a particular case up to the government, guided by the impact statement of its appointed committee.
It is not the role of our Policy Committee to make the Government's decision for it, although we may express a view to the forthcoming Annual Conference, which may or may not adopt it.
If an Annual Conference resolution supports or opposes a privatisation proposal but does not change the Platform, it is not binding on the Government. In the present case, the Conference set the policy years ago and the Government has followed it.
The Party has no role in directing Executive Government action when the Government is acting consistently with the Platform. The Conference can hardly change policy retrospectively after the Government has made a policy-based decision. There is therefore no sense in expulsions, or sustained acrimony, by either side over this issue.
The Electrical Trades Union's motto is Power is Unity. I prefer Unity is Power.
Discuss this article
To participate in the discussion Sign in or Register
Homerjunior 20/02/08 4:17PM
If you want Power Stations of the calibre of the Bathurst Hospital debacle, sure, why not privatise? People will miss their power. They only miss a hospital when they’re sick.
juswhe 21/02/08 1:58PM
Doesn’t the Platform say there will be no electricity privatisation until their is a consensus in the Party supporting such a move?
If so, that certainly suggests the Gov’t has absolutely defied the Platform.
GraemeF 22/02/08 4:36PM
The Iemma government are a bunch of incompetant mongrels. Little better than the recently ousted federal Liberals and displaying the same amount of arrogance and hubris. I pity anyone who joined the Labor Party on the basis of its past because the right wing of Sussex Street have bastardised a fine organisation.
If you disagree then I suggest that like every crime you should follow the money. Who donates it to them and who pays them after they leave politics and then tell me again about the ‘workers’ party.
Anti privatisation members of the ALP, this is what we are up against!
Jenny Haines
Unity is Power
By Kirk McKenzie, New Matilda
20.02.08
The Iemma Government's plan to privatise the State's electricity has divided the Labor Party and sidelined a vital support base, writes NSW ALP insider, Kirk McKenzie
Unity within the Australian Labor Party can lead to great things. During last year's election campaign, disputes within Labor's parliamentary and organisational wings, trade union affiliates, local branches and even factions were suspended. As a participant in some of these disputes in the past, it was good to see the result of everyone pulling in the same direction - the Rudd Government.
Alas, after the November poll, the incentive to co-operate receded and less than three weeks later conflict erupted over the electricity privatisation plans of the NSW Labor Government under Morris Iemma.
In essence, those plans are to lease out to the private sector the State's power stations, all of which are currently Government owned, although two have already been leased out. The Iemma Government also intends to sell off the retail arms of the electricity industry, which it also owns, but retain the "poles and wires" - the grid itself.
NSW Treasurer Michael Costa argues that this is necessary to avoid the State having to bear the cost of a new baseload power station which he says will be needed by approximately 2014. His argument goes that if the generators are (partially) privatised, a new market for electricity generation will be created and with it the incentive for the private sector to fund, build and operate the new power station.
Some of the Government's critics argue that there will be no net economic benefit in the sale and with the adoption of appropriate energy efficiency measures, a new baseload power station will not be necessary until 2020 or later. Perhaps the principal critic is Bernie Riordan, the Secretary of the Electrical Trades Union, who is also NSW Labor's President. Among other things, he is worried about the jobs of his members under new, private sector management. Any job losses would also affect his union.
The Government disputes that economic benefits will not accrue to the State and has attempted to counter the unions' argument by pointing out that in Victoria, where the whole industry was privatised some years ago, staffing ratios under privatised generation are now roughly the same as in the NSW power industry. The Iemma Government has also promised to guarantee the jobs of the workers affected, and to further sweeten the deal by offering compensation averaging $40,000 to the affected workers, even though their jobs are to be secured.
So why all the heat of recent weeks between the Government and the unions?
Partly it is a matter of process. NSW Labor party policy, often referred to as "the Platform", says that a privatisation proposal must be considered on a case by case basis. It prescribes that the Government appoint a committee to prepare an impact statement on any proposal, guided by 12 separate criteria. These criteria were added to the Platform some years ago after lengthy negotiations between various stakeholders. Part of the problem is that the Government announced its decision before the committee had even met to consider the matter.
The unions and the Party's local branches, which are traditionally suspicious of privatisation proposals, were unimpressed by this, particularly after both groups worked hard to re-elect the Iemma Government in March last year, and even harder in the lead up to Federal Labor's victory in November. Branch and union activists now claim a greater degree of ownership of the Party and its direction, because of that heavy and vital commitment.
The dispute has been worsened by personality clashes between the major participants. Costa, the Trostskyite turned Labor right-winger, would concede that he is not a natural diplomat. He occupies a role once filled by Paul Keating in the federal sphere - that of policy battering ram. As such he seems unaffected by his former role as Secretary of Unions NSW before entering Parliament.
Riordan on the other hand, is the son of Joe Riordan, a respected Whitlam Government Minister and former union Secretary. Bernie has been steeped in Labor politics all his life. He knows that both the NSW and Federal Labor Governments needed and received the strongest support of the trade unions and branches last year and he is determined to ensure that their views are not ignored in this debate.
The Iemma Government has other concerns. One is the likely value of the State's coal-fired power stations in 10 or 20 years time. If the proposed international carbon trading scheme has its intended effect, coal-fired electricity will become much less economic and therefore the value of those power stations may decline substantially in the medium to long term. Unless it divests itself of those assets now, the Government may lose its chance to extract real money from them.
A second concern is the financial position of the State of NSW. It was only in the last financial year that the revenue from the Goods and Services Tax passed on to the State by the Federal Government exceeded that expected from the State taxes abolished in 2000 when the GST was introduced. NSW has not had any significant GST windfall and the Howard Government ensured that none of the states shared in the enormous resources-boom revenues accruing to the Commonwealth over the same period.
Related to this is the highly elastic nature of revenues directly levied by the NSW Government. Almost two-thirds of these tax receipts comprise property transfer duties and land and payroll taxes which are heavily reliant on the level of economic activity, particularly of the property market. The NSW property market has gone off the boil over the last three years and although revenues have not declined as yet, there is a possibility they may decline very significantly with interest rates increasing, potentially stalling activity.
The Government is probably also worried that the expected transfusion of funds to the States from the Rudd Government will not materialise because of the need to maintain Federal surpluses to take the pressure off interest rates.
A final worry for the Iemma Government is the need for substantially increased capital spending in NSW. Critics, including the Property Council of Australia, have criticised the level of infrastructure spending in NSW over the last half century under all governments. The Iemma Government has made a fine start over the last two years with large increases in such expenditure, but with health, education and transport crying out for further public spending, depreciating assets like power stations are prime candidates for sale, if only to allow room for further infrastructure spending.
Both sides now await the impact statement from the committee considering the privatisation, headed by former Labor Premier Barrie Unsworth, and including MPs, trade union officials, environmentalist Jeff Angel, UnitingCare Director, Harry Herbert and two of the State's most senior public servants.
Meanwhile, NSW Labor's Finance and Economic Policy Committee, which I chair, is shortly to deal with resolutions from party branches on the issue, almost all of which, I predict, will oppose the sell-off. Our committee will report on the issue to NSW Labor's Annual Conference in May and we are not sure we are looking forward to it!
My view, which may or may not be shared by other committee members, is that the Government has adhered to party policy - albeit belatedly - by ensuring that the Unsworth Committee assesses the privatisation proposal. The Platform does not rule out privatisation in any industry and impliedly leaves the decision in a particular case up to the government, guided by the impact statement of its appointed committee.
It is not the role of our Policy Committee to make the Government's decision for it, although we may express a view to the forthcoming Annual Conference, which may or may not adopt it.
If an Annual Conference resolution supports or opposes a privatisation proposal but does not change the Platform, it is not binding on the Government. In the present case, the Conference set the policy years ago and the Government has followed it.
The Party has no role in directing Executive Government action when the Government is acting consistently with the Platform. The Conference can hardly change policy retrospectively after the Government has made a policy-based decision. There is therefore no sense in expulsions, or sustained acrimony, by either side over this issue.
The Electrical Trades Union's motto is Power is Unity. I prefer Unity is Power.
Discuss this article
To participate in the discussion Sign in or Register
Homerjunior 20/02/08 4:17PM
If you want Power Stations of the calibre of the Bathurst Hospital debacle, sure, why not privatise? People will miss their power. They only miss a hospital when they’re sick.
juswhe 21/02/08 1:58PM
Doesn’t the Platform say there will be no electricity privatisation until their is a consensus in the Party supporting such a move?
If so, that certainly suggests the Gov’t has absolutely defied the Platform.
GraemeF 22/02/08 4:36PM
The Iemma government are a bunch of incompetant mongrels. Little better than the recently ousted federal Liberals and displaying the same amount of arrogance and hubris. I pity anyone who joined the Labor Party on the basis of its past because the right wing of Sussex Street have bastardised a fine organisation.
If you disagree then I suggest that like every crime you should follow the money. Who donates it to them and who pays them after they leave politics and then tell me again about the ‘workers’ party.
IEMMA BANS WORKERS FROM PROTEST
Red News Readers,
How else are they going to keep the numbers down so they can say the Rally wasn't a success?
Jenny Haines
Iemma bans workers from protest
By Simon Benson, dtm
February 23, 2008 12:00am
PREMIER Morris Iemma has slapped a ban on the state's 300,000 public servants attending a planned protest against electricity privatisation outside Parliament House on Tuesday.
Director-general of the Premier's Department Robyn Kruk sent a circular to all state public service managers telling them to dock the pay of any worker who took the day off to protest.
In a move compared to the Howard government's attempts to thwart opposition to WorkChoices, the circular included a ban on lunch breaks longer than one hour, sick leave without a medical certificate, and flex time.
Unions NSW has organised a rally to picket Parliament House on Tuesday when MPs return for the first sitting day of the year.
All public servants have been encouraged to attend the rally, but only state-employed workers in the electricity sector are planning to conduct an official "stop work".
However, fearing many MPs may be pressured to hold the picket line, Mr Iemma has tried to kill off the rally by threatening to take action against any public servant who attends.
"Employees who absent themselves from work within the core times on February 26 . . . will not be paid for any time lost," Ms Kruk warned in the memo sent to all agencies.
"Please ensure that there are arrangements in place to ensure that staff who are absent from the workplace without approval are not paid for the period of the absence. This circular applies to all public service departments."
Anyone who failed to show up at work for the day would be reported to management so their pay could be docked.
But the unions warned legal action could follow.
"These are the types of intimidatory tactics which the Howard government used against federal public servants," Unions NSW secretary John Robertson said.
"The Federal Court ruled these tactics were illegal."
Public Service Association (PSA) general secretary John Cahill wrote to Ms Kruk telling her to correct her original memo because it was based on a false premise that a general stop work had been called.
How else are they going to keep the numbers down so they can say the Rally wasn't a success?
Jenny Haines
Iemma bans workers from protest
By Simon Benson, dtm
February 23, 2008 12:00am
PREMIER Morris Iemma has slapped a ban on the state's 300,000 public servants attending a planned protest against electricity privatisation outside Parliament House on Tuesday.
Director-general of the Premier's Department Robyn Kruk sent a circular to all state public service managers telling them to dock the pay of any worker who took the day off to protest.
In a move compared to the Howard government's attempts to thwart opposition to WorkChoices, the circular included a ban on lunch breaks longer than one hour, sick leave without a medical certificate, and flex time.
Unions NSW has organised a rally to picket Parliament House on Tuesday when MPs return for the first sitting day of the year.
All public servants have been encouraged to attend the rally, but only state-employed workers in the electricity sector are planning to conduct an official "stop work".
However, fearing many MPs may be pressured to hold the picket line, Mr Iemma has tried to kill off the rally by threatening to take action against any public servant who attends.
"Employees who absent themselves from work within the core times on February 26 . . . will not be paid for any time lost," Ms Kruk warned in the memo sent to all agencies.
"Please ensure that there are arrangements in place to ensure that staff who are absent from the workplace without approval are not paid for the period of the absence. This circular applies to all public service departments."
Anyone who failed to show up at work for the day would be reported to management so their pay could be docked.
But the unions warned legal action could follow.
"These are the types of intimidatory tactics which the Howard government used against federal public servants," Unions NSW secretary John Robertson said.
"The Federal Court ruled these tactics were illegal."
Public Service Association (PSA) general secretary John Cahill wrote to Ms Kruk telling her to correct her original memo because it was based on a false premise that a general stop work had been called.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
RECORD ASBESTOS PAYOUT
Landmark asbestos compo claim won
By Nicolas Perpitch, dtm
February 19, 2008 08:19pm
A PERTH motor mechanic has been awarded $840,000 compensation for exposure to asbestos in brake linings while working at two Ford car dealerships.
Antonino Lo Presti, 58, who suffers from serious fibrosis and requires constant oxygen assistance, has become the first mechanic in Australia to win a successful negligence verdict against a car company for exposure to asbestos.
His lawyer, Michael Magazanik from Slater and Gordon, said today's judgment in the Western Australian Supreme Court could open the way for thousands of other mechanics who suffer from asbestos related diseases.
"This decision will set a precedent because it's the first time a mechanic has succeeded against a car manufacturer in this country and there are literally thousands of mechanics who have been exposed to asbestos while working with brakes," he said.
Between 1970 and 1987 Mr Lo Presti used compressed air to blow out the brake drums and handle asbestos brake linings when brakes were serviced or changed.
"It would generate large amounts of dust containing asbestos which would blow up into my face and stick to my clothes and hair," Mr Lo Presti said in his witness statement to the court.
"It would cause a cloud or haze in the air and fall down in the area where I was working."
The Sicilian-born Mr Lo Presti was diagnosed with asbestosis and pleural disease in July 2001.
But the Ford Motor Company of Australia argued it was not asbestosis but a pulmonary fibrosis of unknown cause.
Ford admitted it knew by 1970 that exposure to certain asbestos fibres could cause asbestos related diseases but denied it knew Mr Lo Presti's type of work could increase the risk.
Mr Lo Presti said while he worked for Ford he was not aware of the asbestos in the brake linings or the danger it posed.
Justice Andrew Beech today ruled Ford ought to have known that if no protective measures were taken the asbestos fibres released from the brake linings could cause life threatening injury.
Justice Beech said Ford owed its mechanics a duty of care and should have warned them of the dangers.
An emotional Mr Lo Presti today expressed his relief that the five years of courts battles were at an end.
"Now I can go on with my life," he tearfully said.
His wife, Connie Lo Presti, worked three jobs, seven days a week after he became sick and could not work.
She said she could now slow down and spend more time at home caring for her husband.
Asbestos Diseases Society of Australia president Robert Cojakozic said the matter should have been resolved earlier.
"He is at the end stage of a respiratory disease, he life is precarious. It could be a matter of months that Mr Lo Presti has got left," Mr Cojakozic said.
Ford was being sought for comment.
By Nicolas Perpitch, dtm
February 19, 2008 08:19pm
A PERTH motor mechanic has been awarded $840,000 compensation for exposure to asbestos in brake linings while working at two Ford car dealerships.
Antonino Lo Presti, 58, who suffers from serious fibrosis and requires constant oxygen assistance, has become the first mechanic in Australia to win a successful negligence verdict against a car company for exposure to asbestos.
His lawyer, Michael Magazanik from Slater and Gordon, said today's judgment in the Western Australian Supreme Court could open the way for thousands of other mechanics who suffer from asbestos related diseases.
"This decision will set a precedent because it's the first time a mechanic has succeeded against a car manufacturer in this country and there are literally thousands of mechanics who have been exposed to asbestos while working with brakes," he said.
Between 1970 and 1987 Mr Lo Presti used compressed air to blow out the brake drums and handle asbestos brake linings when brakes were serviced or changed.
"It would generate large amounts of dust containing asbestos which would blow up into my face and stick to my clothes and hair," Mr Lo Presti said in his witness statement to the court.
"It would cause a cloud or haze in the air and fall down in the area where I was working."
The Sicilian-born Mr Lo Presti was diagnosed with asbestosis and pleural disease in July 2001.
But the Ford Motor Company of Australia argued it was not asbestosis but a pulmonary fibrosis of unknown cause.
Ford admitted it knew by 1970 that exposure to certain asbestos fibres could cause asbestos related diseases but denied it knew Mr Lo Presti's type of work could increase the risk.
Mr Lo Presti said while he worked for Ford he was not aware of the asbestos in the brake linings or the danger it posed.
Justice Andrew Beech today ruled Ford ought to have known that if no protective measures were taken the asbestos fibres released from the brake linings could cause life threatening injury.
Justice Beech said Ford owed its mechanics a duty of care and should have warned them of the dangers.
An emotional Mr Lo Presti today expressed his relief that the five years of courts battles were at an end.
"Now I can go on with my life," he tearfully said.
His wife, Connie Lo Presti, worked three jobs, seven days a week after he became sick and could not work.
She said she could now slow down and spend more time at home caring for her husband.
Asbestos Diseases Society of Australia president Robert Cojakozic said the matter should have been resolved earlier.
"He is at the end stage of a respiratory disease, he life is precarious. It could be a matter of months that Mr Lo Presti has got left," Mr Cojakozic said.
Ford was being sought for comment.
CASTRO RETIRES
Red News Readers,
Cuba never was a socialist paradise but you have got to admire a man who lived to retire when the Americans for the last 50 years have spent a good part of that time trying to kill him, and overthrow the Cuban State. When you look at Cuba you can see old cars in the streets and old buildings but the children go to school and the health system functions for all. You don't see the chaos and decay of other Carribean, Latin American and South American countries that have been allies of the United States. Even if there were what George Bush calls free and fair elections, I wonder how Cubans would vote?
Jenny Haines
Castro declares his reign at an end
Latest related coverage
Bush welcomes Castro departure
Video: Castro steps down
GALLERY: Fidel Castro's 50 years of revolution
After half a century in power Fidel Castro steps down as Cuba's president.
February 20, 2008,smh
THE ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro has announced he will not return to lead the country, retiring as head of state almost 50 years after he seized power in an armed revolution.
"I neither will aspire to nor will I accept - I repeat - I neither will aspire to nor will I accept, the position of president of the council of state and commander-in-chief," he wrote in a message published yesterday in the online version of the newspaper Granma.
Dr Castro, 81, is the world's longest-serving head of government and has been the leader of the Americas' only communist country since he seized power in a 1959 revolution. The only heads of state to have served longer are the King of Thailand, Bhumibol Adulyadej (since 1946) and the Queen, Elizabeth II, (since 1952).
El Comandante (the Chief), as Dr Castro is known, outlasted nine US presidents, and survived the fall of the Soviet Union - for long his main benefactor - the end of communism in Eastern Europe, as well as numerous attempts to assassinate or oust him.
At a summit of South American leaders in Argentina in 2006, he said: "I'm really happy to reach 80. I never expected it, not least having a neighbour - the greatest power in the world - trying to kill me every day."
Anti-globalisation activists saw the leftist firebrand as a hero, along with revolutionary Ernesto "Che" Guevara, his Argentine-born comrade-in-arms.
But in his last interview, in December, he said his duty was "not to cling to office", indicating for the first time that he might step down before death. Dr Castro temporarily handed power to his brother, Raul, in July 2006 after undergoing stomach surgery. Since then his public appearances have been rare.
A new book, Without Fidel by the CBS correspondent Ann Louise Bardach, concludes that Raul Castro, who is 76 and has been in charge since July, may prove to be the leader who brings Cuba out of decades of isolation.
The book says: "A few weeks after Fidel Castro's surgery, his son, Antonio Castro, an orthopaedic surgeon and the doctor for Cuba's national baseball team, was more forthcoming with some of his foreign counterparts at an international baseball event.
"Asked solicitously about his father's health, the amiable Antonio shook his head sadly, and said: 'What my old man has is insurmountable."'
Since Raul took the reins of power, some dissidents have been released from prison and there have been discreet overtures towards the US.
Some Western diplomats believe the younger Castro may follow a similar path to Vietnam, where markets have been gradually opened by communist rulers, although there is scepticism about this in the US.
Dr Castro was until yesterday the leader of one of the world's last communist states.
He projected the persona of a romantic, bearded revolutionary dressed in crumpled military fatigues. Yet, for all the romanticism associated with his regime, and notwithstanding agrarian reforms and achievements with universal education and medical services, his one-party communist state tolerated no dissent and fell into near economic ruin.
Under his rule jails have reportedly held up to 50,000 political prisoners, and about 1.7 million Cubans fled into exile.
Dr Castro's fierce nationalism and determination to keep Cuba independent of US economic and political control led to the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962. The world was dragged to the brink of nuclear war when the Soviet Union moved to install tactical nuclear missiles in Cuba, resulting in a US blockade.
The world held its breath before the US president, John Kennedy, and the Soviet leader, Nikita Khrushchev, reached a compromise: the Soviet Union abandoned plans to base nuclear-armed missiles in Cuba and the US agreed not to invade Cuba.
The loss of billions of dollars in subsidies from Moscow after the Soviet collapse plunged Cuba into a crisis in the early 1990s.
Widespread hardship sowed discontent that triggered a renewed exodus of tens of thousands to Florida, 145 kilometres away. The crisis forced Dr Castro to open Cuba to foreign investment and tourism, and legalise the currency of his enemy, the US dollar.
Telegraph, London, and agencies
Cuba never was a socialist paradise but you have got to admire a man who lived to retire when the Americans for the last 50 years have spent a good part of that time trying to kill him, and overthrow the Cuban State. When you look at Cuba you can see old cars in the streets and old buildings but the children go to school and the health system functions for all. You don't see the chaos and decay of other Carribean, Latin American and South American countries that have been allies of the United States. Even if there were what George Bush calls free and fair elections, I wonder how Cubans would vote?
Jenny Haines
Castro declares his reign at an end
Latest related coverage
Bush welcomes Castro departure
Video: Castro steps down
GALLERY: Fidel Castro's 50 years of revolution
After half a century in power Fidel Castro steps down as Cuba's president.
February 20, 2008,smh
THE ailing Cuban leader Fidel Castro has announced he will not return to lead the country, retiring as head of state almost 50 years after he seized power in an armed revolution.
"I neither will aspire to nor will I accept - I repeat - I neither will aspire to nor will I accept, the position of president of the council of state and commander-in-chief," he wrote in a message published yesterday in the online version of the newspaper Granma.
Dr Castro, 81, is the world's longest-serving head of government and has been the leader of the Americas' only communist country since he seized power in a 1959 revolution. The only heads of state to have served longer are the King of Thailand, Bhumibol Adulyadej (since 1946) and the Queen, Elizabeth II, (since 1952).
El Comandante (the Chief), as Dr Castro is known, outlasted nine US presidents, and survived the fall of the Soviet Union - for long his main benefactor - the end of communism in Eastern Europe, as well as numerous attempts to assassinate or oust him.
At a summit of South American leaders in Argentina in 2006, he said: "I'm really happy to reach 80. I never expected it, not least having a neighbour - the greatest power in the world - trying to kill me every day."
Anti-globalisation activists saw the leftist firebrand as a hero, along with revolutionary Ernesto "Che" Guevara, his Argentine-born comrade-in-arms.
But in his last interview, in December, he said his duty was "not to cling to office", indicating for the first time that he might step down before death. Dr Castro temporarily handed power to his brother, Raul, in July 2006 after undergoing stomach surgery. Since then his public appearances have been rare.
A new book, Without Fidel by the CBS correspondent Ann Louise Bardach, concludes that Raul Castro, who is 76 and has been in charge since July, may prove to be the leader who brings Cuba out of decades of isolation.
The book says: "A few weeks after Fidel Castro's surgery, his son, Antonio Castro, an orthopaedic surgeon and the doctor for Cuba's national baseball team, was more forthcoming with some of his foreign counterparts at an international baseball event.
"Asked solicitously about his father's health, the amiable Antonio shook his head sadly, and said: 'What my old man has is insurmountable."'
Since Raul took the reins of power, some dissidents have been released from prison and there have been discreet overtures towards the US.
Some Western diplomats believe the younger Castro may follow a similar path to Vietnam, where markets have been gradually opened by communist rulers, although there is scepticism about this in the US.
Dr Castro was until yesterday the leader of one of the world's last communist states.
He projected the persona of a romantic, bearded revolutionary dressed in crumpled military fatigues. Yet, for all the romanticism associated with his regime, and notwithstanding agrarian reforms and achievements with universal education and medical services, his one-party communist state tolerated no dissent and fell into near economic ruin.
Under his rule jails have reportedly held up to 50,000 political prisoners, and about 1.7 million Cubans fled into exile.
Dr Castro's fierce nationalism and determination to keep Cuba independent of US economic and political control led to the Cuban missile crisis in October 1962. The world was dragged to the brink of nuclear war when the Soviet Union moved to install tactical nuclear missiles in Cuba, resulting in a US blockade.
The world held its breath before the US president, John Kennedy, and the Soviet leader, Nikita Khrushchev, reached a compromise: the Soviet Union abandoned plans to base nuclear-armed missiles in Cuba and the US agreed not to invade Cuba.
The loss of billions of dollars in subsidies from Moscow after the Soviet collapse plunged Cuba into a crisis in the early 1990s.
Widespread hardship sowed discontent that triggered a renewed exodus of tens of thousands to Florida, 145 kilometres away. The crisis forced Dr Castro to open Cuba to foreign investment and tourism, and legalise the currency of his enemy, the US dollar.
Telegraph, London, and agencies
EVANS: I WILL NOT PLAY GOD!
Red News Readers,
This has got to be a first - a Minister saying he has too much power!! But good on him, undoing the centralisation of power that was created to administer the cruelties of the Howard Government,
Jenny Haines
I should not play God: Evans
Mark Metherell, smh
February 20, 2008
THE Immigration Minister, Chris Evans, is rethinking his godlike sway over the fate of would-be immigrants whose appeals pour into his office at the rate of more than 11 a day.
Pleas for ministerial intervention from refugees and others whose requests to settle in Australia have been rejected by officialdom have soared to more than 4000 a year, more than 10 times the level of 12 years ago.
"I have formed the view that I have too much power," Senator Evans told a Senate estimates committee yesterday. "I think the [Immigration and Citizenship] Act is unlike any other act I have seen in terms of the power given to the minister to make decisions about individual cases.
"I am uncomfortable with that, not just because of concern about playing God, but also because of the lack of transparency and accountability for those decisions and the lack in some cases of any appeal rights against those decisions."
Senator Evans said he believed the ministerial intervention powers were established to be used in rare cases, but had now become "very much the norm".
Intervention by the minister may be sought by those who have exhausted their rights before the Refugee Review Tribunal or the Migration Review Tribunal. Senator Evans said many cases involved difficult decisions such as balancing the rights of children and those with a criminal history. There were "no easy solutions".
He has commissioned a former Victorian public servant, Elizabeth Proust, to advise him on his powers. Senator Evans also reported on the resolution of the cases of seven Burmese and 82 Sri Lankans apprehended under the previous government and sent to Nauru as part of the now abandoned Pacific solution.
He said the "discredited" policy had cost taxpayers $300 million and "ultimately saw the majority of refugees who were held offshore end up in Australia".
Having announced a review of the citizenship test introduced last year, Senator Evans said he was also moving to quickly settle 247 cases of unlawful detention, as identified by the Ombudsman.
The president of the Refugee Council of Australia, John Gibson, said yesterday that there had been concerns about the use of ministerial powers, and the review was welcome.
This has got to be a first - a Minister saying he has too much power!! But good on him, undoing the centralisation of power that was created to administer the cruelties of the Howard Government,
Jenny Haines
I should not play God: Evans
Mark Metherell, smh
February 20, 2008
THE Immigration Minister, Chris Evans, is rethinking his godlike sway over the fate of would-be immigrants whose appeals pour into his office at the rate of more than 11 a day.
Pleas for ministerial intervention from refugees and others whose requests to settle in Australia have been rejected by officialdom have soared to more than 4000 a year, more than 10 times the level of 12 years ago.
"I have formed the view that I have too much power," Senator Evans told a Senate estimates committee yesterday. "I think the [Immigration and Citizenship] Act is unlike any other act I have seen in terms of the power given to the minister to make decisions about individual cases.
"I am uncomfortable with that, not just because of concern about playing God, but also because of the lack of transparency and accountability for those decisions and the lack in some cases of any appeal rights against those decisions."
Senator Evans said he believed the ministerial intervention powers were established to be used in rare cases, but had now become "very much the norm".
Intervention by the minister may be sought by those who have exhausted their rights before the Refugee Review Tribunal or the Migration Review Tribunal. Senator Evans said many cases involved difficult decisions such as balancing the rights of children and those with a criminal history. There were "no easy solutions".
He has commissioned a former Victorian public servant, Elizabeth Proust, to advise him on his powers. Senator Evans also reported on the resolution of the cases of seven Burmese and 82 Sri Lankans apprehended under the previous government and sent to Nauru as part of the now abandoned Pacific solution.
He said the "discredited" policy had cost taxpayers $300 million and "ultimately saw the majority of refugees who were held offshore end up in Australia".
Having announced a review of the citizenship test introduced last year, Senator Evans said he was also moving to quickly settle 247 cases of unlawful detention, as identified by the Ombudsman.
The president of the Refugee Council of Australia, John Gibson, said yesterday that there had been concerns about the use of ministerial powers, and the review was welcome.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
THE LIBS DIDN'T UNDERSTAND ???
From Crikey 19.2.08:
Last night's edition of Four Corners was instructive.
"Most cabinet ministers in the former Howard government did not realise that workers could be worse off under Work Choices, former workplace relations minister Joe Hockey says."
Other things the Howard Cabinet didn't understand:
That innocent people might die if we helped invade Iraq.
That putting asylum seekers in high security detention could be construed as harsh and inhuman treatment.
That the Australian Wheat Board was giving lots of money to Saddam Hussein.
That there would never, ever, be a GST.
That we could say sorry to black people.
That the Australian flag was not a party political symbol.
That climate change was a bit of a worry really and quite possibly our fault.
That Don Bradman couldn't help.
Last night's edition of Four Corners was instructive.
"Most cabinet ministers in the former Howard government did not realise that workers could be worse off under Work Choices, former workplace relations minister Joe Hockey says."
Other things the Howard Cabinet didn't understand:
That innocent people might die if we helped invade Iraq.
That putting asylum seekers in high security detention could be construed as harsh and inhuman treatment.
That the Australian Wheat Board was giving lots of money to Saddam Hussein.
That there would never, ever, be a GST.
That we could say sorry to black people.
That the Australian flag was not a party political symbol.
That climate change was a bit of a worry really and quite possibly our fault.
That Don Bradman couldn't help.
ZIMBABWE INFLATION TRIPLES
From Associated Press, 15 February
Zimbabwe inflation triples in December
By Angus Shaw
Harare - The official rate of annual inflation in Zimbabwe tripled in the space of one month to 66,212 percent in December, by far the highest in the world but less than half the rate calculated by independent analysts. The state Herald newspaper published the figures from the central bank Friday, showing a dramatic escalation from November's already dizzying rate of 24,470 percent. In early October, the state central statistical office gave official inflation at just below 8,000 percent. It then suspended its monthly updates on inflation because there was not enough in the shortage-stricken shops to calculate a regular basket of goods. The National Incomes and Prices Commission, the government's price control body, this week allowed sharp increases in the prices of the corn meal staple, sugar, bread and other basics in a bid to restore viable operations by producers and return the goods to empty shelves.
But the new prices were still roughly half the price demanded on the black market and were unlikely to guarantee regular supplies to food stores. Even the Herald predicted that "in most cases, the products will be available only immediately after the price increases" and would disappear again as production costs rise. Independent analysts estimate the real annual rate of inflation is closer to 150,000 percent. They cite supermarket receipts showing the price of chicken rose more than 236,000 percent to 15 million Zimbabwe dollars, or about $2.15 for 2.2 pounds between January 2007 and January 2008. Zimbabwe, a former regional breadbasket, is facing acute shortages of food, hard currency, gasoline and most basic goods in an economic meltdown blamed on disruptions in the agriculture-based economy after the often-violent seizures of thousands of white-owned commercial farms began in 2000.
Zimbabwe inflation triples in December
By Angus Shaw
Harare - The official rate of annual inflation in Zimbabwe tripled in the space of one month to 66,212 percent in December, by far the highest in the world but less than half the rate calculated by independent analysts. The state Herald newspaper published the figures from the central bank Friday, showing a dramatic escalation from November's already dizzying rate of 24,470 percent. In early October, the state central statistical office gave official inflation at just below 8,000 percent. It then suspended its monthly updates on inflation because there was not enough in the shortage-stricken shops to calculate a regular basket of goods. The National Incomes and Prices Commission, the government's price control body, this week allowed sharp increases in the prices of the corn meal staple, sugar, bread and other basics in a bid to restore viable operations by producers and return the goods to empty shelves.
But the new prices were still roughly half the price demanded on the black market and were unlikely to guarantee regular supplies to food stores. Even the Herald predicted that "in most cases, the products will be available only immediately after the price increases" and would disappear again as production costs rise. Independent analysts estimate the real annual rate of inflation is closer to 150,000 percent. They cite supermarket receipts showing the price of chicken rose more than 236,000 percent to 15 million Zimbabwe dollars, or about $2.15 for 2.2 pounds between January 2007 and January 2008. Zimbabwe, a former regional breadbasket, is facing acute shortages of food, hard currency, gasoline and most basic goods in an economic meltdown blamed on disruptions in the agriculture-based economy after the often-violent seizures of thousands of white-owned commercial farms began in 2000.
LIBS BACK OFF ON AWAs
Red News Readers,
Rudd's bluff worked!! The Libs are backing off big time!! They know that to face a double dissolution election now, would be annihilation for them,
Jenny Haines
Coalition makes 'U-turn' on AWAs
February 19, 2008 - 1:21PM, smh
The federal coalition will not oppose the passage of legislation dismantling the Howard government's workplace laws through the House of Representatives.
Opposition workplace relations spokeswoman Julie Bishop said the position had been endorsed unanimously by the shadow cabinet and the joint party room.
"The coalition will not oppose the passage of Labor's workplace relations bill introduced on the 13th of February through the house," she told reporters.
Ms Bishop said the legislation had already been referred to a Senate committee.
"I can't pre-empt the Senate committee but given what the coalition position is in the house, you can have an expectation that there will be a similar position in the Senate, subject to the Senate inquiry."
Ms Bishop said she will propose two amendments to Labor's bill to ensure it provided both fairness and flexibility in the workplace.
Firstly, the federal opposition would move to extend the expiry date of new individual contracts directly negotiated between employees and employers, she said.
"The amendment I propose to move in the house is that the nominal expiry date of Labor's individual agreements be extended to five years," Ms Bishop said.
"This will give certainty to employers and employees, particularly those that are involved in longer term projects, as well as enable Labor to move more quickly on its substantive legislation to set up its new regime."
Labor's no disadvantage test would apply to the new individual contracts, Ms Bishop said.
© 2008 AAP
Rudd's bluff worked!! The Libs are backing off big time!! They know that to face a double dissolution election now, would be annihilation for them,
Jenny Haines
Coalition makes 'U-turn' on AWAs
February 19, 2008 - 1:21PM, smh
The federal coalition will not oppose the passage of legislation dismantling the Howard government's workplace laws through the House of Representatives.
Opposition workplace relations spokeswoman Julie Bishop said the position had been endorsed unanimously by the shadow cabinet and the joint party room.
"The coalition will not oppose the passage of Labor's workplace relations bill introduced on the 13th of February through the house," she told reporters.
Ms Bishop said the legislation had already been referred to a Senate committee.
"I can't pre-empt the Senate committee but given what the coalition position is in the house, you can have an expectation that there will be a similar position in the Senate, subject to the Senate inquiry."
Ms Bishop said she will propose two amendments to Labor's bill to ensure it provided both fairness and flexibility in the workplace.
Firstly, the federal opposition would move to extend the expiry date of new individual contracts directly negotiated between employees and employers, she said.
"The amendment I propose to move in the house is that the nominal expiry date of Labor's individual agreements be extended to five years," Ms Bishop said.
"This will give certainty to employers and employees, particularly those that are involved in longer term projects, as well as enable Labor to move more quickly on its substantive legislation to set up its new regime."
Labor's no disadvantage test would apply to the new individual contracts, Ms Bishop said.
© 2008 AAP
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
