Archive for the ‘ Uncategorized ’ Category

Ditch passports for ditch: NZ minister
AAP APRIL 23, 2015 5:07AM
Print
Save for later
NEW Zealand’s minister in charge of passports has invoked the spirit of Anzac in urging Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott to scrap them for New Zealanders and Australians crossing the ditch.

IN a pre-Anzac Day statement, Internal Affairs Minister Peter Dunne says the trans-Tasman relationship is “more akin to that of the distant cousin, rather than the close sibling we like to portray it as”.

Since New Zealand rejected the invitation to join the Commonwealth of Australia at the time of federation in 1901, there have been attempts to reinvigorate the relationship, most notably the Closer Economic Relations agreement of 1983, the United Future party leader says.
“But benign neglect has been the more general characteristic,” he said.
“And in such interactions as occur, the presumption is always of New Zealand being not quite on a par with New South Wales, rather than as an equal sovereign nation.
“The nadir most surely aside from the infamous underarm incident must have been the Keating government’s decision via a curt late night fax in the early 1990s to terminate consideration of a single aviation market.”
Mr Dunne says there are arguably no more similar peoples on earth than Australians and New Zealanders, who “genuinely like each other” despite all the rivalries.
As the Anzac spirit is invoked this weekend, he suggested marking the occasion by reinvigorating the Australia-New Zealand relationship.
“A practical starting point would be to allow our respective citizens free movement across our borders, without the need for a passport, as is increasingly the case in Europe,” he said.
“The spectacular memorial gift to grace Wellington’s Pukeahu park is one thing but, Mr Abbott, a move on passports would be a much more enduring recognition of the bond we say we forged at Gallipoli.”

How true, an excellent article from David Uren, the limits of Government are laid bare.

The Harper Competition Review has complied for us the obvious pathways towards real growth and prosperity. Blind Freddie could recite most of the suggested areas for serious reform, most of those reforms involve a long forgotten idea called “free enterprise.”

In particular the Harper report asks us to consider competition in planning and land land zoning. Don’t hold your breath, like all the other mooted reforms this will be consigned to the archives. Weak kneed polititians looking only to the next election will not wish to upset all the vested interests in this most important area of national economic life, as in all the others. The planners, land developers, the mortgage industry ie banks and a know it all ego mentality will see to that. The whole picture clouded and complicated because it is the states that have the major controls. As Richard said Deng Xiaoping had the right idea, free enterprise zones to start the ball rolling. But can anyone imagine a free enterprise zone in Canberra? One can only dream. But if it did happen it would soon spread, just like Joh’s decision to remove death taxes in QLD, many moons ago, spread quickly to the other states.

Sarah,

Because the livestock transaction form has been changed it was necessary to obtain a new book of forms, cost $40.

This I did by phone but only after I was required (blackmailed?) to recite “yes” to all nine questions as below in the forwarded email from “LPA AusMeat” whoever they are. Another Independent statutory Government business body?

This thoroughly impolite, humiliating and insulting procedure is no doubt being repeated to practically all livestock owners throughout Australia. What a great way to consolidate the view that big government has little respect for Australian producers.

Citizens should be not treated like potential criminals. This behaviour by Government is all too prevalent, similar also are the new incomprehensible and unworkable Part 61 licencing rules from CASA, but that’s another story.

Regards,

Sandy

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: <noreply@ausmeat.com.au>
Date: Thursday, April 2, 2015
Subject: LPA Commitment Confirmation – DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL
To: s…..

[A] LPA COMMITMENT CONFIRMATION

Attention: Alexander Reith,

The LPA Database has recently been updated by you and shows that as the authorised representative of Property Identification Code (PIC…………… that you have confirmed your commitment to ensuring that the requirements of being an LPA Accredited Producer are understood and met at all times.

A copy of the Declaration as agreed to by you is highlighted below for your records:

I understand that eligibility to use LPA National Vendor Declarations (LPA NVDs) is restricted to PICs that are accredited under the LPA Program;
I have read and understood the requirements of the LPA Program as described in the LPA Rules and Standards (as amended from time to time);
I will seek to ensure all persons with access to LPA NVDs for this PIC will comply with the requirements of the LPA Rules and Standards at all times;
I will ensure that all records required by LPA Administration and the LPA Rules and Standards are maintained, including auditable evidence to demonstrate compliance with the five (5) elements of the LPA Standards: Property Risk Assessment, Animal Treatment records, Agricultural Chemical Usage and Stockfeeds, Preparation of Livestock and Livestock Movements and Transactions;
I will provide access to LPA Administration to conduct random audits as required under the LPA program (irrespective of whether the business is a hobby farm, small/large operation, or is currently destocked);
I will take any corrective and preventive action as required under the LPA Rules and Standards;
I will cease using NVDs displaying the LPA logo if accreditation is withdrawn;
All information provided to LPA applicable to this PIC is correct to the best of my knowledge;
I will inform LPA Administration of all changes applicable to the LPA Accreditation of PIC ……….

[B] LPA LOGIN DETAILS

Your LPA Login Details are also highlighted below:

PIC:……….
User ID: ……..
Password: ….

[C] ORDERING NVDS

Have you considered ordering your future NVD orders online?
To order online go to lpa.ausmeat.com.au and login with your LPA User ID and password.

Alternatively, have you considered using the electronic versions of the NVD (eDECs). To register for the Producer eDEC program logon to your LPA user profile (http://www.ausmeat.com.au/lpa); select the Producer eDEC button and follow the prompts.

[D] ENQUIRIES

For all enquires forward an email to lpa@mla.com.au

General information about the LPA Program can be obtained from the following website http://www.mla.com.au/lpa.

DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL AS THIS IS AN UNATTENDED ADDRESS

Judith’s article tells us that there are several Commonwealth bodies doing the same thing. IGR from the Charter of Budget Honesty (aren’t governments honest anyway?), National Commission of Audit, Parliamentary Budget Office and I’ll bet the Taxation Office. What we need now is a new statutory body; the Office of Bureaucratic Enhanced Forecasting who will bring all the Government Forecasting strands together with its own research into the processes of manipulating the Future. Nirvana awaits.

Budget repair would be possible by curtailing expenditure on bureaucracy (Canberra pop. nearly 400,000). In addition taking the dead hand off private enterprise would spur growth. Accepting that governments should not be in business will be the problem even for the Liberals. Costello’s Future Fund was possible mainly because the world, read China, bought our minerals at inflated prices. The thought that it could be administered wisely by an expensive bureaucracy and polititians whose livelihoods do not depend on its success is laughable. This ridiculous Fund just deprived the general economy of money that would have been put to efficient use by private enterprise. We should add to our Constitution that Government will not engage in business.

M. Guehenno’s thoughtful concerns might well be heeded by Australian authorities. Disaffected youth, probably young testorterone fired men, in Australia pose the same risk. The haves and have not differentials are in plain view, these days in many ways the haves are supported by legislation. University controlled placements, a myriad of licences for all sorts of commerce from taxi work to carers. “Planning” restrictions reduce opportunities and create great costs to potential land ownership or start up business. We are truly overgoverned and there are consequences beyond the monetary when when free enterprise is shackled by minority groups winning claims for legislated exclusivity. With some 400,000 in Canberra (including Queanbeyan) in perhaps the “free” world’s most socialistic capital doing their level best to increase their good fortune at the expense of us subjects, little wonder some discontent at the bottom of heap. Let alone the burgeoning bureaucracies at state and local levels.

Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
C. S. Lewis
English essayist & juvenile novelist (1898 – 1963)

Je suis Charlie.

Surely in the modern world, a world of science and a world with considerable history, we should have some strong leads that indicate reasons for such extraordinary behaviour.  I hear that the profile of such young men is that they are second generation from migrant parents. The parents, probably having escaped the rigors of narrow and oppressive regimes, are apparently more secular in outlook. It is said the young terrorists don’t identify with the general populace, so why not? I believe we see similar behaviours in some groups of young people in Australia, those who see themselves as being on the outside of mainstream society. If we look to why this is so maybe we can ameliorate the problems. I hear a French commentator say that “these people should learn to understand the values of democracy.” This is a simplification that is quite understandable but goes absolutely nowhere if we wish to provide practical measures to create a more inclusive social framework. France is a country with a very rigid heirachy and exercises land use controls that would be the envy of a medieval monarch. So much so that that it is reputed that some 300,000 French citizens have migrated to England. The British environment being close to home and more friendly and flexible to business, more open to change. Not that the Brits would be a model of freedom in the vexed question of private land control.

When the Italian migrant flow slowed, in the 50s or 60s, we encouraged many Turks to come to Ausralia in company with many others unfamiliar to the majority. Affordable land and simple business procedures were factors that must have helped to integrate these great waves of migrants. In Houston Texas freedom of land use, just like it used to be in Australia, has resulted in true market prices which are around one third to half of comparable prices in Melbourne or Sydney.

Today we live at the mercy of a horde of planners and bureaucrats, in contrast to those days fifty odd years ago. These days there are many people, and not just migrants, who have little hope of owning their little piece of the country. No wonder they feel like outsiders. There is nothing, nothing that can compare with owning your own bit of dirt. Nothing is more hard-wired into the animal psyche. Even spiders guard their own little territorial spaces.

In so many ways it seems to me that our civilisation in the developed world has still to make huge improvements. The very tight land use controls being a good example of policies that continue with huge expense with little or no real objection to the enormous drawbacks. But then other examples abound, VicRoads persist with the extraordinarily difficult reverse parking test for no benefit except to the system employees. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) governs with a set of impossibly complicated rules that do nothing for the safety of flight, arguably it is a reverse outcome that results, and the system has smashed what was a thriving industry. Local government has grown itself into a  gargantuan machine that swallows a disproportionate amount of the public purse.

Much of excess government power owes its existance to our quaint adherence to the archaic notion that the monarch owns all land, where us subjects are allowed to hold it “freehold” unless government determines otherwise. Reading an adverse finding by the Administrative Appeals Tribunal of Australia, no. 424 (2014), the Tribunal states “the Applicants have demonstrated a lack of respect for the civil aviation laws and those whose professional responsibly it is to enforce them.” This  is symptomatic of  an authoritarian mindset, a mindset that pompously believes that government bodies must be respected. While we should abide by the law, respect for particular laws or bureaucrats is an entirely different matter. Note the respect between our law makers and their constant disrespect for laws enacted by their opponents. I wonder if the aforementioned AAT Tribunal would castigate Members of Parliament for such sins. Respect must be earned, and in the case of CASA and General Aviation the recent government safety regulation review demonstrated that there is more distrust than respect either way. If we are to proclaim the advantages of democracy then we’d better make sure that “a fair go” for all is a reality and not just a sentimental throw back to the greater freedoms that this country enjoyed before our governments realised how much power they could stealthily accumulate. Accumulate  without too much riot in the streets.

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance and part of that price is the cost of critical introspection of our personal beliefs, our laws and our government administrators.

John Lloyd looks for strong engagement by business as an antidote to over regulation. Business people are too busy keeping heads above water for there to be much hope of this. The only sure way forward is through legislation and attitude change, a new Thatcher type leadership. Richard makes a case that employment law is the major problem. Number one I would put government land use controls, that is lack of property rights due to our archaic model that has all the final land rights invested in the Crown. This then is the basis for unlimited government power and the all too pervasive attitude that officialdom displays towards us lowly subjects. This attitude well exampled recently in an AATA judgement where the Tribunal put down the applicant for failing to respect the government regulator. In this case the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, a body that has managed to destroy what should be a vibrant industry employing thousands.

Not difficult to agree with targeted welfare but the bigger question is how to grow the cake. This can only be done by free enterprise, in a framework of good governance as well as good policy. If government gets the settings for free enterprise right we could be the richest country in the world, readily able to have a first class welfare system, and better environmental outcomes. Neither of which is possible without prosperity.

There is one example where good governance could spur economic activity without taxpayer money. General Aviation (GA) has been bureaucratically strangled with the loss of thousands of jobs since Government created the autonomous Civil Aviation Safety Authority. This body, a law unto itself, is incapable of producing a rational set of rules of the air. Its been attempting to re-write the rules, as instructed by the Minister 25 years ago, and wasting millions of taxpayer dollars (it took NZ 5 years), and still not finished. Its made such a mess you can’t even get a flying lesson in the Nation’s capital, the last Canberra flying school gave up and closed it’s doors four years ago. Want jobs? Counter the closures in the car industry? Easy, let people get on with business.

We need all of us to work our democracy in better ways, engage with our MP’s personally and factor in the benefits of free enterprise in all future changes.