Speaking Freely

From Asia Times Online at http://www.atimes.com/
SPEAKING FREELY
Media fail to report for dutyBy Kent Ewing

Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are interested in contributing.

HONG KONG - It is already patently clear who the biggest loser will be in the US presidential election - and it is neither President George W Bush nor Senator John Kerry. Rather, it is the US news media, which (to borrow a recurrent theme of the interminable campaign) failed to report for duty.
We thought US journalism had reached its nadir on election night nearly four years ago when the country's major news networks, without a shred of reliable data, prematurely projected that Bush had carried the key state of Florida and thus won the presidency.
That claim was as irresponsible as it was incorrect and had to be retracted later that night. But the damage had been done: Bush had already acquired the aura of a president and wound up the winner of the protracted legal battle that followed his virtual draw with Al Gore in Florida.

But how many of us know that it was a cousin of Bush who made that initial, baseless projection for Rupert Murdoch's Fox News Channel?
And how many of us remember the slavish stampede as other networks followed the Fox report with the same groundless projection, which they then falsely claimed to be their own?
Yes, that was bad enough, but things are even worse this time around. There is no other way to explain why a recent Newsweek poll shows that 42% of Americans continue to believe that Saddam Hussein was "directly involved" in the September 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon near Washington, DC.
Or why the smears against Kerry's honorable military record have gained such sticking power. This is not just a bitter battle between two candidates; the US media have in large part renounced their role as objective reporters of the campaign and leaped into the partisan fray.

Murdoch's Fox News, which is little more than a propaganda arm (and fist) of the Republican Party, is the main culprit, but because Fox is so entertainingly good at being bad, others are now imitating the Fox style. Since Fox has won a monopoly on die-hard Republicans, for example, CNN seems to have decided to join the Kerry camp.
And what do you suppose compelled veteran CBS news anchor Dan Rather to jump into an unflattering story about Bush's service in the Texas Air National Guard that was apparently based on forged documents? After a week of fending off attacks on the reliability of their source, Rather and CBS were forced to apologize.
But let's not just pick on these three giants of the television media. For a more general indictment, go on the Internet and take a look at the transcript of the now-infamous presidential news conference of March 2003. It was there and then that President Bush articulated what has turned out to be an almost entirely bogus rationale for going to war against Iraq.

And, since the president gives press conferences just about as often as North Korea's Kim Jong-il, this was the time for the White House press corps to rise to the occasion. Yet the transcript is notable for its lack of substantive questions. This was not only a president girding the nation for war, but also a US media too cowered to question why.

While the right questions are finally being asked, they come too late and in the midst of a furious campaign of distraction - about Kerry's service in Vietnam, about Bush's service (or lack thereof) in the Texas Air National Guard, about anything but the heart of the matter. The Fox-driven agenda has triumphed.

US journalism is no longer a question of who, what, where, when, why and how. Instead, it is more about us versus them. Both the country and the world suffer for this woeful loss of balance and credibility.

Kent Ewing is a writer and teacher at Hong Kong International School who worked as a journalist in the US before moving overseas. Several of his articles have appeared on the op-ed page of the South China Morning Post.

Talking Heads

For a good laugh at both Leaders in the upcoming election go to http://www.crikey.com.au/talkingheads/

Aust Invited to Plan Iraq War

AUSTRALIA INVITED TO PLAN IRAQ WAR
30.9.2004. 08:16:23
From http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=95395&region=7

Britain’s defence ministry has confirmed that Australia was invited to take part in planning of the Iraq war. A defence ministry official claims Australia was included in planning in about June or July 2000, nine months before Iraq was invaded.

An Email I recieved recently

Attached is a statement from a disgruntled MailOfficer.
I forward it for your information.

Vote NO to EBA6!
Vote NO to EBA6!
Vote NO to EBA6!
Vote NO to EBA6!

I have just read through the latest EBA 6 update from Australia Post. It is quite an interesting piece of propaganda. So lets have a look at it.
It starts off with some useful information about how they have reached an in principle agreement with the unions and we all must now vote.
Next we get these two short paragraphs
"A YES vote not only provides benefits to employees, but also provides a mechanism that will allow the business to continue to move forward. In doing so, it will help create a more secure environment for everyone at Post."
"A NO vote will only mean more delays and an uncertain future for the corporation. Inevitably, this will impact on future job security."

This EBA is a great win for Post, so of course they are going to advocate a yes vote. What I find interesting is the way they have chosen to encourage the no vote. They have done this by using a statement that is supposed to put the 'fear' into all of us.
I would go further and even say they are threatening us to not vote no.
Lets look at it again shall we?

A no vote will only mean more delays and an uncertain future for the corporation.
It's funny how all of a sudden the delay factor is important to Post. They didn't seem to care much about that before.
In fact they were quite happy to delay. They only had negotiation meetings every two weeks. They were happy to not have real discussions with the union until after we went out on strike. hmmm.
Then theres the 'fear' factor. An uncertain future for the corporation. This is designed to get everyone thinking that bad things will happen if we vote no. Then we come to the threat part of the statement.
Inevitably, this will impact on future job security.
What does this mean? Are they saying that they have no control over their business? Are they saying that a NO vote will send the business into a decline and they'll be forced to shed jobs?
Maybe this is a plea to us from the high-ups at Post. You see if the NO vote gets up, maybe it will impact on their future job security. I fail to see how it would impact on the average Post workers job security.
Ok next we get to a long paragraph about how there are certain elements (small factions) that will seek to undermine the agreement and not to pay any attention to these elements because they are irrational and crazy people. (well words to that affect)
If these 'factions' are small, why even mention them. Obviously Post is worried about these small factions.
Could it be that they are exposing certain truths about are fantastic new EBA that don't fit in with the 'this is great for everyone' mantra.
Hell, these people might even be making sense, so we'll say something about it so that if anyone is approached by one of these people they will turn and run from them because they are a menace to all good Post employees.
Also I'm thinking that one of the reasons that Post mentions these 'small factions' is because they are probably not all that small. Post would like us to think they are small so that if we are thinking that this EBA contains little in the way of real advancement in conditions and pay, we are in the minority.
The last paragraph show us how high and mighty Post is feeling about this EBA. I highlight this small but significant pointer to Post's arrogance
Once we have majority support.....
Are they trying to take the vote away from you by declaring a win for the YES vote bofore the ballot has been conducted? Seems like it. Do they know something we don't? Probably not. They are just showing us how arrogant (and
cocky?) they are feeling. Maybe even smug, because they have an EBA on the way that does a hell of a lot for the future of the corporation, but little for the workers who make the corporation the success it is.
One last thing to go over before I get off my high horse. There is an agreement time in this EBA update which I feel the need to point out.
28 months
Where does this figure come from? I know I'm absolutley correct on this when I tell you that this agreement is 34 months long. I know this because I can count (I can hear the gasps of surprise). EBA 5 finished in february 2004. EBA 6 finishes in december 2006.
Now everbody try this. Get a calender if you want and count how many months there are from february 2004 to december 2006. Its 34 not 28.
POST IS LYING TO US (AGAIN) ABOUT OUR EBA.
If they feel they can lie to us so blatantly about something which anyone with some basic math ability can figure out is wrong. Then what else are they lying to us about. How good really is this EBA?
Don't believe Post. Don't believe our Union. They have both told us lies about this EBA
VOTE NO TO EBA 6

This is the CEPU view

WHY ARE WE PROPOSING A YES VOTE?

Your union negotiators are recommending you vote Yes to EBA6 – we believe this is the best agreement we can get. You‘ll be asked to vote first in a union ballot. If a majority of union members endorse the agreement, the Unions Div Exec will support a Yes vote for the ballot of staff.

We won a better outcome because of your support as members.
Post’s final offer was very different to their draft back in April/May. They changed position after the May strike and again when we threatened strike action in July and August.

Your union negotiators made the assessment in August that this is the best agreement we could get and another 24-hour strike would not have made it better.
Reps told us members couldn’t afford to take 5 or 10 days strike action. This is what it would have taken without a guarantee of getting a better result for members with the probability of losing the deal on the table all together.

We took 12 issues to Post in late August and got shifts on 9 of them. We didn’t get everything we want but we got a better EBA.
We got shifts on agreement expires 31 Dec 2006, consultation re PT DODO, same wages in Retail franchises, process for linehaul drivers determining the position on Post’s new remuneration package, finalising Post’s new remuneration package, finalising Post logistics EBA, Transport review terms of ref sorted before EBA i.e. certified, Delivery review use EBA6 dispute process so can access arbitration, super choice- education/seminars, get agreements with labour hire. We couldn’t get any movement on 6.30 starters or union officials access rights.

If we went on strike the risk was Post would attack your union the way employers like Telstra has.
This means offering individual non-union contracts (AWA’s), cutting off all union fees paid by payroll deduction, sacking key union reps and so on and Post being able to do as they please when they please.

WHAT’S IN THE AGREEMENT?

We got improvements/safeguard in 17 areas in this EBA. We didn’t get everything we wanted or could fix the current problems in 5 areas.

The areas we didn’t get everything we wanted are:

1. Didn’t fix non-penalty shifts- we couldn’t get changes for 6.30 starters. This means we have to campaign about this and make Post see they need to reconsider their position.
2. Potentially cuts/freezes in Linehaul pay- we’ve got a process to get the Industrial Commission to decide this but we may not get everything we want.
3. We didn’t get a lot of part-time jobs converted to full-time, particularly in Mails. However we did get stronger provisions on employment arrangements to make it harder for Post to move away from full-time jobs.
4. We didn’t stop DODO altogether but we did restrict it to a part-time cap and vert importantly we forced Post to do it using the consultation and dispute process so we can put alternative proposals and make them accountable for every new job proposal.
5. We didn’t stop retail franchising altogether but we did restrict it to 20 corporate offices and ensured staff will get the same wages, not the 30% less they would have got.

What we gained was:

1. Arbitration & consultation- this is really important, as Post will make more changes in the next few years. Now we can rely on the Industrial Commission to make decisions that force Post to act reasonably.
2. Union reps training
3. Union reps charter- together with rep training this means your reps are much better placed and recognised to help you win on issues in your workplace
4. Increased maternity leave
5. Stronger words on employment arrangements- linked to arbitration this provides an opportunity for future full-time job designs
6. Stronger contracting out clause
7. Increased $20 shoe allowance for retail $56 to now $76
8. 30% penalty for part-time staff working 12-4am and finishing before 8am
9. Protection of tea breaks
10. Discontinue AIMS
11. Won’t use sort/machine rates unreasonably against workers performance
12. Strong limits and conditions on retail franchising
13. No full-time DODO
14. Have to consult before introduce part-time DODO- along with stronger consultation provisions, this is very significant. We can put up alternative staffing proposals and look at OHS wherever Post tries to introduce part time DODO. And we can rely on arbitration if a dispute arises with DODO.
15. Consultation on team working in mails and parcels including an examination of SWLF
16. Got overdue review of Transport
17. Salary sacrifice improved
18. Pay rise of 10% with 4% up front for an agreement expiring 31 Dec 2006 which = 4.2% per year or (10%) $126 per fortnight.

For the first time, we didn’t trade off conditions for a pay rise. This is a significant win.

Post didn’t get the reduction in conditions and entitlements they wanted in their shopping list.

They wanted to change sick leave entitlements, redundancy agreement, hours of duty, cash overtime meal allowances and delivery duty allowance provisions. Open slather on DODO and Franchising (150). They couldn’t get any of these up.

It was always going to be hard to get everything we wanted because the law doesn’t let workers or the union to tell employers how to organise their business.

The workplace Relations Act doesn’t let unions or workers to tell employers how to run their businesses. They can close and open post offices, open and close DC’s, abolish workplaces and so on. So it was always going to be very difficult to stop DODO and Franchising altogether as Post can argue these are about the way they organise the business.

WHAT HAPPENS IF THE NO VOTE IS SUCCESSFUL?

If the NO vote is successful we remain on EBA5 and have no restrictions on DODO, on franchising, no access to arbitration and no protection of union reps rights. No 10% pay rise and gives the ability for Post to remove the recent 4% pay rise gift whenever they like. Basically Post will be able to do as they please when as they please without challenge in the absence of an EBA.

EBA5 says nothing on DODO so Post could introduce full-time DODO. Similarly it says nothing on franchising so Post could franchise 150 P.O.’s like they first proposed.

Post could also change the EBA and put out a non-union agreement with some changes so some groups will vote for it and they can get a majority of staff. Then we are all stuck with a worse agreement and more importantly horrific industrial relations environment.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?

If a majority of members vote YES then your union Div Exec will recommend a YES vote in the ballot of all staff. Once both the union ballot and the staff ballot are completed the agreement will be ratified.

Then we need to continue campaigning on the issues we haven’t fixed. Getting results isn’t just about the EBA. It’s about what we do on the ground over the next couple of years. We need your help. We want to train lots of union reps so we can continue organising in workplaces to fix your issues.

We’re committed to continuing what we’ve started in EBA- spending more time in workplaces, putting a lot of resources into training and supporting reps, getting members more involved and really acting you are the union- because you are.

Blair almost admits wrong about Iraq

From Aljazeera on line
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/E4D19123-9DD3-11D1-B44E-006097071264.htm
Wednesday 29 September 2004, 0:08 Makka Time, 21:08 GMT


Blair admitted the evidence over WMDs was wrong

British Prime Minister Tony Blair offered his Labour Party and the British electorate a partial apology for waging war on Iraq.
But as two more British soldiers died in Iraq and a captive remained under threat of death, his hopes of drawing a line under two years that has wrecked his public trust ratings are far from secure.
"The evidence about Saddam having actual biological and chemical weapons ... has turned out to be wrong," Blair said on Tuesday, his nearest yet to a mea culpa.
"The problem is, I can apologise for the information that turned out to be wrong but I can't, sincerely at least, apologise for removing Saddam," he said. "The world is a better place with Saddam in prison not in power."
Blair's speech was interrupted twice by protesters, one yelling that the premier "had blood on his hands". They were ruthlessly bundled out of the hall.

Position Vacant for Bully

http://workers.labor.net.au/237/news1_bully.html
Position Vacant for Bully
Psychometric testing is being used to identify bullies - then give them jobs.
The revelation came as a clinical psychologist revealed profiling could identify "psychotic bullies" who terrorise workplaces.
Greg Chilvers from the NSW Police Association says a NSW employer used psychometric testing to select "a bully" after another applicant was rejected on the grounds that she lacked aggression and had too much empathy.
Chilvers identified the employer as a leading state government agency but said he wasn't able to name it publicly. He did, however, say it was not the NSW Police Service.
The claim was made at an anti-bullying conference, which launched the NSW Labor Council's Dignity and Respect in the Workplace Charter.
The Charter has been developed to give workplaces a "road map" towards developing anti-bullying policies and was a response to what the Labor Council has identified as the number one OHS issue.
"The changes to the workplace over the last 20 years have created an environment that pits worker against worker," says Labor Council secretary John Robertson. "We wouldn't allow kids to bully in the playground, so why should we allow it at work."
Clinical psychologist Keryl Egan told the conference bullies came in three types - 'accidental' bullies who bully when they're under stress, 'destructive' bullies who lash out when challenged, and 'psychotic bullies', who bully "because they can".
John McPhilbin, a former Chubb Security employee who blew the whistle on bullying at the security firm, described how bullying had destroyed his emotional and physical health.
He dedicated his speech to the family of Linda Costa, who committed suicide after bullying and harassment at the Speedo factory in Windsor.
Linda's two daughters, Aimee and Melissa, attended the conference and told Workers Online of the need for the perpetrators of bullying to be prosecuted.
"Our mum is dead as a result of bullying," says Aimee Costa. "But we want to make sure it doesn't happen to anyone else."

Stink rises from Dunnies

From http://workers.labor.net.au/latest/
Foremen at Ingham’s Chickens, Perth, have been recording the details of toilet use by female process workers.
Women, from different cultural backgrounds, say that at least one male supervisor would stand outside the ablutions area and record the names of women who used the facilities, along with the times they entered and left.
Now the company is baulking at AMWU demands for a copy of its toilet break policy.
State secretary, Jock Ferguson, said Ingham's attitude to its female staff represented a "return to the ignorance of the dark ages."
"No worker should be monitored in regard to toilet breaks. In this situation, it amounts to a serious case of gender discrimination," Ferguson said.
"Our members come from a variety of ethnic and cultural backgrounds and some of them are very upset. We have had reports of male supervisors making inappropriate remarks that I am not prepared to go into in public.
"What I will say is we will be taking this further and we expect an outcome that respects the dignity of everyone on the job."
Ferguson said Inghams had refused to divulge its policy on toilet breaks, arguing it was an internal company matter.
The AMWU has more than 200 members at the chicken processing facility.

Pure Satire

From the funniest site around http://www.johnhoward.blogspot.com/
Monday, September 13, 2004
Ugh, I had to do that stupid debate with Mark Latham today. I forget how boring politics can be sometimes. Like, in Parliament I only have to get up and speak every so often, and the rest of the time I can just sit back and play snake on my mobile, or draw biro tattoos on my arm or whatever. But one hour of discussing politics without even getting ad breaks? Yawn. Mark kept using all these dorkus catch phrases, like "ease the squeeze". I've watched Burgo's Catchphrase, too, y'know, and I can make up catch phrases that'll have the ALP totally spewing. Just wait until my "Look 'em in the eye, and tell 'em a lie" and "Join the push to support George W. Bush" campaigns are unveiled. Not to mention the equally catchy "Mark Latham is a stupid loser, and everyone hates him because he's stupid and he smells, and I'm cool and he drools" initiative. The debate was also crap 'cause they had this stupid panel of journalists asking us questions. It was such a hassle 'cause it meant that I had to twist things around to what I wanted to talk about all the time.

Greens National Campaign Launch

Charles RichardsonCrikey's philosopher at large
http://www.crikey.com.au/
After a pause for the Jakarta bombing and the 11 September anniversary, the real election campaign started yesterday. And its first major event was the Greens national campaign launch in Melbourne.
13 September 2004
Politics Index

Most stereotypes have an element of truth to them. The one that portrays the Greens as unrealistic fruit-loops certainly has some evidence to support it. But the one that says they are a humorless and mean-spirited lot just doesn't gel at all.

Continued trouble in Iraq

Tuesday 14 September 2004, 18:02 Makka Time, 15:02 GMT


The Arab League chief said Arab states may be able to help Iraq

Arab League chief Amr Musa has sounded a strong warning about the situation in Iraq as ministers from the pan-Arab grouping gather for a meeting in the Egyptian capital, Cairo.

From http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/D3B293B8-BA6A-4BBA-B222-87169C9D8C72.htm

Group offers $50,000 for proof of Bush service

(CNN) -- The founder of the group Texans for Truth said Tuesday that he is offering $50,000 to anyone who can prove President Bush fulfilled his service requirements, including required duties and drills, in the Alabama Air National Guard in 1972.

Found at http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/09/14/bush.texans/index.html

N Korea blast: The only certainty is doubt

The North Koreans are expecting commercial satellites to produce pictures of a mountain removed, a large crater similar to what intelligence analysts have already hinted is evident from satellite photos. But their explanation of last week's massive explosion is suspect to say the least - as one would expect from Pyongyang. - David Scofield
From Asia Times http://www.atimes.com/

CEPU and EBA6

I recieved this email this afternoon, it seems there are some who will be asking you to consider voting No to EBA6.


Hello again

On my previous rant about how OUR union has ripped us off and lied to us about our "great win" against post, I made a small error in my calculations.

It seems that the original pay offer from Australia Post was a 8% pay rise over 25 months with two $400 bonus's.

I calculated the original offer over a 28 month period.

So heres the new correct figures of the original pay rise.

8% over 25 months

25 months is 2.083 years

8% divided by 2.083 years equals

3.84% PER YEAR

Our current "great win" over Australia Post pay rise is:

10% over 34 months which works out to be,

10% over 2.83 years

10% divided by 2.83 years equals

3.53% PER YEAR

WHAT A SHOCK!

Our union has actually negotiated a PAY LOSS on our behalf. (3.53 - 3.84 is 0.31% worse)

They want us to believe that it is a win??

A win for who?

Not the paying members of that make up the union thats for sure.

They are blatently misleading us on the deal they have secured on our behalf.

For instance: In the CEPU Postal News letter 35, the union talks about our great win and how we made Australia Post listen etc. They then talk about our pay rise but they neglect to mention the length of the agreement. They only offer an agreed finish date. No start date

Are they trying not to draw our attention to the fact that this will be a 34 month agreement? Yes they are!

10% sounds great. Much better than the 8.5% that Australia Post wanted to pay us.

But wait a minute. That 8 - 8.5% was over a much shorter agreement. Nevermind we just won't mention it. Those workers are probably not smart enough to figure out that we are fooling them.

What about DODO? The union said absolutely NO to DODO. right?

Wrong DODO is in the new EBA

Fanchising?

Yep its in too.

Remember when we were told that if you let Australia Post in the door on issues then it is easy for them to expand on those issues?

The union, despite telling us that they wouldn't let it happen, have done just that.

Of course they'll tell us that its ok. They have a clause that says that Australia Post has to consult with them when they implement DODO and Franchising.

Well we can see how good the union is at getting us a good deal when they negotiate with Australia Post.

I have a lot more to say on OUR EBA but I'm so worked up I have to go and vent my anger on some innocent inaminate object.



We have a finish date for the EBA not a start date. That finish date is December 2006

CEPU says "Lets turf out Howard"

The CEPU will be actively campaigning to turf-out the Howard Government. Since we have limited funds, we will be concentrating on the marginal seats that Q’ld Labor must win to form a government. On top of our list is Herbert, based on Townsville and Hinkler based on Bundy and Gladstone. In other seats we will see what can be done with rank and file activity on the ground. Some Mackay members have already volunteered to do some letter boxing in Dawson. We will print a dodger, which has been designed by the candidate on the Sale of Telstra, for them to distribute.
Our three main issues are;
1. Deregulation of postal services.
2. The Sale of Telstra.
3. A more balanced industrial relations environment.
Our experience with EBA “negotiations” shows that the employer has a huge advantage under Peter Reith’s laws.

The Australian newspaper summarised the contrasting industrial relations policies as follows.
Coalition
Ø Freedom for employers and employees to choose their industrial work arrangements without interference from Unions.
Ø Removal of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission as umpire so that enterprises can negotiate according to their own circumstances
Ø Weakening the role of unions in the industrial relations system by limiting their right to strike and their right of entry to work sites.
Labor
Ø Restore union collective bargaining as the preferred model for negotiation in the workplace and abolish the Coalition’s system of non-union individual contracts
Ø Restore the power of the Industrial Relations Commission to act as umpire in intractable disputes.
Ø Restore union rights by forcing employers to negotiate in good faith and allow unions into worksites.
If you can help with our campaign ring Ian McLean on 32550330 or Michelle Rae on32550440.

Yanks Demand Racism

Taken from Workers Online http://workers.labor.net.au/latest/
I can't believe this one!
Australian Defence Industries (ADI) wants to duck Australian laws so it can comply with American demands that foreign-born workers be denied jobs.
ADI has applied for an exemption from the state’s Equal Opportunities Act so it can sack or transfer employees to comply with requirements attached to specific multi-million dollar US contracts.
Unions WA has been formally joined to the company's application and AMWU secretary, Jock Ferguson, is promising to fight ADI every step of the way.
"This application is a direct attack on Australian values and the Australian way of life at the instigation of a foreign power," Ferguson says. "It's industrial apartheid, it's outrageous and it is unacceptable because it reinforces negative racial stereotypes."
People born in at least 20 countries, including China and Vietnam, are barred from working on specified US defence contracts, by order of the President, but the ADI application would allow it to deny employment to anyone not born in Australia or the US.
Ferguson said not only does ADI want the green light to bar people on the basis of race or nationality, but it has also put forward a proposal to make staff wear distinguishing badges and to publish lists of employees and their birthplaces.
The American demands wouldn't just apply to ADI's US defence contracts but to Australian organisations that, in turn, had contractual relationships with the US armed forces.
ADI concedes the American requirements would rule out nearly 40 percent of its current Perth staff of around 220.
"This is John Howard and George Bush imposing American values by demanding that our state and federal laws be over-ridden," Unions WA secretary, Stephanie Mayman, says.
She says victory for ADI in the Equal Opportunities Tribunal would be hollow if it could not prevail apon the Federal Government to change its Workplace Relations Act that also forbids discrimination.
Western Australian Equal Opportunities Commissioner, Yvonne Henderson, will also oppose the ADI bid.
The case will be heard later this year.
Media reports suggest that ADI has already been granted an exemption from Victoria's anti-discrimination law and that it is applying to dodge the rules in NSW, Queensland and South Australia.

More of Howard's Lie's

This is from
http://www.actu.asn.au/
Keep up the excellent work you guys!

Apprenticeship numbers that are used in a new TV advertisement by the Liberal Party are wrong and should be immediately corrected says the ACTU.
ACTU President Sharan Burrow said today:
"The first television ad by the Liberal Party wrongly states that under the Howard Government 'apprenticeships have almost tripled to over 400,000'.

In fact the latest data from the National Centre for Vocational Education Research (NCVER) shows that there are only 133,376 traditional apprentices currently in training.
The figure that the Liberal Party uses in the advertisement is misleading because it includes short-term trainees as well as traditional four-year trade apprenticeships.
Of the 416,800 total participants in the Federal Government's so-called 'New Apprenticeships' program, 175,473 (42%) are engaged in training of less than two years duration.
The so-called 'apprenticeships' that the ad refers to includes short-term traineeships in a fast food chain, local fish and chip shop, a juice bar, or bakery franchise.

These traineeships have no structured training and many (27%) are taken up by existing workers - leading to suggestions that some employers are rorting the scheme to obtain a wage subsidy.
Traditional trades apprenticeships for plumbers, electricians, carpenters, boilermakers, mechanics and chefs take up to four years and include structured training as well as substantial on-the-job experience.
It is wrong for John Howard and Peter Costello to pretend that a 12 or 18 month traineeship for a kitchenhand in a fast food outlet is a real apprenticeship.

That's like saying there is no difference between a fast food worker flipping burgers and a cordon bleu chef or no difference between a First Aid course and a medical degree.

The Liberal Party advertisement is dishonest in suggesting the Howard Government is serious about encouraging more apprenticeships. The facts are:
There is an annual shortage of around 25,000 traditional trades apprentices and this skills shortage is set to cost the economy up to $9 billion over the next ten years thanks to government inaction in this area.

The Government's 'New apprenticeships' program is seriously flawed with incentives biased against employers prepared to invest in a full four-year apprenticeship - the same $4125 incentive is also given for a one-year trainee.
Poor wages for apprentices is a problem that the Howard Government has failed to address. An 18 year old entering an apprenticeship in the manufacturing industry is paid only $6.20 an hour in their first year while a fast food trainee flipping burgers starts out on up to $8.70 an hour - an extra $100 a week.
The Liberal Party should immediately withdraw the advertisement and correct its figures."

Kerry calls Republican Convention "Bitter and Insulting"

Full Story at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59721-2004Sep3.html?nav=hcmodule

It seems The US has the same problem as us!

NEWARK, Ohio - Democrat John Kerry Friday dismissed the Republican convention as "bitter and insulting" and promised to be a U.S. president who would tell Americans the truth.
"Every time they open their mouths they can't tell the truth," Kerry said at a rally. "It's time for us to have a president of the United States who can look you in the eye and when he does, you know you're being told the truth."

Sen. John Kerry speaks to people in a neighborhood in Newark, Ohio. (Laura Rauch - AP)
The newly combative senator from Massachusetts said he would not allow President Bush or others to question his fitness for the White House.
"Not gonna do it, not gonna happen," Kerry said. "I will not have my commitment to defending this country questioned by those who refused to serve when they had a chance and I will not have it questioned by those who misled this nation into war in Iraq."
Neither Bush nor Vice President Dick Cheney, who scathingly attacked Kerry's national security credentials at the Republican National Convention Wednesday night, fought in Vietnam. Bush served in the Texas Air National Guard and Cheney obtained five draft deferments.

US and The UN

NEW YORK -- John Kerry has taken his hits at this year's Republican National Convention. But the Democratic presidential nominee came off easy compared with the United Nations.
Not since the convention that nominated Barry Goldwater in 1964 has a gathering of the Republican faithful featured so much UN bashing from so many prominent players in the party. What once was the extremist line of John Birch Society cadres and their allies -- "Get US out of the UN," read the society's billboards in the 1960s -- has become a popular position within the Republican party.
The anti-UN sentiment was stoked by Vice President Dick Cheney in his unilateralism then, unilateralism now, unilateralism forever address to the convention on Wednesday night.
Among the vice president's many sneering references to Kerry's internationalism was the declaration that, "History has shown that a strong purposeful America is vital to preserving freedom and keeping us safe, yet time and again Senator Kerry has made the wrong call on national security. Senator Kerry began his political career by saying he would like to see our troops deployed 'only at the directive of the United Nations.'"
In contrast, Cheney thundered, "George W. Bush will never seek a permission slip to defend the American people."
That turned out to be one of the biggest applause lines for a speech that formed the centerpiece of the convention's foreign-policy message.

Full Story at http://www.thenation.com/thebeat/index.mhtml?bid=1&pid=1778

What can I say......it's a joke!

A public servant, on his way home from work in Canberra traffic came to a dead halt and thought to himself, "This is unusual."
He noticed a police officer walking between the lines of stopped cars, so he rolled down his window and asked, "Officer, what's the hold-up?"
The officer replied, "The Prime Minister is depressed, so he stopped his motorcade and is threatening to douse himself with petrol and set himself on fire. He says no one believes his stories about why we went to war in Iraq, or the connection between Saddam and al-Qaeda, or that his tax cuts will help anyone except his wealthy friends. So we're taking up a collection for him."
The public servant asks, "How much have you got so far?"
The officer replies, "About 200 litres, but a lot of people are still syphoning."