Category: General news

Managing director of Ebono Institute and major sponsor of The Generator, Geoff Ebbs, is running against Kevin Rudd in the seat of Griffith at the next Federal election. By the expression on their faces in this candid shot it looks like a pretty dull campaign. Read on

  • SW Chamber explores Brisbane with Mayor

    Lord Mayor Quirk addressed the South West Chamber of Commerce this week, outlining the City Plan for Brisbane and the impact it will have on business.

    (more…)

  • Democrats swell Griffith field

    Paul Stevenson from the Australian Democrats with Liam Flenady of Socialist Alliance on the left and Bronwyn Rees, a single mum out side the Prime Minister's office
    Paul Stevenson from the Australian Democrats with Liam Flenady of Socialist Alliance on the left and Bronwyn Rees, a single mum out side the Prime Minister’s office

    A Democrat candidate has emerged for the seat of Griffith.

    Paul Stevenson spoke to a group of single parents outside the Prime Minister’s office on Thursday 11 July. He described the impact of single parenting on his professional life as a psychologist and the years he has spent recovering from that economically damaging experience.

    The party has dusted off its founding slogan saying “Whoever is Prime Minister after this election, keep that bastard honest.” It is also harking back to Gough Whitlam’s ’72 theme with “It’s time to bring back the democrats.”

    The party polled just over 800 votes in 2004 and 600 in 2007. It did not field a candidate in 2010.

     

  • Sacred Masturbator

    By Sidonie Bouchet

    Now that pornography is only a click away, more and more people are meeting up with their fantasies each night, releasing themselves of their pent up energy. It’s totally acceptable whether you are single or in relationship, man or woman. There’s nothing wrong with self pleasure, but unfortunately, pornography is a long story of woundedness. (more…)

  • Is Murdoch about to abandon Abbot?

    Rodney H Lever of the Independent Australian suggests Rupert may be changing horses in mid-election streamAbbottMurdoch

    For years, Tony Abbott has been able to rely on the heavy backing of the Murdoch press, but has the Rudd revival shattered this core plank of Abbott’s election campaign?

    Like Gough Whitlam, John Howard and Gordon Brown before him – has Tony Abbott lost the support of his powerful backer?

    Has he switched his allegiance to Rudd Labor? The weekend papers certainly made it appear so.

    This is just a beginning. The Rudd coup had to be headlined. The news could not have been buried — as Julia Gillard’s great achievements often were.

    In this, his 83rd year on the planet, Murdoch’s interests in Australia, his personal legacy and his family’s fortunes are prominent in his thinking. The recent divorce from his fortune-hunting third wife is believed to be a step to mediate the family friction with his children.

    It is understood they were disgusted with his treatment of their mother and the influence his avaricious and pugilistic third wife was able to exert. Rupert dumps people when he decides they are no longer of use to him, whether they are his wives or his employees.

    Wendi Deng was useful to him when she punched the man who hit him with a pie at a Leveson Inquiry hearing last year and in his attempts to integrate China into his international operations. The Chinese politely asked if he had married a Chinese woman for business reasons and then declined to allow him to expand beyond a TV service they could fully control.

    In a weekend speech to the Liberal Party faithful in Victoria, Tony Abbott produced lines straight out of the mouth of the party’s founder Bob Menzies — promising everything, then doing nothing because it’s all too hard.

    During Menzies’ prime-ministership, Australia waited 20 years for television to be introduced. Would it be the same for broadband and the other programs already on the policy map for Labor should Tony Abbott be elected?

    If the Murdoch papers continue to back Rudd, will his party insist on rejecting Murdoch’s blandishments? Will a replay of the Whitlam dismissal follow?

    We can’t read Murdoch’s mind. We can, however, clearly see his attention is now on Australia. He wants to hand over the keys of his empire to sons Lachlan and James and his daughter Elisabeth – all of whom have had hands-on experience in the business – before he dies.

    Lachlan is struggling to reap a profit from his personal investment in television at Channel Ten. He also owns a modest radio network and a CD rental business that is probably shot as far as future profits are concerned.

    From Rupert’s point of view,  the Australian newspapers are vital to his family legacy in one form or another, even if they are running at a loss. At some time in the future, their printing presses and associated equipment will need replacing. That cost will be huge if the papers continue to be produced in every state.

    His pay TV operations hang in the balance with Labor’s plan to introduce the NBN, given its ability to provide all the same services at a cheaper cost to consumers than the monthly rentals of pay TV. This is one of the main keys to Rupert’s final ambitions for his legacy.

    Will he be able – as Menzies did for the benefit of newspaper and radio barons – to stave off the inevitable for another 20 years?

    These are the issues Kevin Rudd has to consider now, among all the other matters that claim the attention of a prime minister. The pressure could well make him crack some time in the future.

    In the meantime, the loss of Peter Garrett and Greg Combet is a sad blow for the Rudd Government. They will both remain members of the Labor Party and, given their remarkably positive performances in the Gillard Government, they are both still prospective leaders for the future.

    They are also both men who have no reason to cater to the whims and fancies of media magnates.

    http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/politics/is-murdoch-set-to-abandon-abbott/

    Creative Commons Licence
    This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia

     

  • Who’s got time for lunch?

    The Australian lunch break is disappearing, according to new research conducted by ING DIRECTinglunch1

    Australians are skipping lunch, eating at their desks and catching up on personal admin in ever increasing numbers, according to research conducted by ING DIRECT. The disappearing lunch break comes as Australians admit that work and personal demands are eating into their lunch breaks.

    Almost one in three of us (28%) are eating at our desk; a similar proportion (33%), are skipping lunch, entirely, once a week and one in ten usually work through their lunch break.

    The research also found:

    · The typical Aussie lunch break is between 15-30 mins
    · 37% of us spend lunch time catching up on phone calls; 31% do personal admin and 30% go shopping while 24% catch up on social media
    · Almost one in three use their lunch break to catch up on work
    · 9% of Australians say their lunch break has become less regular in the past 18 months
    · 7% use their lunch break to go to the gym

    Health and productivity expert, Andrew May, believes this could be having a big impact on the overall health of many Australians.

    “What I find scary about this research is that many Australians aren’t even seeing the light of day during their work hours which has a detrimental impact on health, let alone productivity and managing stress.”

    When asked whether work demands takeover your lunch break, 21% said regularly and 12% said very regularly.

    “Taking a lunch break away from your desk, even if it is only 15 to 20 minutes, is a proven way to increase productivity and decision making throughout the afternoon. Human beings do not work in a linear fashion like machines and taking regular breaks is imperative to help sustain concentration and energy levels throughout the day.”

    “On a positive note, 34% of us ‘always’ take a lunch break away from the desk; 36% never skip lunch and 71% of us are satisfied with their lunch break,” said May.

    ING DIRECT conducted this research to find out how Australians are spending their lunch times as part of a campaign to make better use of their lunch break.

  • The coal industry v everyone else: Battle for the future

    The coal industry v everyone else: Battle for the future

    The stark choice between the ‘climate makers’ and the rest of us underlines a competition of two radically different visions.    It is a fight over the very future of Australia

    Coal loading operations in the Hunter Valley.
    Coal loading operations in the Hunter Valley. Photograph: Ho New/Reuters

    A mighty political struggle is dividing Australia, but it is not the mêlée taking place in Canberra.   It is the battle that pitches the kids on my street: bouncy Jack, serious Cristiana, little toddling Lily and all of their mates, and every other child from across Australia, against a gigantic industry that menaces their future.   It is the epic fight that is taking place between the fossil fuel companies and the rest of us.

    The politics of climate change is often seen as complicated, but in one sense it is all very simple.   On the one side we’ve got those who leading UK analyst Tom Burke calls “the climate makers – the small number of large businesses who produce and burn fossil fuels”.   On the other side is everyone else.

    In Australia, the arch climate makers are the coal mining companies, with up to 91 coal projects planned for Queensland and New South Wales alone.   If they are allowed to proceed, burning the coal from these new projects could add an additional 1.5 bn tonnes of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere each year after 2018.

    These are the coal mining companies who care so little about our country that they would wreck the Great Barrier Reef for their trade, and would dig up the fossil fuels that the science tells us is unburnable carbon.   They’ve used the money that was meant for developing carbon capture and storage into a promotional slush fund.   The head of the Australian Coal Association apparently sees the collapse of Arctic sea ice as worth a joke.   These are the realities of the coal industry’s cynicism and contempt.

    Enviroment activists display an anti-coal industry placard outside the New South Wales Parliament building in Sydney.
    Enviroment activists display an anti-coal industry placard outside the New South Wales Parliament building in Sydney. Photograph: Greg Wodd/AFP/Getty

    The contest between the climate makers and the rest of us is a competition between two radically different visions.   It is a fight over the very future of Australia.   It is the hope of people set against the bullying voice of a corporate lobby telling us that there is no choice but to let the coal industry have its way.

    As the National Sustainability Council recently highlighted, we know from the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ measures of Australia’s progress that environmental sustainability, economic resilience and social equity are recurring themes that matter to Australians.   These are our hopes and dreams for Australia, embedded in our deepest shared values about what constitutes the good society.

    Most Australians want decent sustainable jobs, prosperity that is about more than just the narrow pursuit of wealth at whatever cost, and a smart, balanced and resilient economy.   We share the cherished ambition of our kids and their kids having fresh air, clean beaches, green spaces on which to play and bush to explore.

    But the very possibility of a decent future for our country is at risk from the climate makers.   We are already two years into what the Climate Commission calls the “critical decade” for averting catastrophic climate change.   The National Sustainability Council said last month that the decisions we make in the very near future will determine “whether or not the next generation of Australians will become the first in recent history to be worse off than their parents and grandparents.”   I think about the kids on my street.   I don’t want them to miss out on the best of what life and our country has to offer.   And the greatest threat to the prospects of the next generation of Australians is the climate makers.

    Whether we can break the grip of the coal dead hand on our politics is a defining challenge of our time.   Climate change is not just another policy issue.   Global warming undermines the very foundations of the modern state.   Professor James Hansen has described coal as “the single greatest threat to civilisation and all life on our planet”.   According to Australia’s own Climate Commission, “[b]urning all fossil fuel reserves would lead to unprecedented changes in climate so severe, that they will challenge the existence of our society as we know it today.”

    We already know that the extreme heatwaves and catastrophic bushfire conditions during the angry summer of 2012-13 were made worse by climate change.   A nation perpetually reeling from cyclones, floods, fires and droughts, and struggling with food security and mass climate migration in a drastically more unstable world, will find it difficult to prosper.   It is hard to see how Australians can hope to become healthier, better educated, more productive, or more content, in a world of climate chaos.

    The choice could not be starker.   The contrast in visions of the future is clear.   If the climate makers win, it means diminished opportunities and reduced horizons for our children and grandchildren.   The kids on my street deserve better than what the coal industry has in store for them.   All our kids deserve better than that.   It is the coal industry against the rest of us.

    David Ritter  

    Monday, 8 July 2013