Political Correctness Rant

[Jerry_Atrick]

6 hours ago, spacesailor said:

None for the rest of Australians.  They are not required. 

Quite frankly, I wonder, in the age of the internet, why a few minutes googling can't be used to validate whatever idealogues and agenda-ed (if that is a word) people spout. Very first link in "Job schemes for Autralians" on Google:

https://www.nationalskillscommission.gov.au/reports/australian-jobs-2021/government-programs

 

Includes subsidised apprenticceships,. and various other things to get everyone working. Most of everything else is how to get a job in Aus for a Brit.. prob because of where I am.

 

There have been targeted employment schemes for different people for years..

 

 

[Bruce Tuncks]

Octave, the indigenous of NZ are nothing like our aborigines. I reckon the abos are very lucky to have been " discovered" by the poms and not bu the maoris. They would have been ,literally and metaphorically, eaten.

[Bruce Tuncks]

Be careful, Jerry. We want you to come back, but be aware that the govt has a history of telling lies about job opportunities for poms out here.

There was a case in WA where a pommy boilermaker successfully sued the govt over the fact that there was no shortage of boilermakers as he had been promised.

[Jerry_Atrick]

a) I am both an Aussie (born and bred) and a pom (natualised), so as an Aussie, I think I stand a chance..

 

and b) not too long ago, an ex employer of mine from Mlebourne got in contact with me and asked when I was coming back..

 

And if I can't find work (to start with), I wil ljust consult - you know - like PWC apparently - con your clients and then insult them..

Edited May 27, 2023 by Jerry_Atrick

[Bruce Tuncks]

Good onyer Jerry.  Best wishes etc. from the west wimmera. There are plenty of jobs around here, the kid up the road has been overloaded with work and he is still supposed to be at school. He bought a ute ( second-hand) last week and he can only use it legally on a farm. He is not even that cheap, I think the wife pays him $10 an hour for laying gravel and stuff. And yes, we do need financial consulting. I still have not found out how to make more money that growing meat sheep.

[Jerry_Atrick]

Thanks, Bruce. It won't be long that, as long as the land is still productive, meat growing will be very profitable again.

[old man emu]

Lamb production is already a very profitable business, if supermarket prices are any indication. I bought two lamb shanks recently for $14 the pair. Lamb shanks used to be thrown to the dogs to save on dog biscuits. The cheapest meats now are pork and chicken, but with the world-wide shortage of grain, the price of each will soon start climbing. Add to that the effects of inflation, which Big Business tells us is all the fault of the us poor buggers trying to survive in a global economy. 

[octave]

23 minutes ago, Bruce Tuncks said:

Octave, the indigenous of NZ are nothing like our aborigines. I reckon the abos are very lucky to have been " discovered" by the poms and not bu the maoris. They would have been ,literally and metaphorically, eaten.

 

  One of the objections often presented is that "the voice" will be unfair and a threat to social cohesion. in fact, the word "apartheid" is being used by some.    Countries such as Canada, the USA, NZ, and Finland don't seem to be suffering negative consequences from recognition or treaties. We are one of the few countries that don't have constitutional recognition of its indigenous people.       South Australia has already passed the "First Nations Voice Bill 2023"  This will operate at a state level.   

[facthunter]

What I read!. That leaves it wide open. WHERE did you read it? That's the problem these days.  Nev

[onetrack]

Octave - The Voice is not "constitutional recognition" of the Aboriginals. They got constitutional recognition in 1967. The Voice, to many people, is simply another huge gravy train for overpaid public servants, more red tape and bureaucracy as every little complaint by an Aboriginal against development is examined in fine detail.

 

In W.A., we now have the State Govt introducing Aboriginal Cultural Heritage laws that are going to make life so much harder for farmers and anyone with rural property. The level and costs of bureaucracy in this new Act is mind-boggling.

 

https://www.wa.gov.au/government/document-collections/aboriginal-cultural-heritage-act-2021

 

W.A. News -

"The Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Bill will affect every Farmer and Pastoralist in the state. Everyday farming acts like Scarifying, Seeding, Delving, Deep Ripping, Shed Building, Drainage work, Fencing, and even pulling out a dead tree stump will require a permit to do so. Any ground disturbance to a depth of 50mm is included.

It is reported that it will cost the state government $77 million to implement over the next four years. To allocate the permits, a series of Local Aboriginal Cultural Heritage Service (LACHS) offices will be established across the state.

You can see what's going to happen here. Some permits will take months to be approved, and the window for Seeding, Ripping, etc, will close before a permit is allocated. One WA Farmer told me, "If we get caught doing the wrong thing, the fines are massive, apparently". He also said, "Our right to Farm is going to get taken away from us through this Act. It will be a shit show".

 

This new Act comes on top of the Noongar-Boodjar Land Trust settlement where 3,500 people claiming Noongar ancestry are the recipients to Land Title over virtually the entire S.W. portion of W.A. - plus payments of what amounts to multiple billions of dollars to these people and their 7 new Aboriginal Corporations. I don't know at what point this small, entitled group is going to be satisfied.

 

https://www.noongar.org.au/about-settlement-agreement

[octave]

11 minutes ago, onetrack said:

Octave - The Voice is not "constitutional recognition" of the Aboriginals.

 I am aware of that and although the voice is not a treaty or constitutional recognition it is a step towards what other countries have done.

 

13 minutes ago, onetrack said:

They got constitutional recognition in 1967.

 

I guess you are referring to the referendum of 1967. the relevant question in this referendum was -  The second question was to determine whether two references in the Australian Constitution, which discriminated against Aboriginal people, should be removed. 

 

This is not really the same as recognizing prior occupation in the Constitution.  By the way, it is often believed that the 67 referendum gave all Aboriginal people the right to vote. This actually occurred before the election in 1962.  There are people alive today who were not given the rights of an Australian citizen. 

 

To me, it comes down to the potential for closer consultation to achieve more than the present system.  If nothing changes then nothing will change.  Sure perhaps it will not yield positive practical results. We can only know that if we try it.  On the other hand, I have not read any convincing arguments that it will be detrimental.   The argument about cost is of some relevance however I have not seen this argument presented in a convincing way other than to say that anything that costs money and is run by the government must be bad.   Last week I was reading about an existing Aboriginal consultation group that will be abolished if the referendum passes.   I wonder how many people here would change their vote from no to yes if it was cost-neutral?

 

I am doubtful that this referendum will pass, it may or may not.    I guess if it passes the no folks will have to vote Dutton in and perhaps we can have another referendum.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[old man emu]

3 hours ago, octave said:

I guess if it passes the no folks will have to vote Dutton in

I'll take that as being said as a bit of humour. Those who vote "No" might strongly object to Dutton in other matters. Likewise, those who vote "Yes" might object to him in other matters.

 

I'd love to be able to read “El-Telegraph”, an Arabic newspaper in Sydney, a Vietnamese one or an Indian one to see how those Australians are thinking about the issue. People from those ethnic backgrounds can't have the finger of blame pointed at then for acts done in the 19th to mid-20th Centuries.

[octave]

19 minutes ago, old man emu said:

I'll take that as being said as a bit of humour.

Well, sort of, however, I am interested in how important people believe a yes or no vote is in the whole scheme of things,  How does this issue stack up with other political issues?  Is support for yes or no a deal breaker for anyone?

 

19 minutes ago, old man emu said:

Australians are thinking about the issue. People from those ethnic backgrounds can't have the finger of blame pointed at then for acts done in the 19th to mid-20th Centuries.

 

As far as I am concerned it is not about guilt or blame.  It is more about acknowledgment.   I was born in Britain.  although I have probably benefited from Britain's exploitation of other countries during the days of the British Empire.  I do not feel guilty about this. I was not there and took no part in it.  I do however acknowledge the past.   I also see the need for us to attempt to make things better in the future.

 

 

Edited May 28, 2023 by octave

[red750]

Did you know that the first nations persons performing Welcome To Country ceremonies were paid to do so? 

 

Broken Hill City Council has caused a stir by deciding to stop making the payments.

[Marty_d]

Sooo... you're saying they SHOULDN'T get paid?

 

Just wondering if the same should apply to all people doing public performances.  Politicians, artists, priests, company CEO's etc.  

[octave]

During my work life as a musician, I have been paid by councils for playing at numerous citizenship ceremonies and other official occaisions.

[spacesailor]

But those performers,  are Not mandatory.

As far as I know. 

 

And can we Ban that ' smoking ceremony ', as it's Bad for my Asthma.  

 

spacesailor

[octave]

8 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

But those performers,  are Not mandatory.

As far as I know. 

 

And can we Ban that ' smoking ceremony ', as it's Bad for my Asthma.  

 

spacesailor

I may stand corrected but I am not sure "welcome to country ceremonies" are mandatory.  

[octave]

The thing is those of you who like to be constantly outraged often don't read beyond the headline.  the fact that the Mayor of Broken Hill says that the traditional owners would still be "invited" suggests to me that it is not a mandatory requirement.   

 

 

Kennedy told the council meeting that traditional owners would still be invited to perform welcome to country but at no financial cost to the council. It had previously paid between $150 and $250 for traditional owners to perform a welcome to country and $300 for a smoking ceremony.

Those rates were already well below those recommended by the National Association for the Visual Arts, which suggests $300-$750 for a welcome to country and up to $1,500 for a smoking ceremony.

 

Broken Hill council to stop paying traditional owners for performing welcome to country

[spacesailor]

Have you tried, to refuse Anything , to do with those that are pushing it .

Please try to stop the " smoking " thing as a ' health hazard. 

spacesailor

[octave]

3 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

Please try to stop the " smoking " thing as a ' health hazard. 

 

I think this is a little disingenuous.  Do you want to ban fireworks displays or light aircraft? 

[spacesailor]

Someone Banned  ' backyard fires ' ,

And ' back yard fireworks ' .

I'm Not even allowed to put a ' fire place ' in my house any more .

So why should I be " smoked " out while attending a civic reception. 

My choice ! , Not to attend .

spacesailor

[octave]

 

4 minutes ago, spacesailor said:

I'm Not even allowed to put a ' fire place ' in my house any more .

If you live where I think you live then you can have a wood heater subject to section 68 of the local government act.  The main obstacle is that it must comply with  Protection of the Environment Operations (Clean Air) Amendment (Solid Fuel Heaters) Regulation 2016.  This is fair enough, isn't it?    Your choice not to attend a smoking ceremony is your absolute right. I don't wish to attend a football match but I would not complain about football events taking place. 

 

If you have been refused permission to install a wood heater please send me the details and I will happily help you navigate the paperwork.

 

 

 

Wood fire heaters and hearth fireplaces are not mentioned in the SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 as they are not considered exempt development in NSW. Therefore, an approval is required under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 and fireplaces are to be installed in compliance with the Australian Standard.

All new wood fire heaters must also comply with Protection of the Environment Operations (Clean Air) Amendment (Solid Fuel Heaters) Regulation 2016.

As wood fire heaters cannot be considered exempt development, please lodge a Section 68  application through the NSW Planning Portal for approval.

[facthunter]

Spacey won't be happy IF he's not permitted to be NOT happy. Nev

[spacesailor]

I Am a Happy Chappie .

But

Those ' Dastardly Bureaucrocrats ' keep making life difficult. 

They refuse to let you know the " section 68 " or any other way to circumvent their " problem making " career  .

spacesailor