by Rob Durbridge

The crisis besetting the Federal Government looks like a rising Queensland flood, while Abbott and Co watch and wait for the Government to drown.

It’s a crisis with multiple causes, linked by the failure of a leadership without a sense of identity or direction.

The undoubted achievements of the Government are submerged by short term opportunism, capitulation to the powerful at the expense of progressive support and an inability to communicate effectively.

However, this is all its own doing as the Abbott Opposition does not command much popular support either; from them there are no big ideas for reform, just more neo-liberal slogans and anti-union plans.

The one positive in this is that despite everything, Labor and the Greens could still win a majority next year.

It’s a long shot but,building on the blocks of the Carbon Price and its progressive compensation package, the NBN, and the Equal Pay commitment to community workers, a platform of social, environmental and economic reforms could still defeat the Coalition’s plans for greater inequality and disadvantage.

Instead of making concessions to corporations who will never repay the favour, take the concessions away from them so they pay their way like the good citizens they claim to be.

If the ALP wants the electorate to start listening, start saying things the majority wants to hear; public nation-building projects to stimulate growth, create jobs and protect the environment protection like fast rail, renewable energy sources and a publicly-owned and modernized energy sector.

Instead of becoming fixated on the budget surplus, how about building quality public services like education and health with the taxation base to do it? The increasing fragility of the prospects for growth may well demand further economic initiatives after May.

The ALP needs internal reform to allow adopted policies and members’ views to prevail and the restoration of caucus democracy so that isolation of the Government from the community can be addressed. Instead of blaming the Greens for the plight of the ALP, ask why it is that the Greens have won the progressive constituency where ideas count and swing votes.

The Greens have found articulate and knowledgeable leaders who are able to communicate the issues effectively while the ALP lurches from crisis to crisis alternating between denial and ultimate policy concessions which win no new support.

Withdrawal from the war-without-mandate in Afghanistan is an example; costing billions, lives and life-long disabilities for purposes never explained and then ended, but not ended with SAS units to continue indefinitely. US bases that are not bases but ‘joint facilities’, drones being launched from Australian territory and billions to be spent on submarines and aircraft for the privilege of the US alliance just don’t add up. Who are we arming against again?

The Carbon Tax is another – something which could be a key building block for the new economy which is now being downplayed and blamed on the Greens while renewable energy is downgraded in favour of more coal and gas exploitation. When it is known that the compensation is real, the costs are minimal for households and the sky has not fallen in, the Coalition’s scare campaign could be neutralized.

Instead of sulking about the success of the Greens, and prophesying doom with Bob Brown’s departure, the ALP should accept that Milne’s team will be vital to regaining government and act accordingly. One way would be to make Bandt the Minister for Energy, replacing the corporations’ favourite son.

Short of that, a reform program which distinguishes Labor from the Coalition and joins the Greens in building a coherent vision for a more just and sustainable Australia would reach traditional and new ALP voters. Leaders who can articulate and reach voters who are sick of spin and manipulation is another necessity. The ALP of all parties knows that its first duty is to win elections and to find the people who can do it.

The Greens new leadership in Christine Milne and Adam Bandt will see the party maintain its vote and reach out to more traditional labour voters in unions and social movements beyond the environment. Marriage equality and all the issues which relate to it, rights for workers to organise beyond the half-finished repeal of Work Choices, ending the demonization of refugees, the unemployed and Indigenous people are all part of the Greens future.

Christine Milne began the leadership of the Greens with a stellar performance which illustrated her command of the economic and environmental issues facing the nation. With a background as a community activist and state politician she has experience in government with both major parties as well as their hostility and ruthlessness.

Of all Federal politicians she has shown her knowledge and ability and is respected internationally for her political and community campaigns against harmful emissions. The Greens’ near 20% primary vote in the recent Queensland by-election shows that predictions of the party’s demise are premature.

Both the Greens and the ALP will continue to compete, particularly in inner-city electorates, but both parties also need to recognize that sitting on cross benches does not achieve much in the way of reform; together they can win government but apart they will be on the sidelines.

The immediate challenge for the two parties is whether or not to exchange preferences in Deputy Leader Bandt’s seat of Melbourne. For its part the Coalition is likely to not preference the Greens as they showed in the 2011 Victorian state poll.

This is a challenge to both the ALP and the Greens, but it is also symbolic of the wider challenge for the two anti-Coalition parties.

- Rob Durbridge, SEARCH President

http://www.search.org.au/archives/3112

by Humphrey McQueen

For months, the bosses, their stenographers in the mass media and their political agents have been publicising corruption in the East Branch of the Health Services Union to tar the whole of the labour movement.

The responses from the Killard government and the ACTU have been as tardy as they have been lame. The best their leaders can mouth is that the HSU is the one rotten apple. This apologetic line is the latest instance of how organised labour is on the back foot.

The most obvious example of this retreat has been in regard to the Australian Building and Construction Commission where the Construction Division of the CFMEU has never taken the fight up to the bosses by focusing on their ‘ingrained culture’ of criminality. Too often the union pleads: ‘we’re not as thuggish as they say we are’.
The union is vigorous in attacking OH&S violations and detailing non-payment of wages, Super and taxes, But these offences are confined to the workplace and don’t help the populace to see the nature of capitalism.

Exploitation is not theft

Before documenting a few recent instances from the avalanche of the activities considered crimes even by the standards of bourgeois justice, it is vital to be clear about how the capitalist system works.

All the money that capitalists steal from each other and swindle out of governments and the public comes from the surplus value added by wage-slaves.

That exploitation is not theft. On average, capitalists pay wage-slaves the full value of the cost of producing the one commodity – their labour-power – that we have for sale.

That exchange is the core of capitalism. Once that surplus value has been produced, sections of capital battle to get their hands on as much of it as possible. That is where the most of the swindling comes in. In some cases, the original capitalist can be left with no profit. No commentator on the accumulation of capital has paid as much attention to swindling as did Marx who nonetheless kept it in its place.

Construction

Collusive tendering and price-fixing are the ‘ingrained culture’ of the employers in this sector. In 1995, Leighton’s then CEO, Wal King, justified his company’s use of false invoices to conceal price-fixing on the Sydney Casino as ‘the culture … and custom that had been long-standing in the industry that had been handed on for years.’ So had King’s excuse.

In 1911, the NSW MBA justified its members’ involvement in illegal commissions by saying that they ‘should be openly recognised’ as ‘universal and worldwide’.

The 1995 report branded King and Leightons as ‘not of good repute, having regard to character, honesty and integrity’. Despite this, he and Leightons continued to flourish.

They were not banned from sites, unlike CFMEU organisers defending the lives of their members.

The NSW Gyles Royal Commission in 1990 forced the resignation of the executive of the NSW MBA which had been a clearing house for collusive tenders. This unanticipated outcome was similar to that from the Royal Commission into the Ship Painters and Dockers which had exposed bottom-of-the harbor schemes across the big end of town.
Howard did not make that mistake in setting the terms of reference for the Cole inquisition into the building and construction unions.

Killard followed suit when she excluded health and safety from the review of the ABCC, which thereby had an easy time in finding that her ‘tough cop on the beat’ was necessary.

The gravest matter in building and construction is the Hardie Asbestos case. The High Court endorsed the disbarring of its directors for seven years for rigging the books about the compensation fund. There is no chance of their being charged with complicity in the mass murder of workers since, under capitalism, killing is not murder when done for profit.

In April, Lend Lease was made to pay fines and restitution of $54USm. for ten years of ‘a systematic pattern of audacious fraud’ in the US of A. Yet again, the company’s defence was ‘everyone does it’. Yet again, Lend Lease is allowed to tender for government contracts.

Funny money

John Gay, former head at Gunns in Tasmania, has been charged on two counts of insider trading late in 2011. It is alleged that he sold shares in Gunns knowing that funds for its pulp mill were not going forthcoming.
In the same week as Gay faced court on 14 May, the Securities Commission (ASIC) reported a boom in insider-trading, with as many as 200 alerts received every day, that is, some 50,000 a year. The authorities managed to get eleven convictions in the three years to December, a slight improvement over their ten successes in the decade before 2008. The financialisation of the economy has inserted multiple levels of intermediaries with access to advance information about company accounts. The disproportion of alerts to convictions is a measure of how light is the hand of the law on corporate crooks.

The shopping center giant Centro lost track of more than $3 billion and thereby misled shareholders in 2007. A judge fined its Chief Financial Officer $30,000 and disqualified him for two years. In delivering his findings, his honour warned off ASIC by ruling that the Centro board had not been personally dishonest. Indeed, they had been ‘intelligent, conscientious and well-advised’. Perhaps if they had been stupid, lazy and ignorant they would not have lost anything? We might compare the court’s kid-glove treatment of Centro’s bosses with what its managers would have done to an honest, intelligent, conscientious and well-advised shopkeeper who happened to lose track of even $3,000 in unpaid rents.

Much smaller in one sense yet also far larger in its implication is the plundering of Super fund Trio by its executives. Alongside the Wollongong battlers whose losses were covered by government guarantees were several hundred leafy North Shore investors who went for Trio’s self-managed funds because they promised higher returns. Where did those ‘victims’ think the extra spondoolicks were going to come from if not from shonky deals such as Trio’s transferring $124m. to a tax haven?

The problem is not the individual rip-off merchant or a few greedy Pymble millionaires, but the institutionalisation of tax havens with the connivance of governments across the globe.
ASIC recently fined Leightons $300,000 for non-disclosure of information to the stock exchange. That is a hanging offence because they were ripping off other capitalists. A fine for killing for profit can be as little as $35,000. Bourgeois justice values a worker’s life at one-eighth of a share-holder’s monetary loss.

Bribes
Leighton’s is also under investigation here and in Iraq into whether one of its subsidiaries paid bribes to get information to win a contract with South Oil Co.

Queensland ex-Minister Gordon Nuttall is in jail for taking bribes from mining magnate Ken Talbot. Talbot was due to stand trial on thirty-five charges of corruption but died in a plane crash between Cameroon and the Congo, two of the most corrupt countries on that continent. You can bet your bottom dollar that Talbot had been as generous to the thugs ruling over those mines as he was to Nuttall. Perhaps his plane crashed because it was overloaded with gifts.

In the wake of the Wheat Board’s bribery in Iraq, the Reserve Bank of Australia got around to cleaning up its act.

Between 2001 and 2009, two subsidiaries, Note Printing Australia and Securency, paid $50m. to agents to win contracts to supply plasticised bank notes. How much of this payout ended up bribing officials in places like Nepal? How much did the RBA oard know, and when did they know it?

On 4 April this year, thirty Victorian building inspectors were charged with ‘alleged corruption, serious misconduct and harassment’; they allegedly took kickbacks to block formal investigations. On the same day, the State government announced the formation of its own Construction Stasi to ban the flying of the Eureka flag on sites. There will be no special police to investigate who bribed the inspectors.

Killing no murder

Four trucking companies are up on 1,000 charges of disabling the speed governors on their trucks. The practice came to light after a truck killed three people in January. In the aftermath, NSW police found that scores of governors at four firms had been tampered with.

The Transport Workers’ Union repeated its accusation against Coles and Woolworths for imposing unsafe delivery schedules. For proof, stop at the Truckies’ memorial at Tarcutta. The employers’ association defence is that executives sit in offices and don’t sully their suits by tinkering with accelerators. Hence, any blame rests with the drivers. At law, corporations don’t have a soul to condemn or a backside to kick, yet they seem well supplied with arseholes.

Price-fixing

One QANTAS executive in the US went to gaol for eight months in 2008 for colluding with competitors to fix freight rates.

Qantas has also been fined by the European Commission, the New Zealand authorities and paid $26m. in penalties early last year in the US of A. If Qantas bosses were indigenous lads in Western Australia they would be behind bars under the three-strikes-and-you’re-in rule.

Dick Pratt made a name for himself as a philanthropist before the Competition Commission fined him $36m. for price-fixing. By colluding on the price of cardboard cartons, Pratt’s Visy and rival Amcor stole money from every pensioner who bought a packet of corn-flakes. Out of that rip-off of the most vulnerable, Pratt made a big fellow of himself.

It is typical of the ingrained culture of capitalism that his associates said that the head of the Competition Commission, Gordon Samuel, had behaved badly in pursuing the case because he had been a guest at Pratt’s house.

Prime Minister Rudd knew about the scam yet flew to the funeral to pay homage to one of the biggest crooks yet to be exposed in Australia.
Transfield’s co-founder, Franco Belgiorno-Nettis, subsidised the visual arts out of the profits he made from exploiting workers while swindling customers and governments. He confessed to his corporation’s official historian that he had engaged in corruption and strong-arm tactics: ‘We cover this with a veneer of civilization.’ In a class society, each act of civilisation is met by a piece of barbarism exacted from workers whose creativity and suffering pay for the benefactor’s noble gestures.

Activists must voice class bitterness and class contempt.

We lose by cringing before bad behaviour in one union.

Instead, we must go straight for the corporate jugular to publicise organised robbers and serial killers.

Dickens got it half wrong in Bleak House when he has detective Bucket observe that, while murder could be done by amateurs, thieving needed professionals.

Dickens was right to foresee that Pratt did not wake up one morning after a blameless career in business and decide to steal tens of millions of dollars. He was a professional thief. Moreover, killing for profit is no work for amateurs as asbestos makes clear.

An International Class-War Crimes Tribunal would charge the Hardie executives with ‘prole-cide’.

Reforms to make the wealthiest Australians pay their fair share of tax must be stepped up, including the introduction of a new “millionaires’ tax”.

At next week’s ACTU Congress, unions will discuss proposals to shift the tax burden off the shoulders of low and middle income Australians, as part of an agenda to shape a fairer and stronger economic system.

ACTU Assistant Secretary Tim Lyons said tax reforms announced in this week’s Federal Budget had made the system more progressive, but there was much more that could be done to ensure Australia’s wealthy pay their fair share.

The union movement’s economic policy agenda for the next three years will include a proposal for a millionaire’s tax, similar to the “Buffett Rule” advocated by the Obama administration in the United States. This will be debated on the second day of next week’s ACTU Congress, beginning on 15 May.

Mr Lyons said the Budget had made strides towards a fairer tax system with a tripling of the tax-free threshold, reduction of super tax concessions for high income earners, and the tightening of loopholes like the tax concessions for golden handshakes and executives’ Living Away from Home Allowance. But she said more was needed to undo the damage of the Howard years, which had favoured tax cuts for high income earners.

“Next week, about 1000 delegates will be focused on our vision to create a better, fairer and more secure life for all Australian workers,” Mr Lyons said. “Part of will include a plan to transform the way Australians are taxed, which at the moment places more weight on the shoulders of working Australians and their families.

“The Minerals Rent Resource Tax and the tax loss ‘carry back’ are good policy, but further change are needed to the business tax system to support jobs and growth, while ensuring business pays its fair share.

“The income tax system is absurdly inequitable when it comes to taxing the mega-rich. Because most of their income comes from investments, billionaires like Gina Rinehart, Clive Palmer and Andrew Forrest pay a much lower proportional tax rate than the average Australian family. They are laughing all the way to the bank, while ordinary Australians struggle to find secure jobs and meet their costs of living.

“The adoption of a Down Under version of the ‘Buffet Rule’ would ensure that millionaires who principally derive their income from capital gains pay at least as much in tax as a proportion of their incomes as ordinary working Australians.”

All draft policies for the ACTU Congress are available at www.actucongress.org.au. Congress is on from 15-17 May at the Sydney Convention Centre.

http://oz.labourstart.org/

Ged Kearney ACTU
Responding to the 2012 Federal Budget, ACTU President Ged Kearney said:

“The 2012-13 Federal Budget will help shape a fairer Australia, through a more progressive tax system, better assistance for low and middle income earners and protection for jobs in struggling businesses.

“The Government has had to perform a difficult balancing act in framing the 2012-13 Federal Budget. It has been driven by its objective of returning to surplus, but has also made several welcome commitments to create a fairer Australia.

“However, while we understand Treasurer Wayne Swan’s objective to deliver a surplus in the coming financial year, it is regrettable that this has resulted in cuts to public services, jobs, and social security for some of our most vulnerable community members.

“The Budget forecasts confirm that Australia’s economy continues to be well-managed, with unemployment much lower than that of the United States and much of Europe.

“However, the Government must remain conscious of the ongoing global economic instability and be prepared to reconsider its position if necessary.

“Specific initiatives we welcome from the Treasurer tonight include the Government’s commitment to the reduction of the inequitable tax concessions on superannuation contributions for high income earners, along with raising the tax free threshold to $18,000, which will mean about 630,000 low paid workers will not pay income tax.

http://www.actu.org.au/Media/Mediareleases/GovernmenttakesimportantstepstowardscreatingafairerAustraliawith2012Budget.aspx

Taur Matan Ruak was formally an independent candidate, but in the last few weeks of the second round he was clearly the candidate of Prime Minister Xanana Gusmao. While FRETILIN members were clearly downcast at the outcome, FRETILIN had succeeded in advancing its final vote by 8 per cent, compared to the 2007 presidential run-off.

In the first round, incumbent President Jose Ramos Horta was eliminated with 17.5 per cent of the vote, with Lu-Olo leading the results at 28.8 per cent, and Ruak coming in second at 25.7 per cent. La Sama, who came in just behind Horta with 17.3 per cent, also demonstrated strong support. These four candidates accounted for 89.3 per cent of the total vote.

Timor-Leste Presidential Election Round 1, March 17, 2012
Candidate Total Vote Percentage
Manuel Tilman (KOTA) 7,226 1.56
Taur Matan Ruak (Independent) 119,462 25.71
Francisco Guterres ‘Lu-Olo’ (FRETILIN) 133,635 28.76
Rogerio Lobato (Independent) 16,219 3.49
Maria do Ceu Lopes da Silva (Independent) 1,843 0.40
Angelita Maria Francisca Pires (Undertim) 1,742 0.37
Jose Ramos Horta (Independent) 81,231 17.48
Francisco Gomes (split of ASDT) 3,531 0.76
Jose Luis Guterres (Frente-Mudanca) 9,235 1.99
Abilio Araujo (PNT) 6,294 1.35
Lucas da Costa (Independent) 3,862 0.83
Fernando La Sama de Araujo (PD) 80,381 17.30
There were 626,503 registered voters, of whom 489,933 voted, a participation rate of 78.20 per cent. Of these 464,611 made valid votes, 94.84 per cent.
Timor-Leste Presidential Election Round 2, April 16, 2012
Candidate Total Vote Percentage
Taur Matan Ruak 275,441 61.23
Francisco Guterres ‘Lu-Olo’ 174,386 38.77
In Round 2, there were 627,295 registered voters, and 449,827 valid votes, a lower turnout at 73.12 per cent.

After the first round, President Horta and Parliamentary President La Sama (Democratic Party PD) held a joint media conference to indicate that they would work together to influence the outcome of the second round. President Horta also indicated that he would play a role in the parliamentary elections, now set for July 7, 2012, but did not spell out what he would do.

In fact, both figures were very unhappy with the decision taken by Prime Minister Gusmao to support Taur Matan Ruak, as each had expected Gusmao’s support for themselves.

In the counting for Round 1, there was some controversy in Baucau and Manatuto, leading to a strong protest by FRETILIN and a call for a recount in Baucau. This was strongly resisted by the electoral agency, the Technical Secretariat for Electoral Administration (STAE), but supported by the oversight body, the National Electoral Commission (CNE). In the end the Supreme Court of Appeal ordered the recount, which STAE conducted under protest. The recount led to an increase in the FRETILIN vote by 3,000, a 10 per cent shift.

FRETILIN and the Democratic Party had protested about late night visits to STAE by Prime Minister Gusmao on March 15 and 16. President Horta had also criticised this, but gave the Prime Minister ‘the benefit of the doubt’.

The campaign for Round 2 was marked by the alignment of the defeated parties around Lu-Olo, and the lack of support for Ruak. However, while the key voter blocs of Horta and La Sama were mobilised in the Districts behind Lu-Olo, neither Horta nor La Sama themselves made strong public statements to this effect, nor did they personally attend a Lu-Olo rally. This phase however, was also marked by the strong personal support of Gusmao for Ruak, with the Prime Minister appearing on his banners and posters, and attending several rallies.

FRETILIN organised a rally for Lu-Olo in Maubara, in the Liquica District, on April 11, with about 700 attending, and strong speeches for Lu-Olo from the Horta and La Sama District coordinators. Such a rally was not possible in 2007, because a pro-Gusmao militia commanded by Railos operated in the area. Gusmao reacted by holding small meetings in Liquica on April 14 and 15, with Railos and ‘petitioners’ – some of the rebel soldiers from the 2006 crisis.

The campaign concluded with a two-hour television debate between the candidates on the evening of April 13, in which Ruak fumbled early and many felt that Lu-Olo gave a convincing presentation. There is no ‘worm’ in Timor-Leste election debates, and also no real polling is possible. However, the broad expectation was for a close vote on the 16th.

But instead there was a decisive win for Ruak, who also won 11 of the 13 Districts, including Dili, which has 124,000 voters. Lu-Olo won the second largest town, Baucau, and Viqueque, and compared to 2007, the FRETILIN vote recovered in western Districts.

Clearly most of the Horta and La Sama votes from Round 1 went to Ruak, despite the apparent stance of their leaders. Perhaps just 6 per cent of this bloc went to Lu-Olo, along with the votes from Lobato, Tilman, Freitas and Pires.
‘Peace and stability’ were uppermost in voters’ concerns, and after the result many people suggested that the voters had chosen the outcome with the lesser chance of violence – a calculation that it was safer to vote for Ruak.

As well, there was a wave of reports to FRETILIN of intimidation of voters prior to election day and vote substitution, particularly in western Districts.

FRETILIN accepted the outcome, and has started its mobilisation and campaign for the July parliamentary elections.

The Presidency is an important institution, to help balance the Executive led by the Prime Minister, and it has the role of asking the leader of the party or coalition with the most votes in the parliamentary election to try to form a government. The President can also veto new legislation, dissolve parliament and call elections in certain circumstances, and made acts of clemency on pardon for prisoners.

Twenty-six parties are going to contest the parliamentary elections, and a party needs 3 per cent of the vote to obtain representation in the 65-seat house.

FRETILIN can expect to win the most votes, as it did in 2007, on the basis of the first round of the presidential elections. If it can achieve an effective alliance with either or both of PD and ASDT, it could be the largest part of a coalition with close to 50 per cent of the vote.
On the other hand, Prime Minister Gusmao will work hard to achieve a formal coalition with PD and ASDT before the election, and thus have his CNRT party as the largest coalition, and continue to be Prime Minister to the exclusion of FRETILIN.

One question now is just what is the CNRT vote. With CNRT support, Ruak achieved 25.7 per cent in round 1. In 2007, with CNRT support, Horta achieved 24 per cent. But Horta himself won 17.5 percent this time, without CNRT support. As well, Ruak won a significant number of votes from FRETILIN supporters. So it is quite hard to predict the real CNRT vote at this time, because Ruak will not be a candidate on July 7.

The ASDT President, Xavier do Amaral, died just before the first presidential election, and it is possible that ASDT will collapse without him. However, it is possible that Jose Ramos Horta will make a bid to take his place, and then make a bid to become Prime Minister himself.

FRETILIN’s candidate for Prime Minister will be its Secretary-General Mari Alkatiri.

Unlike the Presidential race, the parliamentary campaign will focus much more on policies, and the problems of wastage, corruption, and poor management will work against the Gusmao government.

Given the profound need for Timor-Leste to move away from its violent past, FRETILIN is hoping that the politics this time will encourage convergence into a sharing of power in a coalition government, including Gusmao, rather than sharp division and exclusion. The new President will have an important role at that moment.

It must be of great concern that a pattern of systematic election manipulation has emerged this time, but it can be countered with determined political leadership and continued training support by the international community.
T
he SEARCH Foundation Election Observer Mission – four people in Round 1 and five people in Round 2 – reported a peaceful atmosphere on both voting days at locations they visited, as well as small technical anomalies.

For the second round, it also reported some more serious incidents which indicated intimidation.

So far 19 people have volunteered to take part in the SEARCH Foundation Election Observer Mission for the parliamentary elections.
- Peter Murphy

Australia is among the top military spenders per capita.

This is not something to boast about! There are alternatives – for example, well resourced public schools with better facilities and smaller classes to educate the citizens of the future; more beds in our public hospitals with more nurses with better working conditions, a sustainable environment, and much more.

All this would be possible if Labor and Liberal Governments would listen to the people and cut military spending.

General Facts
• We spend $32 billion a year on the military that is $87 million a day.
• That makes us the 14th biggest spender on the military in the world.
• We are 6th largest per capita spender on the military in the world.
• Australian military expenditure equals and sometimes surpasses what we spend federally on education.
• Australian military expenditure is 9 to 10 per cent of Federal Government outlays.
• Australian military expenditure is guaranteed to rise by 4 to 5 per cent each year for 20 years.

Specific Facts
• Australia has spent $10 billion on the war in Afghanistan – $1 billion a year plus an additional $1.6 billion for extra armour.
• Australia is buying 3 Aegis air warfare warships at over $2 billion each.
• Australia has recently acquired a fleet of 24 Super Hornet warplanes for $6.6 billion.
• Australia is purchasing 100 F35 Joint Strike Fighters at a cost of over $16 billion. This aircraft involves controversial, highly complex technology and is still being developed. In late 2009, when the Government ordered its first instalment (14 jets totalling $3.2 billion), less than 3 per cent of flight testing had been undertaken.
• Australia cannot staff its existing 6 Collins Class submarines but the 2009 Defence White Paper pushed for 12 new submarines (estimated to cost $38 billion).
• Australia plans to be the first country in the South East Asian region to acquire cruise missiles (said to be more than $0.5 million each). Not only will this appear threatening to our neighbours but it will put us in breach of a nuclear non-proliferation measure to which we subscribe, the 1987 Missile Technology Control Regime.

Australian Comparisons
Building the Educational Revolution; $16.1 billion ½ of 1 year’s military spending
The Government’s 2 year economic stimulus plan – $42 billion 1 year and 3 months military spending
Move Royal Adelaide Hospital to a new site – $1.7 billion 3 weeks military spending
Refurbish Royal Hobart Hospital – $1 billion 2 weeks military spending
Government funding of large, grid-connected solar projects (Solar Flagships Program) – $1.5 billion 3 weeks of military spending
Refurbish Royal North Shore Hospital (Sydney) – $1 billion 2 weeks military spending
Rebuild Wagga Wagga Base Hospital – $290 million 3 days military spending
$100 mill for Tamworth’s hospital Just over a day’s military spending Just over a day’s military spending
Acute care beds for Dubbo and Orange Base Hospital – $5 million 1 and half hours military spending
EcoTransit’s light rail plan for inner west Sydney – $414 million 4 days of military spending
Australian overseas aid — $4.3 billion 1½ months military spending
Queensland reconstruction after the cyclone and floods — $5 billion 2 months military spending

Chomsky on May Day

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/04/29-4

Photos May Day
http://boingboing.net/2012/05/01/may-day-2012-big-photo-galle.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/gallery/2012/may/01/may-day-rallies-pictures

Leo Panitch on May Day
http://www.socialistproject.ca/inthenews/MayDay.html
The claiming of May 1 as a day for political protest grew out of the particular nature of working-class activism of Europe and North America in the late 19th century. During that time labourers were encountering ferocious industrial capitalists who sought to limit workers’ control over their jobs; working people in turn fought back by demanding shorter hours and better conditions. New May Day graphic novel retells old stories of struggle
“May Day has symbolized the common struggles of workers around the globe”.
Read here
http://rabble.ca/books/reviews/2012/04/may-day-graphic-novel-retells-old-stories-struggle

From the US May Day and Occupy
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/04/30-9

Monday is May day Public holiday in Darwin

Unions NT May Day Magazine
with articles including mine on the right to strike for secure jobs.
Unions_NT MayDay 2012

And in one of the poorest nations Timor Leste the unions are now allowed to exist from 2002, so good struggles to the KSTL.

In the US, the AFL-CIO

http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/Global-Action/May-Day-Workers-Rights-Must-Be-Universal

In Adelaide

http://s-o-b.posterous.com/may-day-dinner-outstanding-success#

With veteran whafie and NT political leader Brian Manning, I with 40 others attended Darwin’s public meeting on the US military machine in Australia.

I applaud the Basewatch group for an informative meeting over 2 hours on this question of War or Peace.

Basewatch aims to be a part of bringing Darwin into the forefront of planning for this major change in social infrastructure, that has so far been declared but not defined for mutual deliberation with the people of Darwin – local voices keen to set boundaries and criteria for any American military presence in our town.

I intervened at the end when Major General Krause – who is implementing the USA Base or as he says it is not a Base but a ‘joint-facility’ – was asked political questions about why?

I said the Major General does not make these political decisions.

The answer is war with China and an incremental build-up with US vessels, aircraft and marines in Darwin combat ready.

The “new forward-staging base” is a clear signal to China that “the US has quick-response capability in Beijing’s backyard”
(Wall Street Journal 27/1/12). The USS Halsey was here for Anzac Day – check out its impressive capability.

Australia’s Defence White Paper (2009) identifies China as a potential enemy and talks about South East Asia being “a conduit for the projection of military power against us by others.”

But China, our leading trading partner, believes “Australia should beware lest it be perceived as a lackey of Washington” (The Australian 22 Mar 2012).

Indonesia, our near neighbour, has warned that an expanded military presence generates a “vicious circle of tension and mistrust” (SMH 17Nov 2011).

War with China? We don’t want this US build up to war with China.

Rather an Independent Australian policy.

Of course Defence Minister Smith denies this

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/chinese-power-cant-be-contained-smith-20120427-1xpw6.html

Fraser accuse Smith of reliving the cold war

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/fraser-accuses-smith-of-reliving-the-cold-war-20120426-1xmoh.html

and China will take us as a prize

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/china-will-take-us-as-a-prize-fraser/story-fn59niix-1226334814698

Darwin citizens ought to be asked whether we want to be a target – like in the Bombing of Darwin when the Japanese invaded Dili Timor Leste.

Chomsky’s moral imperative is to work to overthrow the power that makes war.

I cited the Sydney group ‘Lets Keep War from Our Front Door’.

But the Major General does not answer these questions, not his to answer, so I asked the speaker the Rev Lee Levitt Olsen who had cited in his moving address that in Adelaide the anti-war movement organised and over 100,000 marched, along with millions in worldwide rallies against the war in Iraq. Slow organising at the community and state level and broad alliances was the key. But Howard went to war under the US. No democracy here. How do we build to overcome this issue?

Lee Levitt Olsen from the Uniting Church has wide international networks, an impressive history of action and a gifted orator and his contribution ought to be listened to.

WA Senator Scott Ludlam argued presented the Greens concerns on the impact of military bases – see also the most reasonable pamphlet.

He carefully worked through important clarifications on what the Australian government is doing and what is happening with this steady build-up.

No ALP politician was present.

Basewatch participants politely questioned Major General Krause on the details on what is happening and he answered them and this exchange is important to continue.

Major General Krause is a straight talker, gave a polished performance and we all found it essential to get his position
on training,not a permanent base and the social and economic impact. I leave it to him and others to go over what we know until now of the US forces in NT.

Live from Okinawa on the large screen Professor Aubay and her supporters gave a detailed explanation of the disaster for the people with the US base. Her contribution means there are many issues to be worked through in the NT, with the government determined to move carefully addressing concerns.

On april 28th Rick Wallace in the Australian wrote “the deal struck to send US marines to Darwin appears to have helped solve a deadlock between Japan and the US over moving US troops away from Okinawa.

Tokyo and Washington reached a deal yesterday to transfer about half of the 18,000 US marines based in the southern island of Okinawa to Guam, Hawaii and Australia.”

June Mills gave the indigenous welcome and talked of her mother Kath Mills and her opposition to war and Kath Mills’ experience in Katherine being bombed by the Japanese. She sang Arafura Pearl.

We are at the beginning of education and debate by the Australian public on the arguments.

This national question of war is on the agenda and opposition growing and can be slowly organised in civil society, in institutions, and with political lobbying. Hundreds of community activities can be organised.

I advocate ‘talking truth to authority’ and encourage challenging the 1%.

But as Chomsky says with US marines there is no point
(see review article in Australian Options 68 on this blog).

What does work in whatever way is to be part of international and local political actions ‘we the people’ as equal citizens collectively in a democracy acting against war and for peace.

I add the following sent to me from a Sydney group

LET’S KEEP WAR FROM OUR DOOR
For discussion
We wish to share a safe home in a region built on friendship, trust and
the peaceful resolution of disputes and differences. However, US troops
are now permanently stationed in Darwin – the “new forward-staging
base”, a clear signal to China that “the US has quick-response capability
in Beijing’s backyard” ( Wall Street Journal 27/1/12).

Australia’s Defence White Paper (2009) identifies China as a potential
enemy and talks about South East Asia being “a conduit for the projection
of military power against us by others.” But China, our leading trading partner, believes “Australia should beware lest it be perceived as a lackey
of Washington” (The Australian 22 Mar 2012). Indonesia, our near
neighbour, has warned that an expanded military presence would generate
a “vicious circle of tension and mistrust” (SMH 17Nov 2011).

Meanwhile, a military solution to end Iran’s nuclear ambitions has also serious implications for Australia while it hosts US combat troops.
In a recent BBC report, Iran’s former lead nuclear negotiator, Dr Seyed Hossein Mousavian, warned Iran would be “confronting Israel directly
and punishing all those countries which advocated war against Iran … I cannot imagine US infrastructure, diplomats or personnel would be safe anywhere in the world.”

Such developments should ring alarm bells for Australia.

Australia has a long history of involvement in global peace efforts. We helped draft the United Nations Charter, which makes it illegal to wage aggressive warfare, and were one of just eight countries to create the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. We have been involved in numerous peace-keeping exercises around the globe.

This is the proud record we should be continuing to expand, not our
military capabilities.

Therefore, We:

• oppose the continuing military build-up in our home region, which threatens to bring war to our doorstep.

• call on Indo-Pacific nations of the to reduce their force levels and military spending.

• call on governments to build regional mechanisms to resolve disputes under the auspices of the United Nations, to stop our differences turning
into flashpoints or pretexts for war.

• call on the Australian government to base the US-Australian relationship on our non military ties.

The increasingly militaristic posture of the US-Australian alliance undermines our national sovereignty and our standing in the region.

Let’s replace confrontation with co-operation. Let’s replace fear with friendship.

Let’s Keep War From Our Door.
___________________________________
c/- KWFD, 499 Elizabeth St, Surry Hills NSW 2010

Please distribute this message on YouTube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVU5-PRWQyo&feature=email

Unions_NT MayDay 2012