Solomon Islands: US-led Cold War tirade continues

 

Written by: (Contributed) on 14 September 2022

 An important anti-imperialist struggle is taking place in the South Pacific as the Sogavare government in the Solomon Islands challenges the dictatorial role of US-led diplomacy toward their country. The US-led diplomacy is based in neo-colonial relations and has included defence and security measures which are not in the interests of the Solomon Islands. Australia is also involved.

US diplomacy toward the South Pacific has, historically, been parochial and invariably channelled through Australia as the main regional hub for 'US interests'. The US diplomatic position has been marked by an indifference toward economic development and due care and consideration toward the multi-ethnic populations of the countries in the region. US-led foreign policy toward the South Pacific has tended to be based in directives rather than diplomatic consultation.

In September, 2019, the democratically-elected Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare and his  government in Honiara chose to switch the diplomatic allegiance of their country from Taiwan to China. It met with disquiet, escalating diplomatic tensions and downright hostility from the US and their supporters in Australia. Moves to subsequently sign a security pact with China sent diplomatic tensions soaring to new found levels.

The security pact was subsequently assessed by the Australian Defence Forces (ADF) as having 'underscored the need for Australia to have a persistent maritime surveillance capability, one able to cover significant portions of the Indo-Pacific on a single mission'. (1) One can but wonder what was going on inside the Defence Department to create the demand for a large, remotely piloted aircraft with the capability 'of remaining air-borne for up to 24 hours and has sensors which include a 360-degree maritime surveillance radar, infra-red / electro-optic camera and significant electronic intelligence capability', linked to Pine Gap and Guam. (2) It is an extremely expensive piece of military equipment.

Following the signing of the security pact, strings of US-led allegations were subsequently made that the Sogavare government was planning to allow China to open military and naval facilities in the country, without any evidence whatsoever. Australia, however, would appear to have begun constructing a secret military facility on a remote part of Temotu province in the Solomon Islands, known as an 'Eastern Border Outpost'. (3) It is, apparently, regarded as part of as longer-term diplomatic agreement between Australia and the Solomon Islands to build a 'multi-agency centre' and has been subject to official diplomatic silence and denial by the Australian High Commissioner in Honiara. One can but speculate why.

A US-led diplomatic tirade toward the Solomon Islands has continued to the present day. It has been conducted with a swash-buckling bravado and complete lack of respect for Melanesian peoples.

A more recent contribution, by a senior diplomatic official in Canberra, for example, equated the Sogavare administration with draconian political legislation and effectively undermining traditional US-led hegemonic positions in the South Pacific. (4) The fact the government in Honiara remains committed toward conducting all foreign policy along traditional Melanesian cultural lines of a 'Friend to All, Enemy to None', has been conveniently overlooked by those who choose to portray Sogavare and his supporters as regional 'bogey-men', not to be relied upon. The fact that domestic political issues arising from inter-ethnic tensions have made governance difficult and political stability problematic has not even been regarded as a matter of consideration.

One recent initiative by the Sogavare government led to a massive reaction by the US and has revealed the true mentality of Pentagon military planning, which is designed to serve only the interests of the US military-industrial complex. US-led regional foreign policy toward the South Pacific is inevitably conducted on a limited and mono-dimensional basis as a recent article in the Wall Street Journal about a ban on US naval vessels visiting the Solomon Islands clearly showed. It was claimed 'the correct context in which to view the ban is through the prism of a security pact signed by Mr Sogavare and Beijing that potentially opens the door to a direct Chinese military and police presence'. (5)

A recent Cold War-type statement made by US Republican Congressman Mike Gallagher, stated 'the US and Australia needed to prioritise reversing the current disastrous trend in the Solomons before it's too late … a foreign aggressor seems bent on conquering the islands from within without even firing a shot', leaving little to the imagination about US-led foreign policy and intentions. (6)  

Viewed in a wider and alternative context, the Solomon Islands diplomacy is quite different to what US-led intelligence assessments have concluded.

In late August the Solomon Islands imposed a temporary ban on US naval visits following a diplomatic incident where US Coast Guard Oliver Henry was refused clearance to dock, re-fuel and take on provisions. The US naval vessel had apparently been part of a regional group monitoring and combating illegal fishing in conjunction with the Pacific Islands Forum Fisheries Agency. (7) A later development included the temporary ban being extended to also include Australian vessels. The Sogavare government, nevertheless, were only too willing to allow the US navy hospital ship Mercy, to dock and conduct free medical consultations, stating diplomatically, it would be 'wonderful to make it an annual event'. (8)

The Sogavare government later exempted Australian warships from entering the waters of the Solomon Islands together with their counterparts from New Zealand and Fiji. An official diplomatic announcement included reference to the problem of those participating in patrols to deal with illegal fishing and official administrative procedures. The government stated we 'needed to know more about the vessels arriving'. (9) And for good reason. The US intelligence services, for example, have a long history of stirring political tensions and supporting and funding separatist movements; the Solomon Islands remain vulnerable to such interference and the prevailing political culture is highly volatile.

The Solomon Islands own defence and security apparatus to maintain political stability also remain minuscule: a recent major and influential global intelligence assessment of the prevailing balance of forces for use with military planners, for example, did not even include a single reference to the Solomon Islands. (10) It was considered irrelevant.  

When viewed in the context of two important considerations, it is not difficult to understand why and how the problem of the shipping ban had arisen: it is the role of responsible government to provide effective control over vessels entering and leaving territorial waters as a prime defence and security consideration; the fact the US military appear to regard it as their right to call into ports at will is not in keeping with usual maritime protocol and administrative procedures. Secondly, political stability in the Solomon Islands remains problematic, and when viewed in the context of a recent statement from former US national security adviser, John Bolton, that he had participated in the planning of coups in other countries, it is perfectly understandable for the central government in Honiara to be reluctant and unwilling to allow US vessels to arrive in their ports without the necessary administrative protocol. (11)

When the high-level diplomatic meetings take place in Canberra between PM Anthony Albanese and his Solomon Islands counterpart, Manasseh Sogavare, a suitable agenda item for consideration might be for Australia to implement an independent foreign policy, effectively distancing Australia from US-led Cold War positions and war-mongering in the South Pacific, in general, and the Solomon Islands, in particular.

 1.     Tritons back on track after funding stall, Indo Pacific 2022, Supplement, Australian, 10 May 2022.
2.     Ibid.
3.     See: Website - Solomons Star.
4.     See: Beijing-backed autocracy festers in our backyard, The Weekend Australian, 3-4 September 2022; and, Cartoon – Pacific Stitch-up, Australian, 2 September 2022.
5.     Quoted: Ship ban speaks louder than hugs in the Solomons, Lead Editorial, Australian, 2 September 2022.
6.     Solomons bars warship visits, Australian, 2 September 2022.     
7.     US ships 'not welcome' as Solomons cosies up to Beijing, Australian 31 August 2022; and, Solomon Islands bans US navy ships from entry, Sputnik, (RF), 30 August 2022.
8.     US ships, ibid., Australian, 31 August 2022.
9.     Solomons drops ship ban ahead of PM visit, Australian, 6 September 2022.
10.   See: The Military Balance, International Institute for Strategic Studies, (London, 2021).     
11.   Coups? I have helped to plan several real ones: Bolton, Australian, 14 July 2022.

Timor-Leste’s President Dr Jose Ramos Horta under scrutiny

 Written by: Nick G. on 13 September 2022

Timor-Leste’s President Dr Jose Ramos Horta recently addressed the National Press Club in Canberra. 

Ramos Horta’s address was well-received by the assembled journalists. This accords with the friendship that Australians have for the East Timorese.

Present at the NPC luncheon was Bernard Collaery, the courageous lawyer against whom the Australian government had conducted a legal campaign of threat and harassment. This was related to his defence of the case against whistle-blower Witness X, who had exposed the Australian government’s bugging of the East Timorese government whilst negotiations were occurring over arrangements for the development of oil fields in the seas between Australia and East Timor.

Environmental risks

Following his talk, Ramos Horta faced questions about the environmental risks of developing the processing of oil and gas from the Greater Sunrise field in the Timor Sea.

Whilst there is much sympathy for the East Timorese, who once again are in conflict with Woodside Petroleum and Australian leaders, this time over where the gas should be piped for processing – to Darwin, 450 km away, or to Tasi Mane on Timor-Leste’s south coast (150 km away) – he shrugged off environmental concerns about developing fossil fuels.

Timor-Leste is quite poor and sees the oil and gas as a potential source of jobs and wealth. Ramos Horta even good humouredly suggested Timor-Leste could become the Dubai of our region. 

He correctly accused Europeans of having "polluted the whole world with coal, with oil and everything that you can imagine. And we, unfortunately, discover oil and gas only now."

He then warned Australia, the US and Europe against "lecturing" Timor-Leste on climate change, saying that the development would go ahead unless those concerned about climate change gave East Timor $100 billion in compensation if the development was stopped.

Indicating a commitment to the development of the project with private finance capital, Ramos Horta said, "We are not Venezuela with nationalised companies … no need to fear".

Australian sympathisers worried

Prominent Australian friend of Timor-Leste, Andy Alcock, noted that "many sympathisers worry about the huge amount of the Timor-Leste national income that has already been spent on Tasi Mane and the long-term feasibility of the project as the world turns away from fossil fuels and the price of oil is likely to decline as fossil fuels are phased out."

Alcock, Information Officer with the Australia-East Timor Friendship Association (South Australia), added: "Another big question is will the Chinese provide the money for the processing to go ahead in Timor-Leste?"

Ramos Horta has dismissed concerns over China’s possible financing of a pipeline to Tasi Mane, saying that "We're not talking about maritime security. It’s just a pipeline! And China will be just an investor. Australia rented the Darwin port to China; no one lost sleep over it," he joked to some laughter. Well, we did - we do not support any Australian port being leased to or owned by any overseas interests.

Alcock also said that "even if the oil and gas is processed in Timor-Leste, it will not provide many jobs and the nation urgently needs to develop other industries to become more economically viable."

Why award a war criminal?

Alcock also drew attention to another controversy in which the Timor-Leste President has been involved and over which he has faced scrutiny at home.

"Before the Timor-Leste President came to Australia," said Alcock, “he has been in hot water from FALINTIL veterans and widows because on FALINTIL Day 20.8 2022, he gave a meritorious medal to former TNI General AM Hendropriyono who was responsible for war crimes in Timor and in Indonesia itself. And he was also involved with the murder of the courageous Indonesian human rights activist Munir."
 
Alcock quoted a lengthy press release from FALANTIL veterans and widows, describing the award to Hendropriyono as "heartbreaking" and calling on the President to withdraw the declaration of the award.

Developing nations should not be forced through poverty to rely on polluting fossil fuels for revenue for their peoples.  There is s strong case for the imperialist powers and advanced capitalist countries to compensate them for leaving fossil fuels in the ground.

Whether it is US imperialism through its Australian lackeys, or Chinese social-imperialism in competition with the US and Australia, no big power should finance climate-wrecking fossil fuel projects. 

There are complexities when the future of an impoverished small nation is at stake, but solutions must be found which deny imperialism the opportunity to profit through further destruction of nature and humanity.

Down with all parasites!

Written by: Humphrey McQueen on 12 September 2022

The death of Elizabeth Windsor will not give rise to the glee that followed the demise of Margaret Thatcher.

While we are deep mourning for the coming fortnight of vacuous obsequies from non-entities who ‘did but see her passing by,’ (1)  we should reflect on the different roles that Windsor and Thatcher played in promoting the rule of monopolising capitals.

In brief, Thatcher was one of their representatives in the state apparatuses. Windsor was both their representative but also their personification.

She was one of the wealthiest people in the world. As with all fortunes, hers came from the surplus-value extracted from us working people. Some of that exploitation was directly from the wage-slaves on her landed estates or out of the corporations in which she held shares. Some came indirectly out of the taxes from those properties.

Like all capitalists, she was a parasite. And she has left a tribe of parasites.

That is what it means to be a personification of capital.

How Windsor represented the interests of the parasite classes around the world is more significant. The hereditary principle in the monarchies is based on the ‘born-to-rule’ view of humankind. Although monarchies are a dying breed, the capitalist system of defends its parasites by all kinds of theological and pseudo-scientific claims that owners have a god-given right to control productive properties because they are innately superior to us wage-slaves.

Hence, our fight is for a socialist republic.

Humphrey McQueen
For my 1999 essay on ‘A Socialist’s Republic’, see see www.surpolusvalue.org.au/mcqueen/currentpoltiics

(1) PM Menzies said, “I did but see her passing by, and I will love her till I die.” Menzies also supported “Mr Hitler”.

 

Working Women Early Childhood Education Workers Take Nationwide Strike Action

 Written by: Ned K. on 7 September 2022

On Wednesday 7 September Early Childhood Educators took strike action in over 1,000 Early Childhood Education Centres across Australia. 

The strike action on such a large scale was an escalation of action by mainly women workers to press their claims for better staffing levels, respect and recognition. 

For the last thirty years these workers who care for and educate children in their pre-school years have been struggling both for more government funding for the Centres where parents leave their young children but also for a decent wage that reflects the level of responsibility and skill in their work

The fact that over 1,000 Centres were shut down for the day of action showed that workers have an expectation that the Albanese Government will provide the funding for Early Childhood Educators to be paid considerably more than the average $24 an hour they receive now. 

Under the Gillard/Rudd Government years of 2007-13, their Union estimated that the wage for a fully trained Early Childhood Educator in 2013 should have been $26 per hour. Nine years later, in 2022, a fully trained worker in this sector is still not at a base rate of $26 per hour!

The pressure is on the Albanese Government to "deliver" for these workers as the Government knows it will not get away with allowing an increase in wages in this sector to be funded by increasing the care cost for parents.

Historically most funding of the Centres including wages has come from government funding. However, the sector has been one of the many casualties of privatisation over the last twenty years with the private for-profit component of the sector growing at a rapid rate.

The Early Childhood Educators have developed a resilience over the years since they won their first major battle in the early 1990s which was for a distinct Award covering their sector. Prior to that they were deemed "Award free" or paid under a health sector Award at the lowest classification level the employer could find.

Not only have they developed a resilience over their years of struggle for respect, but they have repeatedly found leaders amongst themselves to give public voice to their demands and also become more and more confident in their ability to mobilize for large actions culminating in the nationwide strike action of 7 September.

They have also shown they are not shy in "calling out" federal governments of either Liberal or Labor variety who fail to listen to their demands.

Maybe Albanese should take the advice of Ross Garnaut and bring in a big tax on mining companies to fund the health, education and early childhood sectors and make the multinational corporations "fund" decent wages for these working-class women warriors in the early childhood education sector!

AI abuses revealed, including in employment selection procedures

 Written by: (Contributed) on 5 September 2022

Information about a large number start-up companies in Silicon Valley designing apps and other tools for the Australian business classes to use with employment selection procedures have sent alarm bells ringing; the federal government has already been urged to appoint a Commissioner to deal with the larger problem of dealing with cyber security and artificial intelligence and accountability.

There are at present few, if any, safeguards in place in Australia to protect citizens and residents from the uses and abuses of high-tech espionage, which they encounter in almost every part of their private and everyday lives, including their employment.

A study of the uses and abuses of cyber and artificial intelligence in contemporary Australia through the University of NSW and a government department have established over a hundred companies in Silicon Valley developing cyber / AI apps and tools for use with the screening of employment applicants in Australia. (1) The finding has come soon after widespread public disquiet being raised about retail outlets using facial recognition technology with customers, without their consent. (2) Further concern has also been raised about profiling techniques being used with intelligence-gathering from social media outlets, including TikTok. (3) Research conducted through the University of Melbourne has revealed TikTok 'captures the face-prints and voice-prints of its users … which are … comparable to finger-prints as they can help others identify, surveil and profile people of interest'. (4)

A major part of the problem is that many social media users access websites from mobile telephones, which are easily high-jacked and tracked, enabling those involved in intelligence-gathering to amass huge amounts of personal bio-data which can then be shared with third parties. While some of the security problems surrounding the matter have been tightened, many Australians run the daily risk of identity theft, or profiles of their behaviour being used without their consent or control. The recent legal verdict and $200,000 fine imposed on the Singapore-based Circles.Life telecommunications company for not conducting proper identity checks on users was, for example, only the tip of a very large iceberg. (5) While the company were found to have been responsible for transferring customers phone numbers from other telecommunications companies, their failure to use correct identity checks allowed 42 customers to become victims of fraud-related concerns, including at least seven who experienced financial losses. (6) No reference was provided in the legal documentation about personal information from 1,787 customers who transferred from other companies; Circles.Life, however, did note it used Optus networks and their own smartphone app without elaborating on the range and capacity of the latter.

Google, likewise, was recently fined $60 million in an Australian federal court for intelligence-gathering from customers Android phones, without the users consent. (7) Google was apparently collecting location data of an estimated 1.3 million Australians. The personal location data was regarded as 'sensitive and important to some consumers'; fears arose the data could be used for profiling and by third parties for ulterior motives. (8) It has become common practice with intelligence-gathering to identify post-codes and recurring patterns of personal behaviour, for example, for profiling purposes.

The fines already issued, however, amount to paltry sums of money for the corporate bodies concerned, which are also likely to be written off in annual audits by company accountants.

Many Australian employers, furthermore, already regard it as a totally acceptable business practice to access highly confidential information from the medical records of their workforces, by using non-standard methods of intelligence-gathering, which by-pass practitioners. A major successful campaign led by Australian trade-unions to encourage their members to 'opt out' of collective medical computer banks, making it very difficult for employers and others to access information, led to blanket silence and denial by the business classes.

These recent developments have been accompanied by a private legal challenge to Facebook in Australia whereby it has been alleged the social media giant has continually failed to take appropriate action over 'fake adds that lured unsuspecting people into scams', for personal information. (9) The forthcoming court-case, by the Australian judiciary, will take place at a future date. No doubt the corporate giant will use their lawyers to hide behind legal technicalities to avoid unfavourable publicity.

The fact ordinary Australians have no, or very limited protection, with on-line infringements of their privacy, however, is a matter which should be dealt with by the federal government in Canberra immediately. The fact the Australian business-classes appear to already be using computer programs for employment selection procedures, compiled from information gleaned by non-regulated intelligence-gathering techniques, is the hallmark of a very sinister side of industrial relations aimed at greater control of society at large.

Calls, therefore, for a federal government commissioner to investigate improper usage of artificial intelligence and on-line intelligence-gathering techniques, is an important and welcome development. (10) Hopefully the outcome will be easy to access and transparent; using CentreLink and Medicare as other government departments as a bench-mark, however, an official federal commission with powers to investigate improper usage of on-line internet intelligence-gathering for ordinary Australian people may prove to be as evasive as the dark side of the moon.  

The highway to hell would appear already well-paved with good intentions by the US-led military-industrial complex operating in collusion with the Australian business-classes. It is aimed at defending their interests, at all times.

1.     Commissioner 'could keep watch over AI', Australian, 25 August 2022.
2.     Kmart, Bunnings in privacy probe, Australian, 13 July 2022.
3.     It's time to stop TikTok harvesting our children's data, Australian, 12 August 2022.
4.     Ibid.
5.     Telco fined $200,000 over fraud exposure, Australian, 9 August 2022.
6.     Ibid.
7.     Google to pay $60m fine for secretly taking users' location data, The Weekend Australian, 13-14 August 2022.
8.     Ibid.
9.     Forrest fit to fight Facebook challenge, The Weekend Australian, 27-28 August 2022.
10.   Commissioner, op.cit., Australian, 25 August 2022.

 

Jobs Summit Initiatives Will Be Second Fiddle to Workers’ Struggle

(Above: This cartoon from Murdoch’s Australian reflects people’s cynicism about the Jobs Summit whilst perpetuating ruling class stereotypes about unions.)

 Written by: Ned K. on 4 September 2022

The Albanese Government's Jobs Summit has been and gone. On Friday 2 September at the completion of the Summit, Albanese put out a press release on his view of the Summit outcomes.

It said the Government wanted to "maintain this spirit of cooperation and collaboration in the months and years ahead" and wanted to build a "bigger, better-trained and more productive workforce" and a "stronger economy and a stronger Australia" based on "full employment, productivity growth and equal opportunities for women".

The press release then outlined a summary of "36 Immediate Initiatives" including:

1. $1 billion in joint federal - state funding for TAFE 2023 leading to 465,000 fee-free TAFE places

2. A one-off increase of $4,000 over 2022/23 financial year that a pensioner can earn from employment without effecting the pension amount.

3. "Flexibly" use $575 million on a National Housing Infrastructure Facility for social and affordable housing, attracting finance from superannuation funds and other sources of private capital.

4. "Modernizing" Workplace Relations laws to make bargaining accessible to all workers and businesses

5. Amend the Fair Work Act "flexible work arrangements" provisions and make unpaid parental leave more "flexible"

6. Improve access to jobs and training pathways for women, First Nations People and create 1,000 digital apprenticeships in the Commonwealth Public Service.

7. Increase permanent Migration Program ceiling from 160,000 to 195,000 in 2022-23 to overcome workplace shortages of labour

8. Extend visas and relax work restrictions  on International Students and fix the backlog of visa applications. For many years International Students have only been able to work 20 hours per week during term times

9.  Include an objective test in law for determining what "casual employment" means

10. Establish a worker's right to challenge unfair contractual terms in employment

11. Limit the use of "fixed term contracts"

12.  Ensure there are "flexible options" for reaching collective agreements

13.  "Making the Better Off Overall Test (BOOT) simple, flexible and fair".

These Government Initiatives by the Government are designed to make capitalism work better for the capitalists and to make capitalism more acceptable to workers.

 

Some of the immediate Initiatives will be welcomed by some sections of the workers, such as more TAFE fee-free placements and improved access to jobs and training to women and First Nations People.

 

Devil in the detail 

 

However, what actually what happens in actual practice with any of the Government proposed initiatives remains to be seen.

 

This is particularly the case when considering what the Government actually means by "Modernizing" workplace relations?

 

Workplace relations laws in Australia have always been to contain the workers’ struggle against exploitation by the capitalist class and to define and limit the legal ways by which workers could advance their collective interests and individual industrial rights.

 

The most contentious issue at the Jobs Forum was undoubtedly what was called "multi-employer bargaining".

 

The Business Council of Australia and other big business organizations at the Summit likened it to the "bad old days" when workers advanced their collective industrial interests by taking collective action to improve wages and conditions of employment in Awards which then became minimum standards for ALL employers to comply with in the industry covered by the Award.

 

These organizations represent the voice of the multinational corporations and finance capital in Australia. As the core of the ruling class, they understand what "when workers unite, bosses tremble" means if workers across a whole industry or sector are more easily able to take collective action at one and the same time to further their interests.

 

Hence, they sounded their alarm bells in their mass media outlets when it was reported on the eve of the Jobs Summit that the ACTU had an in-principle agreement with some small business organizations for multi-employer collective agreements.

 

The Albanese Government's Jim Chalmers and Tony Bourke were non-committal on the scope of any multi-employer agreement making, as was ACTU's Sally McManus.

 

No teeth in collective bargaining without the right to strike

 

The Government and the ACTU did not say whether they agreed that where it did become lawful for workers to collectively bargain on a sector or industry-wide basis, workers could take industrial action. 

 

Under current laws, there is a limited right to take industrial action during a bargaining period after so many legal hoops are jumped through and even then, bosses run off to the courts to seek orders to stop industrial action.

 

Without workers having the legal right to take industrial action without having to have a secret ballot and then give 72 hours’ notice of proposed action, multi-employer bargaining will be just another tool or bosses to chip away at workers conditions and reduce real wages even further, but on a sector/industry wide level instead of on a single employer level.

 

The Murdoch press has reported that some employer groups see multi-employer collective agreements replacing Awards.

 

Combine this with both employers’ groups, the Government and (yes) Bill Kelty talking about Awards being "complicated" then the alarm bells for workers start ringing?

 

What else are the bosses after than changes to laws which enable them to REDUCE working conditions such as shit penalty rates, weekend rates that are currently in Awards and have to be taken in to account under the Better Off Overall Test?

 

Struggle against work intensification

 

During the Jobs Summit both Government and employers talked about the need to "increase productivity". In the workplaces this usually means for workers that fewer workers do more. This occurs in factories producing a product but also right across the services sectors such as nursing, aged care, cleaning, child care and more.

 

Work intensification also occurs where there are already collective single employer Agreements in place. During the life of an Agreement, workers who take industrial action are taking "unprotected industrial action" leaving themselves and their union delegates open for massive fines and dismissal.

 

These issues of course did not rate a mention at the Jobs Summit.

 

Workers are struggling against work intensification, poor safety, bullying bosses and more, every day in one workplace or sector or another.

 

As with the Accord of the 1980s, the Government actions arising from the Summit and what it actually places in law are likely to be very limited as far as benefits to workers is concerned.

 

Workers’ collective action is the way forward

 

While the Jobs Summit was going on, Security Guards at Sydney airport succeeded in winning significant improvements in their wages and conditions through struggle on the job and collective action.

 

Two years ago, they were a divided group with only a small number out of a workforce of over 300 even in a union. During an enterprise agreement process they took industrial action and joined together to win permanent jobs for hundreds of workers, or full time jobs and increases of 7% per year plus a 15% shift loading for the majority day workers. 

 

They did this without any help from a Jobs Summit or Government Initiative. 

 

They did it by their own efforts collectively. During the process they learned that "when workers unite, bosses tremble"!

The Governor-General and the hurly-burly of political corruption

Written by: Nick G. on 27 August 2022 

When the disclosures of former Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s secret gathering of multiple ministries unto himself were revealed, some people were quick to rush to the defence of Governor-General David Hurley, saying that he was an innocent party, that he was simply under an obligation to act on the advice of the Prime Minister.

The revelations about Morrison, and the tumult associated with them, are because the democratic and constitutional fig leaf covering the naked dictatorship of the bourgeoisie has been brought into question, and nothing is more important to the bourgeoisie than its capacity to keep those it exploits and oppresses comfortable in their delusions about the freedoms and rights that they enjoy through democracy and the Constitution.

Thus, Albanese frames the issues in these terms: “We have a Westminster system of parliamentary democracy that relies upon conventions, it relies upon accountability and checks and balances in the system. Those checks and balances have been thrown out by the former government.”

However, he said he would not criticise Hurley, and legal experts say a constitutional crisis could have been triggered had Hurley refused Morrison’s request.

So, why the reticence to call Hurley to account?

Former SA Senator Rex Patrick was quite certain that he should be held accountable.

“The Governor-General was in effect complicit to a conspiracy to defraud the parliament, of which he is the ultimate, of which he is sovereign,” he said.
A few independent journalists and commentators have questioned aspects of Hurley’s track record in ways that the mainstream media have avoided.

For example, both Michael West Media and the Kangaroo Court of Australia (KCA) website have questioned Hurley’s role in an $18m federal government grant to a charity, the Governor-General’s Australian Future Leader’s Foundation. They alleged that Hurley lobbied Morrison to provide the grant to the charity which has no office, website or staff, apart from three directors, and has been inactive in the first 16 months of its existence. The grant was supplied despite no tender process having been used.

The KCA website describes the grant as a fraud: “It is nothing more than a fraud scam that has illegally stolen money from the government.”

Generous grants that have gone through no competitive tender process are nothing new for the Morrison government.

Remember the Paladin scandal?

Back in 2019, a tiny spurious security company, Paladin, which was registered to a beach shack on Kangaroo Island, was awarded a $423m contract through a “limited tenure” process in which it was the only company invited to tender, to provide housing for refugee detainees and security on Manus Island concentration camp. Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton was clearly embarrassed by the scandal and said he had “no sight” of the tender process.

And remember the Great Barrier Reef Foundation scandal?

As Treasurer, Morrison approved a $444m grant to the Foundation.  There was no competitive tender process.  The Foundation had not even applied for the grant! As we revealed at the time, the Foundation was a front for finance capitalists and fossil fuel corporations who wanted to minimise climate change activism by pushing the “science” of reef resilience. It remains the largest ever federal government grant to an NGO.

Leaving aside the crony capitalism of untendered grants to bodgy recipients, the Governor-General has his own corrupt practices that occurred whilst he was Chief of the Defence Forces.

Remember the sex Skype scandal when an 18-year old female cadet was filmed, without her knowledge, having sex? It was also live streamed via Skype onto a computer into a nearby room where there were 6 other cadets watching. They also took pictures and showed them to other cadets. The cadet was told by Defence, wrongly, that what happened would be illegal in any of the Australian states but it was not illegal under ACT law so virtually nothing would happen.

This was done on Hurley’s watch.

Remember whistleblower and army officer David McBride’s attempts to have allegations of Australian war crimes in Afghanistan dealt with by the Army? These war crimes, later substantiated by the Brereton Report, occurred while Hurley was Chief of the Defence Forces. McBride went to the media with his allegations after his attempts to lodge complaints with the Defence Forces were denied. As a result, he still faces life imprisonment for violating national security.

He has called on the Federal Police to visit Defence Headquarters and ask for all major documents Hurley signed in his tenure, to see whether any of them seem to be attempts to hide the truth or cover for dubious political requests.

“Hurley didn’t start signing dubious but, highly important, documents just while he was Gov Gen,” tweeted McBride on August 22. “He was given the GG job because he was well known to be a ‘signer’. He signed off on many a dubious order: ‘not’ to investigate BRS (Ben Roberts-Smith – eds) allegations, but also to investigate scapegoats.”

“The same evidence that is used now to prosecute me, will support of prosecution of Hurley: in fact that is precisely my defence: Hurley was covering up war crimes (and many other things) -and the org. was complicit.”

It is no longer tenable to Hurley as an innocent in the “multiple ministries” affair.

Plausible allegations suggest that he has been corrupt on a number of levels. Even such a minor indiscretion as appearing with his wife in an ad for a Canberra building company that completed renovations on their private home suggest his lack of judgement and openness to “favour for mates” deals that compromise his office.

Australian workers have a justifiable cynicism directed at politicians, but they are still encouraged to believe that system itself is fair and equitable, and that it will look after them in the long run. 

We beg to differ. Even the most open and incorruptible bourgeois democracy enforces the rights of the owners of the major means of production and the financial corporations that grease the wheels of exploitation. 

The right to vote and stand for election is promoted as the ultimate expression of democracy, but beyond that, the people have no say in how society operates.

Only by fighting for and winning anti-imperialist independence and socialism will the superficialities of our system be swept aside and real democracy emerge as workers make themselves the ruling class over society.