*****
The greatest friend the Australian worker has ever had moved this week to ensure we all work harder for less.
While millions of Australian workers were overjoyed at the prospect of exchanging job security for their new lifestyle as a peasant, nonetheless some stronger message was needed to bring a few malcontents up the back of the classroom on board with the new program, and develop a bit of team bonding here on the good ship Howard's Australia.
This involved more than just having our great wartime leader redefining the word friend, he also moved onto the work 'choice', creating a new meaning synonymous with having one or less options.
While it remains unclear to the rest of the population exactly why working for a rock and a shiny thing can be gauged as a step forward, our economic guru of a leader assures us that having less money makes us richer, and hey, that's got to be a good thing. And, as luck would have it, Howard's friendship extends to improving our job security by making it easier to lose our jobs. What could be better!
While, to the ordinary person, the benefits of these reforms may not be immediately obvious, we are re-assured that these are symptomatic of the sterling qualities of leadership inherent in Earlwood's answer to Napoleon.
While that dangerous Trotskyite President of the United States, F. D. Roosevelt, may have stated "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself", one can only gaze in wonder at the sort of leadership that tells a people "the only thing we have to fear is everything".
Such a refreshing contribution to public life, untainted as it is by logic or information, can only be admired, as under the new sedition laws anything else is illegal.
Which could come in handy, as the general populace may not have been so well disposed towards the man who has made eyebrow waxing sexy when it becomes apparent that poverty wages were the new black.
Luckily such churlishness is covered by the laws we need to protect us from the black cats in a dark room that aren't there. It also creates a fantastic new growth industry in running around like a headless chook screaming "the terrorists are coming! The terrorists are coming!"
Without such leadership Australia could have made the mistake of approaching these problems in a calm and considered manner. As anyone close to Dear Leader Howard will tell you. This will not do.
The inscrutable nature of our great Prime Minister was shown when he confounded his enemies with the master-stroke of convincing people that we were going to risk human life and make ourselves a high-profile terrorist target over something that actually existed.
Luckily the Weapons of Mass Destruction that we went to fight in Iraq were fabricated, thus allowing Australians to be killed for no discernable purpose - and who can be responsible if someone gets killed over nothing. Pure genius!
Now, with his statesmanlike introduction of laws prohibiting dissent, our wise and generous leader can get on with defending the national interest, which happily coincides with the interests of the Macquarie Bank, the Business Council of Australia, Delloite Touche Tomatsu, Brad Cooper and Kerry Packer's helicopter pilot's one remaining kidney, amongst others.
No doubt there will be those nay-sayers and un-Australian types trying to destroy the economic juggernaut that has delivered soaring rates of domestic violence, mental health problems, housing unaffordability and petrol at $1.50 a litre.
Luckily the distraction of the new terrorism laws and the clear and present danger - which is not quite clear, doesn't appear to be present and may not be dangerous - created a wonderful entertainment that relieved Australian business from having to justify this semi-sophisticated form of larceny.
After throwing off the burden of liberal democracy, which, as the Chinese coal industry shows, is little more than a crimp on unfettered productivity, Australian business now has a free hand to move across the country like a plague of suit wearing locusts, courtesy of our Tool Of the Week
Indeed, we should give thanks for the boundless wellspring of human solicitude inherent in a man such as Howard.
If you don't the police will be around to take you downtown and ask why.
With ACTU secretary Greg Combet warning a trade unionist would be Australia's next political prisoners, 100,000 CFMEU members plan to stare down $22,000 fines for attending the national action.
Any prosecution of CFMEU members attending the rally would spark a legal show down, with Combet adamant that unionists would not be paying politically motivated fines.
Under specific laws that are designed to target the construction industry, building workers specifically face fines of $22,000 for attending meeting without their employer's permission. Union officials also face fines for merely mentioning pay equity with other construction sites or union training during negotiations.
"You know, and we're not going to be intimidated and when some of us ... some of us will go to jail under these laws," Combet told the Press Club on Wednesday. "No, it's not a joke. Some people will go to jail," he said.
Speaking on Melbourne radio, the Prime Minister confirmed jail was an option: "If you don't pay fines ... if you don't pay a fine, theoretically you can go to jail," he said.
CFMEU national construction secretary John Sutton has written to the new anti-worker building industry police force seeking clarification on how the harsh new laws would be applied to his members.
If, as is likely, workers can not afford or refuse to pay the fines on principle, then there will not be enough prisons in Australia to accommodate these political prisoners," Sutton says
"The government appears hell bent on criminalizing `industrial action and is heading for a major crisis in the administration of justice," he said.
John Lloyd, Commissioner with the Australian Building and Construction Commission has confirmed that under Section 38 of the Building and Construction Industry Improvement Act "a person must not engage in unlawful industrial action." as "The Act provides for a fine only (up to a maximum of $22,000 for an individual)"
"There is no provision for a term of imprisonment to be imposed for engaging in unlawful industrial action," he said, and would not be drawn on what would happen to a person who did not pay the fines.
Numbers Swell for Protest
Hundreds of thousands of Australians are expected to challenge draconian new workplace regulations at November 15 protests around the country.
Participants at hundreds of locations around Australia will be linked to Melbourne in the nation's biggest-ever video link-up.
The Sky Channel broadcast will be beamed into workplaces, clubs and community venues in every state and territory.
Workers and their supporters will be campaigning against federal government laws that promote secret individual contracts; sideline the IRC; threaten minimum wage increases; strip their rights to contest unfair dismissals, slash minimum standards and introduce big fines and prison terms for unionists who resist that agenda.
Previous protests, during the first week of July, drew 120,000 people onto the streets of Melbourne and more than 150,000 to 250 venues around NSW.
Organisers expect next week's turnouts to better those numbers.
Capital city focal points for the November 15 day of action include:
Federation Square, Melbourne, 9am.
Martin Place and Belmore Park, Sydney, at 9am.
Turf Club, Fannie Bay, Darwin, 8.30.
Southbank, Brisbane, 9am.
Princes Wharf, Shed 1, Hobart, 8.30.
The Esplanade, Perth, 12 noon.
Elder Park, King William St, Adelaide, 8am.
Betting Hall, Canberra Racecourse, Canberra, 8.30.
For more details of the Day of Action go to www.rightsatwork.com.au
John Howard's �Workchoices� give employers the right to punt anyone for �economic, technical or structural or similar� reasons. His legislation describes these broad get-out provisions as �operational�.
The Prime Minister admitted in Federal Parliament, last week, that the provisions were drafted to "clarify" a situation that arose at a Rio Tinto's Blair Athol mine, in Queensland.
What the Prime Minister didn't say was that in the late 1990s unionists at the mine were victimised through a "black list" that singled them out for termination under a redundancy process.
The skilled miners were reduced to menial tasks such as chipping weeds with a hoe, rather than using weed killer, in an attempt to force them to accept a redundancy packages, the AIRC found. They were eventually sacked.
The case was pursued by the workers under unfair dismissal provisions. After numerous cases, appeals and further appeals, most of the workers were reinstated and the case was settled with the unanimous approval of the workers.
Earlier this year, federal government flagged its intention to green light unfair sackings at businesses with less than 100 employees. The Blair Athol amendment opens the floodgates for every employer in Australia.
Griffith University industrial relations specialist, Professor David Peetz, says that this amendment would have prevented the miners from pursuing their claims.
Lawyers from Freehills, who represented mining giant Rio Tinto in the Blair Athol case, were involved in drafting the WorkChoices legislation.
Professor Peetz says that the Blair Athol amendment will give large employers, who are over the 100 employee threshold set by the unfair dismissal exemption, the same freedom to unfairly dismiss as small employers will have, provided they reorganise their affairs the right way.
"In effect a company won't be constrained from unfairly dismissing an employee so long as they can demonstrate that the dismissal was done partly for genuinely operational reasons, including economic reasons" Professor Peetz says.
"Economic reason could cover all sorts of things. It could cover replacing more expensive workers on awards or collective agreements with cheaper workers on just the four minimum standards. That would provide a genuine economic benefit to the corporation," he says.
Nearly half a billion extra dollars have been set aside, over four years, to bring �Workchoices� to fruition with most of the spend earmarked for the Office of the Employment Advocate and an expanded Office of Workplace Services.
The OEA, created by John Howard and headed by hand-picked activists, will relieve the 100-year-old Industrial Relations Commission of agreement certification responsibilities.
All agreements, individual and collective, will have to be ticked off on by the OEA which has aggressively carried Canberra's ball against the CFMEU and collective bargaining.
The organisation, originally headed by Jonathan Hamberger and, more recently, Peter McIlwain will have the power to strike down any collective agreement that doesn't get the nod of its political masters.
At the same time, it will continue spending taxpayer funds on the promotion of secret, non-union, individual agreements.
Canberra moved to deny workers choice about AWAs, and to strip away the no-disadvantage test they had been measured against, after the OEA failed to convince Australians of their merit.
An aggressive eight-year campaign on behalf of AWAs, by the Office, had seen less than 2.5 percent of Australian workers take them up.
Even so, the OEA was pinged in court for failing to apply legal safeguards it was obliged to administer.
Last year, the Federal Court in Perth, heard evidence that the OEA had been registered fraudulent individual contracts that workers had neither seen nor signed.
The evidence was not contested but repeated efforts to have the matter investigated have drawn a blank.
Justice French called an admission by the Office's WA manager that it was registered AWAs outside the 21 days permitted by law "surprising".
He also heard evidence that the Office routinely accepted AWAs without signatures.
All those requirements have been removed by the new Workchoices legislation.
McIlwain told a Senate Committee hearing, last week, that his organisation would no longer be required to check on whether or not workers had genuinely consented to being covered by AWAs.
"I don't believe I will have that requirement placed on me," McIlwain said.
He also confirmed that his Office would no longer check the contents of AWAs and that they would be enforceable, immediately, an employer declared they were legitimate.
The new legislation, introduced to federal parliament this week, green lights the sacking of workers who refuse to sign individual contracts and continues the existing policy of allowing employers to refuse jobs to applicants who opt for collective coverage.
A new section of the law specifically states that employers do not apply duress "merely because the employer requires the employees to make an AWA with the employers as a condition of employment".
It will remain an offence, punishable by jail, however, for unionists to try to "coerce" an employer or employee to make a collective agreement.
Howard's expanded Office of Employment Services will take over policing and prosecuting the new laws from the IRC.
That office will have the power to prosecute unions and union officials who ask for prohibited matters, even those employers have already signed-off on, to be included in future collective agreements.
Such requests carry possible six months prison terms and the government has authorised enforcement agencies to prosecute them, with or without, the support of affected employers.
Government currently spends $86 million a year on IR agencies. Over the next four years, it will add $486 million to the figure, massively increasing workplace regulation.
Legal experts say the new Act will empower the Minister to disallow sick leave, notice provisions, redundancy pay and a host of other conditions in AWAs, collective agreements and State awards, without reference to Parliament.
The powers lie in obscure 'Henry VIII' clauses that give the Minister the power to change the legislation by regulation.
The Henry VIII clauses are scattered through the Bill, but the most alarming example gives the Minister for Workplace Relations power to over-ride the will of contracting parties with the stroke of a pen.
"He can just decide he doesn't like them," says barrister Adam Searle.
Legal experts fear the Government is keen to use the new power to scratch provisions he thinks are too generous
.
"The Government has been waiting for years to be able to cut back employees' work conditions in such a way," says barrister David Chin.
'The first attempt to use regulations in such a way was in July 1997, " he says, adding the only reason Government failed on that occasion was that, unlike now, it did not control the Senate.
"The government is enhancing its ability to interfere," says Searle. "They can say you and your employer are making the wrong choice."
Lawyers say the ability to use regulations is important because they do not need to be scrutinised by parliament or made public until after they come into force.
Searle says the government's control of both houses of parliament mean it is practically impossible for any Ministerial decision to be challenged.
"While any member of parliament can object to what the Minister decides, a regulation can only be struck out if the majority of either the House of Representatives or the Senate votes to disallow it," he says.
Other controversial aspects of the Workchoices Bill, include:
- Youth Wages - The Bill does not guarantee a Federal Minimum Wage for junior employees, trainees or disabled employees. Whether these people get a Federal Minimum Wage will depend on whether the new Australian Fair Pay Commission decides to give them one.
- Overriding State Industrial Commissions - Besides getting rid of the power of state IR commissions to create new awards, the Bill also gives the Fair Pay Commission the power to ban them from granting pay rises under existing state awards.
- Banning Industrial Action On New Project Sites - Employees working on new projects will be unable to undertake otherwise legal industrial action for at least one year, with Government backbenchers now pushing for the ban to be extended to five years.
- Jail Sentences for Highlighting Unfair AWAs - Union advocates and journalists who highlight unfair Australian Workplace Agreements could face six months jail.
Locked out Boeing workers from Williamtown have welcomed the move by the NSW Minister for Industrial Relations, John Della Bosca, to refer the Boeing dispute to the NSW Industrial Relations Commission.
"We'll back any avenue to end this dispute," says Boeing employee Adam Burgoyne from the Williamtown picket line. "We'll appreciate any help."
Burgoyne said the locked out workers, fighting Boeing's move to force them to stay on individual contracts, were resolved to stay the course.
"We're not going back until we get what we want,' says Burgoyne.
"It is abundantly clear the dispute cannot be resolved in the federal system," says Della Bosca. "The Iemma government is activating the Ministerial reference power of the State Industrial Relations Act to allow for the NSW Commission to inquire into the dispute.
"The failure of the Commonwealth to resolve this matter is a national disgrace and an example of how industrial relations issues will be dealt with under Mr Howard's brave new world of workplace relations.
"With the support and encouragement of the Howard government, Boeing continues to block a resolution by refusing to negotiate a collective agreement."
Della Bosca slammed the Howard government for failing to act, even though it had the power to intervene, accusing it of actively supporting one of the world's largest corporations in a battle with Hunter Valley engineers and their families.
"And these are the sort of workplace relations Mr Howard wants to impose on all Australians," said Della Bosca.
At the heart of the dispute is the refusal of the American corporation to allow workers a ballot on whether they should be covered by individual or collective contracts.
Howard supported Boeing's stance in Parliament, last month.
As thousands of Wal-Mart employees and former employees head to court over allegations of wage abuse, chief exec Lee Scott says the time has come for Congress to act.
"The US minimum wage of $US5.15 ($A6.80) an hour has not been raised in nearly a decade and we believe it is out of date with the times," Scott said in an address to employees.
"Our customers simply don't have the money to buy basic necessities between pay cheques."
Scott's comments came as a Missouri court gave approval for thousands of Wal-Mart workers to take class action against the company for wage abuse.
Employees claim the company forces them to work without pay and without breaks.
"Based on Wal-Mart's own data, it's abundantly clear they're forcing employees collectively to work many thousands of hours each month without pay," lead trial attorney Steve Long said.
Wal-Mart is notorious for its labour practices and opposition to unions.
Earlier this year the chain was accused of closing a Canadian store because workers joined a union.
Minimum Rates for Hurricane Jobs
Meanwhile a grass roots campaign by unions and community activists in the US has forced president George W. Bush to back down from moves to cut the pay of workers affected by a spate of hurricanes on the country's gulf coast region.
Last week Bush rescinded his executive order that suspended minimum wage protections for workers rebuilding many communities devastated by hurricanes Katrina and Wilma.
The order, which now will expire Nov. 8, allowed contractors to pay substandard wages to construction workers.
activists sent more than 350,000 messages to politicians demanding fair wages be reinstated for the Gulf Coast, where skilled, full-time workers average less than $20,000 a year in pay.
Government's determination to limit the workplace debate was confirmed when AMWU Queensland state secretary, Andrew Dettmer, was a late scratching from a scheduled IR round table in Brisbane.
Dettmer had accepted an invitation to discuss John Howard's "Workchoices" at a Wynnum Chamber of Commerce meeting on November 14. He was to have shared the platform with Liberal Member for Bonner, Ross Vasta, and IR consultant, Laurie Maloney.
"I thought it was a good opportunity to get the issues into the open but, bugger me, last Friday I got a call from a conference organiser asking if she could un-invite me," Dettmer said.
"She said Vasta's office had told her Government MPs have been barred from addressing any meetings on industrial relations until the legislation is through Parliament, so the debate was off."
Two days later, Workplace Relations Minister, Kevin Andrews, flopped out more than 1200 pages of legislation, and explanatory notes, demanding immediate debate on the floor the House.
Within hours he had announced Australia faced credible terrorist threat, effectively driving his radical workplace agenda front pages around the country.
Dettmer said the Liberal Party head office edict showed "contempt" for voters and the Prime Minister's absolute determination to limit debate.
"While this government was bombarding voters with dishonest advertising, it wouldn't let individual members engage in any process that might have revealed the truth about its proposals," Dettmer said.
"Individual members should be ashamed for putting the party machine ahead of their own constituents right to be informed about issues that will affect their families."
The Brisbane revelations came as workers around Australia tried to flush out reluctant government MPs.
At Gosford, on the NSW Central Coast, a group of frustrated electrical workers delivered a load of frozen chickens to the officer of Liberal Member for Robertson, Jim Lloyd.
One of the protestors donned a chicken suit after Lloyd declined repeated requests to front up to community meetings.
The report says human rights are being thrown overboard, citing the suspicious fire last month aboard the Simiez in the Uruguyuan port of Montevideo, in which 11 Chinese crew members died.
Abuses cited in the report include forced labour and the abandonment of crews in foreign ports.
General Secretary of the International Transport Federation, David Cockroft, said that a clear violation of human rights was taking place on illegal fishing vessels. He said abuse of crews and appalling safety standards were exacerbated by the sometimes harsh and dangerous weather conditions faced by fishing vessels.
"Not only is flag of convenience fishing a threat to fisheries and the marine environment, but there is a deadly human cost," says Cockroft. "In many cases the vessels operate with an unprotected workforce who can be beaten, starved, and worked without pay - all out of sight in one of the world's most dangerous industries."
The report found the illegal fishing business is worth around US$1.2 billion, yet it costs only a few hundred dollars to buy a flag of convenience registration for a vessel.
Approximately 15 per cent of the world's large-scale fishing fleet is either flying flags of convenience or the identity of the flag is unknown.
The federal government has backed flag of convenience shipping, through single voyage permits, as a way of slashing maritime labour costs.
The Changing Nature of High Seas Fishing: How Flags of Convenience provide cover for illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing report was sponsored by the Australian Government, the global transport union body, the International Transport Workers' Federation (ITF) and WWF, the global conservation organisation.
To view the report go to http://www.itfglobal.or
Adverts paid for by the Business Council of Australia hit television screens, last week, picking up where the federal government's $45 million taxpayer-funded campaign left off.
The Business Council is an aggressive supporter of individual contracts andd stripping back the rights of Australians to contest unfair dismissals.
High profile members of the Council include Wesfarmers boss Michael Chaney, Qantas chief, Geoff Dixon, BHP head Chip Goodyear, Leightons CEO, Wal King, Macquarie Bank's Allan Moss and retiring Commonwealth Bank counterpart, David Murray.
Their latest reported annual incomes were $6.12 million, $3.022 million, $6.4 million, $35 million, $18.5 million and $5.5 million respectively.
While average Australian incomes have risen 26 percent over the past eight years, the BCA elite have helped themselves to 129 percent hikes, over the same period.
The BCA is made of chief executive officers from Australia's 100 "leading" companies.
It led a chorus of big business cheering when Howard introduced his Workchoices legislation, last week. The only reported dissenting voice came from the Chamber of Commerce and Industry's, Peter Hendy, who said the changes didn't go far enough.
The BCA has announced its "Four Steps" tv, radio, newspaper and billboard campaign will run through until early November.
The ads confirm that the Council's next campaign will be a push for slashed corporate and high-income tax rates.
Sitting in Geneva, Switzerland, the ILO is considering whether the Australian Government's current workplace laws breach international human rights obligations to protect the right for workers to collectively bargain.
The ILO has already strongly criticised the Australian Government, when in June this year, the ILO's special Committee on the Application of Standards found the Government was not meeting its international obligations to protect the rights of workers to collective bargaining.
The ACTU believes the new WorkChoices legislation introduced into Parliament this week will worsen the human rights situation for Australian workers with many legitimate union activities to be made illegal by the new laws.
Under the Government's proposed laws, union officials and employees will be fined up to $33,000 simply for asking an employer to include in an enterprise agreement provision for:
* Protection from unfair dismissal
* Union involvement in dispute resolution
* Allowing employees to attend trade union training
* Committing the employer to future collective bargaining
* Protecting job security in the event that people are replaced by labour hire or contractors
* Any other claim the Minister decides should be illegal.
The ILO 'Committee on the Freedom of Association' will hear the complaint with the findings of the Committee due to be considered by the ILO's Governing Body meeting next week.
In a Senate Estimates Committee hearing, Queensland Senator Santo Santoro revealed he has a group of 28 people around Australia monitoring the public broadcaster.
"I just give you fair warning, there's a whole network of Australians that are monitoring you," Santoro told ABC's Acting Director of Strategy and Communications, Murray Green.
Santoro said he had 973 questions to ask the ABC and took issue with the non-appearance of ABC chief Russell Balding.
Among the accusations was that the ABC showed disrespect to war veterans because management did not order presenters to wear poppies on Remembrance Day - although presenters did wear rosemary on Anzac Day.
"Is it official ABC policy to acknowledge people who lost their lives at Gallipoli, but not on the Somme?" Santo asked.
Santoro said his spies send in 15 to 20 tapes a week of ABC radio and television broadcasts which he has transcribed.
"The ABC is in denial and refuses to adequately deal with my carefully documented allegations," Santoro said.
"The ABC is riddled with bias and mismanagement and I have the conclusive evidence to prove it."
To build his case, Santoro has added a poll to his website asking web surfers if ABC journos are left wing, right wing or "fair and balanced".
Santoro was forced to retract accusations in the Senate earlier this year of anti-Semitic comments on ABC youth radio station Triple J.
"Having reviewed the ABC's answer to that question on notice, and the material on which I based my question, it is clear that I was misinformed."
The hearing comes after years of attacks from the Howard Government including funding cuts and political appointments to the board and executive.
Former Communications Minister Richard Alston threatened funding cuts in 2003 linked to 68 alleged examples of "biased" reporting of the Iraq War.
Macarthur "Your Rights at Work Committee
o The Macarthur Your Rights at Work Committee are entering in the Campbelltown Fishers Ghost Parade on Saturday 5 November as the 'Your Rights at Work' group. The Macarthur Liberal MP, Pat Farmer, will be on the podium for the parade so it will be an important way of showing community opposition to the industrial relations changes.
o We would like to invite for anyone who would like to attend, particularly unions who would like to be present with their flags and shirts.
o Assemble at Old Campbelltown Showground (northern end of Queen St) via Warby St no later than 11.45am. The parade will move along Queen St, proceeding south to Koshigaya Park.
o Please RSVP to Jason Kara, 0409 042 599.
Details: 11.45am Saturday 5 November 2005
Defend Civil Liberties
March and Rally
Organised by Stop The War Coalition
Saturday, 5th November, 12 noon commencing at Belmore Park
Near Central Railway
Party For Justice
A FUN PARTY FOR A SERIOUS CAUSE!
In April this year, filmmaker and journalist Anne Delaney was arrested and charged for visiting a Queensland prisoner - who could be the victim of a gross miscarriage of justice. In Queensland a law prevents the media from talking to a prisoner. If she's found guilty, Anne could face two years in jail.
Where: Waverley Bowling Club
163-189 Birrell St,
Waverley, Sydney
When: Sunday 6 November
6-10 pm
Entry Fee/Donation: $20
Guest artists:
Three Blind Whites (kooky gospel cabaret)
Ray Moynihan & Co. and DJ Frank Rodi
DRINKS AT CLUB PRICES * SAUSAGE SIZZLE RAFFLES * AUCTION * KIDS WELCOME
RSVP and pre book: Melissa McAllister on 1300 656 513
I Dream of Johnny
A musical comedy. Opening Thursday November 24,
Newtown Theatre. Cnr King & Bray Sts, Newtown South.
The play is a riotous musical combining 60's psychedelia, Gilbert and Sullivan type songs, dance routines and guest appearances from mythical gods as it steers its protagonists- namely John Howard and Tony Abbott, towards retribution for their policies on refugees and industrial relations.
Regular ticket prices are $25/20 respectively. However, union members are eligable for a $15 ticket in week two- from Tuesday November 29 to Saturday December 3.
The play has been made with generous support from unions such as the CFMEU and the Flight Attendants' Association.
Plot:
After losing his passport and his memory John Howard finds himself on a boat to Norway as part of a 'refugees for nuclear waste' scheme, devised by his government and outsourced agencies. A series of mishaps lead to him being thrown over-board and stuck on a desert island with an irate Tony Abbott, who has been using his thinking time to devise a new dastardly portfolio for himself called the 'Department of Industrial Convalescence'. After being rescued from the island both men end up in the Baxter Detention Centre and must face the consequences of their past actions which winds up in an all-in rap battle and the appearance of Amanda Vanstone to sort things out.
The play features great musical and dance numbers, choreographed by Mark Daly, with music written by producer/playwright Joel Beasant and musician Matthew Campbell. The play was written by Joel Beasant, Robert Luxford and Leslie Marsh, and is directed by Jenelle Pearce, whose work recently featured in the Newtown Theatre's 'Short and Sweet' sessions. Adam Fraser and Rhys Wilson star as Howard and Abbott, respectively.
The play cleverly uses real dialogue from figures, such as Howard and Abbott, to challenge their actions towards refugees and the disadvantaged by literally placing them 'in the others' shoes'. John Howard finds himself in a number of situations where he appeals for humanitarian treatment, by re-stating quotes he has made in the past however, instead of being delivered by them, he actually gets the treatment his government has metered out. The irony is hilarious and made even better as it is regularly accompanied by groovy singing and dancing.
The shows will run from Tuesday to Saturday at 8pm, with a 2pm matinee on Saturdays. Ticket prices are:
$25 full
$20 concession
$15 special price for union-card holders in week 2, from Tues Nov 29- Sat Dec 3.
$15 special price for students in week 3, from Tues Dec 6- Sat Dec 10.
Enquiries about the show can be made to:
Bookings MCA 1300 306 776 or online: www.mca-tix.com
For further information call Joel Beasant on: 02 9797133
At 62 I am nearly at the end of my working life. Never have I ever been so saddened at what we are going to become because of the IR and Terrorist legislation. These two pieces of Law(?) will come into effect very soon. Everyone knows that Flack Jacket Johnnies WhatChoices legislation is focused on driving down the worker. the Terrorist legislation is for the terrorists---or is it?
How do you tell the difference between a rowdy union rally, pushing the police barriers on the steps of parliament house, and potential terrorists among the legitimate demonstrators. You can't, this legislation will be used to arrest and hold unionist for questioning, I have no doubt about that.
Earl Downing
I live in regional Queensland and I have encountered one of the most offensive bosses I've ever had to deal with. She frequently referred to one of her workers as nigger, she admits to being a racist and that she hates Aborigines, but I've saved the most horrifying until last,she thinks we should round up all the Muslims and kill them.
J
Watching a Documentary on SBS about the Political climate in Germany prior to the Great War in 1939, compares frightfully like what is happening in Australia today.
The German people did not want war this was ignored by Hitler
The Australian People did not want our Soldiers to go to war in Irag. This was ignored by Howard.
Hitler constantly lied to his people, So did Howard.
Hitler did everything he could do to remain in power.
Howard has done likewise.
The drastic changes to the IR rules being undemocratically forced through Parliament are signs of a Dicatorship operating in Australia
The Liberal Party should now be renamed as THE FASCIST PARTY
Hal Crossing
Dear Editor
When you consider executive pay along with the potential for corporate greed, I can't help but think that many investors should be very hesitant about departing with their hard earned money by investing in stocks. Our superannuation may not even be a safe bet anymore.
How do you really know if you are being fleeced or not? Are we just starting to see the emergence of a problem that has devastated and decimated some of the largest companies in the U.S, and around the world?
This week, Sydney businessman Brad Cooper is facing a lengthy jail term after being convicted of 13 fraud and bribery charges relating to the collapse of insurer HIH. Adler and Williams have already recieved their penalties.
Let's not forget NAB's rogue trading scandal either? Now there's also a big question mark over AWB and their involvement with allegedly paying millions of dollars in transport costs that were illegally funnelled to Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq."
The PM can't imagine such a scnadal, however, recent reports indicate that had a secret coding system that seen faxes directed to home faxes as opposed to office faxes in an attempt to cover up the love affair with Saddam's regime.
God knows where Telstra is really headed, do you know?
Then there's the insider trading scandals which include high powered people such as 'Rene Rivkin, and Steve Vizard. Thinking back, there's a few more fraudsters such as 'Skase and Bond'
How can we really trust corporate Australia? All we need now is a downturn in the economy and nobody will be safe, especially workers and mum and dad investors.
Are we really immune?
Kind regards
John McPhilbin
This email is to thank Doreen Burrow for her letter and her brave life.
Recently I told a friend that 'Workers Online' simply made me feel like having a good vomit because it was such a shocking bit of tripe.
Doreen's story cut through all the crap.
What a woman!
May there be many more of her kind.
Mary Sharah
Hi,
As workers,we should unite and voice a strong opposition to the new ir legislation. It is a recipe for low wages, no christmas holiday or loading. No choice for sundays etc what is life ? If we have to work at ungodly day and hours for the benefit of the bosses.
Just last week the boss of walmart admitted that low wages mean that more people are unable to afford to buy. Higher wages mean people would have more disposable income to spend.
The-us is a very poor model to follow. They have $4/hour mexican slaves but they still unable to compete with china. Factories are closing down and going to china. Poverty and social breakdown are growing. What a country?
Worse, the present government is trying to privatise health. Look at the mess of the private system in theus, absolute chaos. Look at the cost and the mess of cross city tunnel in sydney. It is a disgrace. A symptom of governments trying to do cost shifting to avoid a public obligation.
Ed Mill
While the Federal Government is spending $20 million exthols the alleged virtues of its Industrial Relations "reforms" and an unknown amount on television, radio and newspaper advertisments asking those recieving Social Security payments to "support the system that supports you", I, a single male on a Disability Support Pension, considered myself fortunate to have secured part-time employment.
I dutifully "did the right thing", as espoused by these above mentioned public funded advertmisments, and reported my earnings - the princely sum of $15-60c for a half day's work - to Centrelink... and that is where my troubles began!
Despite the fact that Centrelink was duly notified on time and in the manner it had advised me to, the appropriate forms were not "actioned" as Centrelink later advised me. As a result, my Pension payment did not go into my bank on the usual day and my bank has charged me $45 because the necessary funds were not in the account to cover regular payments I had arranged to pay by direct debit.
Despite numerous calls to Centrelink and the assurances of Centrelink staff, four days later, my Disability Pension has still not been paid into my account and I am out of pocket - solely because I chose to "do the right thing"!
Yes... "support the system that supports you"... but I for one now have much greater sympathy for those that instead opt to "screw the sytem that screws you" and not report their meagre earnings to Centrelink - it certainly does not seem to pay - as doing the "right thing" obviously is not always the same as doing the "smart thing"!!
Jean-Luc deVere
No sooner had the legislation lobbed than the PM was diverting the media with talk of an imminent terror attack; and all eyes went straight to the birdie.
We are not denying the PM has some intelligence that needs to be addressed, although why he chose this moment to go public when he admits he had the briefing for a week, it does make you wonder.
And it would have been interesting if a single journalist had asked a question like: how many terror threats of this nature have crossed your desk in the past four years? And if he had said this is the first, then maybe we would be a bit less cynical.
At least we have the political dynamic of the next 18 months in stark relief. The Howard Government will use everything in its power to shift the focus to national security to divert attention from these nasty, extremist, ideologically driven laws.
How else can we describe a set of laws drafting by corporate laws that, in the name of deregulation, set out to criminalise industrial activity, give the government unprecedented power to impose its will on individual workplaces and strip the long-held rights of Australian workers.
There is no pretence of balance in the laws and, with the obscene government advertising campaign proving to be an absolute dud, the government knows that its chance of winning the IR debate is dead.
That's not the game now - there will be no meaningful IR debate -
Barnaby might huff and puff but the PM will place his jewel in the crown some time before Christmas. Then, barring a successful High Court challenge, the laws will take affect early in the New year. Then it will be on for young and old.
The political battle from this point will be to stake out the battleground between the major parties - and that will be about the government using its control of national defence agencies to keep security at the centre of politics.
For a government that has been prepared to lie and cheat to keep office - think Kids overboard, think interest rates - this is a relatively easy task; just keep tweaking the terror level up whenever things get sticky, aligning the election with a major threat - real or constructed.
The much harder task is the one confronting the labour movement - both its industrial and political wings - to hold the government accountable for these destructive laws.
This begins and ends with a simple premise: from today every member of the Howard Government is individually responsible for the worst behaviour of the worst employer.
As the excesses that these laws come to light, our job is to keep the spotlight on the victims and the heat on the villains, while developing a set of workplace rights with the capacity to rebuild from the social wreckage.
But we also need to blunt the Government's terror, supporting measures that are reasonable while having the courage to stand up to the gross abuses that this government will attempt in order to draw out a political advantage.
To thread this needle, we need to do more than duck and weave, we need to draw a consistent narrative between the attack on workers personal economic security and the threats to our external national security.
This narrative has at least two elements: first, that a fragmented society is the breeding ground of extremism and that these workplace laws will make our communities less cohesive. And secondly, a government prepared to fine and lock up workers for expressing their political and industrial views should not be trusted with our broader civil liberties.
What this week has confirmed are two things: there is nothing fair about the WorkChoices laws; and there will be nothing fair about the political fight to follow.
It's time to take the gloves off.
Peter Lewis
Editor
Search All Issues | Latest Issue | Previous Issues | Print Latest Issue |
© 1999-2002 Workers Online |
|