Morrison has to go

[billy the kid]

Why does this contemptuous arrogant turd who poses as a human being always have an arrogant,
condescending smirk on his face..
This is one of the reasons why this turd is so hated in Australia...

[billy the kid]

"Senate cash ban cowards block important witnesses and thousands of opponents from ‘public’ hearing
Demand Parliament sack the Liberal Chairman Slade Brockman and Secretary Mark ‘Sir Humphrey’ Fitt from the Senate Economics Legislation Committee!
You’d think that as the Morrison government is planning a radical change that upends centuries of tradition by banning transactions in the legal tender of cash, it would want to know the views of the public.
Hell no! When it comes to extreme measures to benefit criminal banks, this government is hell-bent on not only ignoring the widespread and deep-seated objections of the public to its radical agenda, but on actively suppressing their ability to object.
In doing so, they have demonstrated for all of Australia to see that they hold the democratic processes of Parliament in contempt, as mere formalities to “go through the motions” while fixing the outcome between the major parties behind closed doors.
The latest example is today’s public hearing in Canberra on the cash ban law. First, the committee has not invited anybody who would destroy the government’s claim that this ban is necessary to combat the so-called “black economy”. Since crooked accounting giant KPMG cooked up that pretext, and the government adopted its recommendation, expert researchers have shown that not only does Australia not have a serious black economy problem, but the small black economy that does exist has been shrinking for two decades without any radical cash ban. As that’s the only excuse for this law, therefore that’s the only issue to clarify, but Liberal Chairman Slade Brockman has refused to invite witnesses such as independent economist John Adams and former APRA Principal Researcher Dr Wilson Sy who could set the record straight.
Instead of inviting the people who could address the central issue, the committee has invited witnesses such as the spokesman of the Uniting Church, who endorses the cash ban. The church has no special expertise, but its financial operations are completely enmeshed with KPMG, which audits its finances and oversees management of its funds.
Second, while the committee must have planned this hearing well in advance and invited the scheduled witnesses more than a week ago, it deliberately waited until 5:30 PM last night to notify the thousands of other people who made submissions that this hearing would be on, to ensure that the interested public wouldn’t have time to come. With proper notice, the hearing room would have been packed with everyday Australians who oppose the law, and they know it! They are determined to lock the real public out of this inquiry process.
When Citizens Party spokesman Robert Barwick challenged the “public servant” directing the inquiry, Mark “Sir Humphrey” Fitt, to explain why he emailed people so late, he chose to split hairs and give a bureaucratic answer: “I haven’t emailed anybody.” No Mr Fitt, the committee secretariat did, of which you are in charge! Mr Fitt behaves as a gatekeeper for the committee that oversees all banking legislation, whose job is to lock the public out so nothing interferes with the committee rubber-stamping everything the banks want. Fitt was secretary when this same committee waved through the 2018 “bail-in” law, and earlier this year when the committee conducted a farcical non-inquiry into the Separation of Banks Bill 2019, because the banks hysterically opposed it.
Between them, Slade Brockman and Mark Fitt had already shown their contempt for the public’s interest in this inquiry when they rubbished almost 3,000 submissions from the public, dismissing them as “correspondence” and refusing to publish them.
The Citizens Party calls on Parliament to restore public confidence in the integrity of its processes by firing committee Chairman Slade Brockman and Secretary Mark Fitt, and replacing them with a new chairman and secretary who will conduct a genuine inquiry.
Parliament debased
The conduct of this inquiry has deliberately debased the democratic procedures of Parliament which exist to hear the views of the public on laws that affect them.
Australian Senate Practice Chapter 16: Committees states of the purpose of committees: “Most signicantly, committees provide a means of access for citizens to participate in law making and policy review. Anyone may make a submission to a committee inquiry…. Committees frequently meet outside Canberra, thereby taking the Senate to the people and gaining first-hand knowledge of and exposure to issues of concern to the public. Inquiries by committees allow citizens to air grievances about government and bring to light mistreatment of citizens by government.”
It adds: “The taking of evidence at public hearings is a key element of most Senate committee inquiries and is an opportunity to test, in public, views expressed in the written submissions already received by the committee.”
Clearly the committee is in breach of this standard for proper practice. Their contempt follows Treasury rigging its initial consultation on the same law, by first not acknowledging the more than 3,500 submissions received from the public in just two weeks; then being exposed by an FOI for having, in its communication with the government, falsely dismissed almost all of them as the campaign of just one group, the CEC; then publishing most of them on its website in one big data dump, but hiding KPMG’s submission among those from individuals, to bury the fact that KPMG was openly calling for the $10,000 limit to be reduced to $2,000, and for the limit to be included in the associated regulation so the minister can easily reduce it further.
Will Labor aid and abet the government?
The question is: given Labor pushed for this extended inquiry, does it approve of the government rigging it so blatantly, or will it object? Labor leader Anthony Albanese has appointed KPMG boffin Andrew Dempster to be his policy director—will KPMG get its way in the Labor Party, or will the party take on the banks and crooked accounting firms to defend the rights of the Australian people?
Call Labor leader Anthony Albanese, and all Labor MPs and Senators, to demand they stop the government from rigging this inquiry.
Contact Albanese on (02) 9564 3588 or A.Albanese.MP@aph.gov.au "

Unbelievable...…
Who does Albanese engage as his policy director..... Andrew Dempster....he represents KPMG, who want this bill passed....
Its like the blind leading the blind...…..

[Nom De Plume]

Why does this contemptuous arrogant turd who poses as a human being always have an arrogant,
condescending smirk on his face..
This is one of the reasons why this turd is so hated in Australia...

Completely agree.

[Juliar]

To the toilet ?

[Black Orchid]

"Senate cash ban cowards block important witnesses and thousands of opponents from ‘public’ hearing
Demand Parliament sack the Liberal Chairman Slade Brockman and Secretary Mark ‘Sir Humphrey’ Fitt from the Senate Economics Legislation Committee!
You’d think that as the Morrison government is planning a radical change that upends centuries of tradition by banning transactions in the legal tender of cash, it would want to know the views of the public.
Hell no! When it comes to extreme measures to benefit criminal banks, this government is hell-bent on not only ignoring the widespread and deep-seated objections of the public to its radical agenda, but on actively suppressing their ability to object.
In doing so, they have demonstrated for all of Australia to see that they hold the democratic processes of Parliament in contempt, as mere formalities to “go through the motions” while fixing the outcome between the major parties behind closed doors.
The latest example is today’s public hearing in Canberra on the cash ban law. First, the committee has not invited anybody who would destroy the government’s claim that this ban is necessary to combat the so-called “black economy”. Since crooked accounting giant KPMG cooked up that pretext, and the government adopted its recommendation, expert researchers have shown that not only does Australia not have a serious black economy problem, but the small black economy that does exist has been shrinking for two decades without any radical cash ban. As that’s the only excuse for this law, therefore that’s the only issue to clarify, but Liberal Chairman Slade Brockman has refused to invite witnesses such as independent economist John Adams and former APRA Principal Researcher Dr Wilson Sy who could set the record straight.
Instead of inviting the people who could address the central issue, the committee has invited witnesses such as the spokesman of the Uniting Church, who endorses the cash ban. The church has no special expertise, but its financial operations are completely enmeshed with KPMG, which audits its finances and oversees management of its funds.
Second, while the committee must have planned this hearing well in advance and invited the scheduled witnesses more than a week ago, it deliberately waited until 5:30 PM last night to notify the thousands of other people who made submissions that this hearing would be on, to ensure that the interested public wouldn’t have time to come. With proper notice, the hearing room would have been packed with everyday Australians who oppose the law, and they know it! They are determined to lock the real public out of this inquiry process.
When Citizens Party spokesman Robert Barwick challenged the “public servant” directing the inquiry, Mark “Sir Humphrey” Fitt, to explain why he emailed people so late, he chose to split hairs and give a bureaucratic answer: “I haven’t emailed anybody.” No Mr Fitt, the committee secretariat did, of which you are in charge! Mr Fitt behaves as a gatekeeper for the committee that oversees all banking legislation, whose job is to lock the public out so nothing interferes with the committee rubber-stamping everything the banks want. Fitt was secretary when this same committee waved through the 2018 “bail-in” law, and earlier this year when the committee conducted a farcical non-inquiry into the Separation of Banks Bill 2019, because the banks hysterically opposed it.
Between them, Slade Brockman and Mark Fitt had already shown their contempt for the public’s interest in this inquiry when they rubbished almost 3,000 submissions from the public, dismissing them as “correspondence” and refusing to publish them.
The Citizens Party calls on Parliament to restore public confidence in the integrity of its processes by firing committee Chairman Slade Brockman and Secretary Mark Fitt, and replacing them with a new chairman and secretary who will conduct a genuine inquiry.
Parliament debased
The conduct of this inquiry has deliberately debased the democratic procedures of Parliament which exist to hear the views of the public on laws that affect them.
Australian Senate Practice Chapter 16: Committees states of the purpose of committees: “Most signicantly, committees provide a means of access for citizens to participate in law making and policy review. Anyone may make a submission to a committee inquiry…. Committees frequently meet outside Canberra, thereby taking the Senate to the people and gaining first-hand knowledge of and exposure to issues of concern to the public. Inquiries by committees allow citizens to air grievances about government and bring to light mistreatment of citizens by government.”
It adds: “The taking of evidence at public hearings is a key element of most Senate committee inquiries and is an opportunity to test, in public, views expressed in the written submissions already received by the committee.”
Clearly the committee is in breach of this standard for proper practice. Their contempt follows Treasury rigging its initial consultation on the same law, by first not acknowledging the more than 3,500 submissions received from the public in just two weeks; then being exposed by an FOI for having, in its communication with the government, falsely dismissed almost all of them as the campaign of just one group, the CEC; then publishing most of them on its website in one big data dump, but hiding KPMG’s submission among those from individuals, to bury the fact that KPMG was openly calling for the $10,000 limit to be reduced to $2,000, and for the limit to be included in the associated regulation so the minister can easily reduce it further.
Will Labor aid and abet the government?
The question is: given Labor pushed for this extended inquiry, does it approve of the government rigging it so blatantly, or will it object? Labor leader Anthony Albanese has appointed KPMG boffin Andrew Dempster to be his policy director—will KPMG get its way in the Labor Party, or will the party take on the banks and crooked accounting firms to defend the rights of the Australian people?
Call Labor leader Anthony Albanese, and all Labor MPs and Senators, to demand they stop the government from rigging this inquiry.
Contact Albanese on (02) 9564 3588 or A.Albanese.MP@aph.gov.au "

Unbelievable...…
Who does Albanese engage as his policy director..... Andrew Dempster....he represents KPMG, who want this bill passed....
Its like the blind leading the blind...…..

Both sides want it so we're doomed.

[Juliar]

Absolutely absurd. This flimsy ragged thread is all based on a rubbishy YouTube video pushing GetUp! and Greeny doom and gloom propaganda.

Albo recognizes that ScoMo is on a winner and he is copying everything ScoMo does. Albo has become a disciple of ScoMo the people's Messiah and he is following him to that light on the hill. Amen Praise the Lord!!!

[Juliar]

Now what about a rational discussion based on FACT instead of GetUp! and Greeny false propaganda in one of the many dubious videos on YouTube ?

It is all to do with curbing black market criminal transactions.



Cash was predicted to be dead in Australia as early as 2022, but there are plenty of reasons why it will be king for a while yet
JACK DERWIN OCT 10, 2019, 12:16 PM


Long live cash (Photo by Michael Dodge, Getty Images)

Measured by the number of card transactions each year, Australia is supposed to be the sixth-most cashless society on earth. The Federal Government is at this very moment even considering outlawing transactions in the stuff over $10,000.

Yet, despite that, we have more cash in circulation per capita than ever before. The RBA is even rolling out new banknotes and leading the charge globally to update our currency to make it safer and more accessible.

While some predicted that cash would disappear from Australian shores as early as 2022, making us the first country in the region to go cashless, there’s plenty of reasons to believe cash is still as important as ever.
The unveiling of the new $20 note in Australia on Wednesday was a fairly humble affair.

There was the RBA governor Philip Lowe – whose signature features on every note in the country – handing over a freshly printed lobster to a fruit vendor in exchange for a few bananas. It was impossible to tell if the reaction to the rollout was muted or if it was just the video.

The new $20 banknote has been released! It includes a range of innovative security features including a top-to-bottom window and Colourful Kookaburra – https://t.co/tkoevan0ge pic.twitter.com/fpNK1rApbe



— RBA (@RBAInfo) October 8, 2019

If there wasn’t any fanfare, perhaps there should have been. After all, the move is contrary to the expectation that the end for cash is nigh – and at the same time the government appears to be waging a war on it.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison and his government introduced legislation to parliament in September that could make it illegal for Australians to pay for purchases over $10,000 in cash. A senate committee is currently open to submissions from the community.

The task recommended by the Black Economy Taskforce, with those who support it claiming the bill’s purpose is to crack down on illegitimate activity, from tax evasion to money laundering. Why, after all, some may ask do we even pay with cash at all?

Tap and go has been around for years. New technology and payment companies are reducing the cost and time required to move money, and online shopping is forecast to explode. Why would anyone bother to fumble with loose change in such a consumer utopia?

Certainly, it appears that Australians are using cold hard cash less and less. In 2008, we used to go to the ATM 40 times per year on average, according to the RBA’s figures. A decade later, it was down to 25 times and declining. Over roughly the same period, the number of card transactions quintupled.

But despite predictions of us becoming cashless society by 2022, Australia is still flush with the stuff. In fact, the amount of cash in the Australian economy is near a 50-year per-capita high, according to the RBA, and its predominantly $50 and $100 bills that we’re clinging on to.

“For every Australian, there are currently around thirty $50 and fourteen $100 banknotes on issue,” Lowe explained at last year’s payment summit. “So there is an apparent paradox between the declining use of cash and the rising value of banknotes on issue.”

We’re hardly the exception in that regard. A UK review found almost one in five Britons would struggle to cope in an entirely cashless society. Even in Sweden, where just 2% of transactions are in cash, conceded in its own review that getting rid of it is a major risk to the most vulnerable people in its society, who are largely unbanked. The same concern goes for the elderly who perhaps aren’t as crash hot when it comes to online banking and its ilk as their grandchildren.

Meanwhile low-interest rates have become a feature of modern economies around the world. From Germany to Japan, the UK to the US, rates are low or going lower. When deposits are barely cents on the dollar, the financial difference between keeping cash in your wallet or in a savings account is negligible.

That, of course, isn’t the only reason. Some are reluctant to have their entire spending history documented by banks and governments. Certainly, not all of these are criminal.

Take, for instance, the example of Hong Kong. Many of its citizens are currently protesting the encroachment of the Chinese government on the administrative region. Reporter on the ground Mary Hui noted on Twitter the need for those protesters to buy train tickets with cash so as to avoid a potential backlash from authorities.

"We're afraid of having our data tracked," one female protester told me.

She said that this ticket-buying was't as prevalent during the 2014 Umbrella Movement. Five years on, however, people are more wary & aware.

— Mary Hui (@maryhui) June 12, 2019

Of course, it’s not just civil unrest which increases demand for cash, but it is a good example of just one essential use case. Australia may have enjoyed the fruits of stable and democratic government for more than 100 years, but nonetheless, has its own motivations for having cash on hand.

A recent technical error in Australia saw ATMs and EFTPOS machines unable to accept payment or distribute cash, leaving thousands around the country unable to use their money. A strong reminder that cash doesn’t require electricity and internet to function.

These are all obstacles flashy cards and electronic payments will need to deal with to complete their climb to the top of the payment world. According to Lowe, these competing types will need to improve their reliability, functionality, and transaction cost. Already there are new entrants into the market which are adding the competition required to improve these. So too the further adoption of open banking and new payment technology.

However Lowe, despite believing cash will become a niche payment option over time, still thinks there’s a place for the humble banknote in this modern world.

“While it is difficult to predict the future, I expect that banknotes will remain part of our payments system for some time to come,” he said.

So there you have it. While we might all soon become outlaws if we dare use it at the 7-figure scale, the death of cash appears greatly exaggerated.


https://www.businessinsider.com.au/aust ... ts-2019-10

[Juliar]

Cashless is not all downhill and wonderful. Think EFTPOS when the EFTPOS computer went down.





Is a cashless society worth it?
Lachlan Maddock — 1 minute read 05 December 2019

As the country continues its inexorable march towards a cashless society, it’s important to remember the downsides.

Australia has been just a few years away from being a cashless society for a couple of decades now, but it will eventually get there. Legislation currently before the Senate aims to ban transactions over $10,000 in a bid to hinder the black economy. From there, it’s not difficult to imagine that the ubiquity of digital payment systems – and efforts the by government – will see hard cash disappear at some point in the future.

One of the supposed benefits of a cashless society is that it cuts down on crime, the logic being that if there’s less cash to steal, less cash is stolen. Laundering dirty money is also harder, as every transaction is logged in some form or another.

But a cashless society comes with a number of negatives that might well outweigh the positives.

“As payments move online, there would be an increased risk of crimes such as identity theft, account takeover, fraudulent transactions and data breaches, due to the higher volume of cashless transactions and more points of exposure for the average consumer,” Dr Richard Harmon, managing director of financial services at Cloudera, told Investor Daily.

“Hackers and other criminals now have new ways to get access to accounts and to potentially set up synthetic accounts to facilitate more sophisticated money laundering activities.”

And that’s just the risk posed by hackers. According to the UK’s access to cash report, a cashless society could heighten the risks of financial abuse. Elderly people, who might lack understanding of digital technology, would be particularly vulnerable. Couples with joint bank accounts are also at risk – money can be tracked and controlled by one person. These issues are already of great concern, but they’d be even worse in a cashless society.

That’s not to mention that digital systems rely on topnotch digital infrastructure, something that Australia doesn’t exactly have in spades. That infrastructure also has to be more or less impervious to cyber attacks, which may be carried out by state-sponsored actors with an interest in crippling a country’s entire financial system. In the face of that existential threat to the economy, a little bit of money laundering doesn’t seem so bad.

A cashless society could also make things worse for workers and the most vulnerable. It’s only a short jump from cashless to “cashier-less”, and a cashless society would have to deal with an explosion of unemployed low-skill individuals.

Meanwhile, those who lack access to banks – or prefer not to use them – are also at risk.

“Let me highlight that one of the concerns about becoming a cashless society – at least as we transition into this state – is the ability for the underbanked or unbanked to have sufficient access to function properly as they would within a cash-based system,” Dr Harmon said.

“This would be a key concern from a societal perspective.”

The idea of a cashless society is promising. But hidden in that promise are a number of caveats that any country – let alone Australia – would be foolish to ignore.

https://www.investordaily.com.au/techno ... y-worth-it

[brian ross]

A national disaster

Christian right groups say PM Scott Morrison stole their thunder

[cods]

did someone try to steal your thunder over yonder bri bri

I see it didnt take you long to lock a thread once you were given the power... omg..

that should read the abuse of power......its ok bri bri wont post there again your safe..

what a shame you have proved everyone right when they say you are a control freak who basically shut down his own forum
due to controlling everyone.....well sunshine I am gone it wont stop me posting my opinion though.....no matter how hard you try.