|
Post by bunyip on Oct 6, 2020 6:35:46 GMT 7
But why were the IGA and service station "banned merchants" ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maybe they dont donate to the liberal party
|
|
|
Post by bear on Dec 2, 2020 8:14:55 GMT 7
📍🌿#PARLIAMENT_WATCH And so it begins...
Monday 30th Nov 2020, an amendment put forward by Linda Burney to the second reading motion at the end of the last sitting will continue through the House Of Representatives (HoR).
If the amendment is agreed to, that is it. The bill will not proceed to a second reading or HoR vote, so will not go to the Senate and all "trials" will end as scheduled on Dec 31st 2020. If the amendment is not agreed to, and after the bill is formally voted on, it will be sent on to the Senate for debate and final vote there. Note please that Gov has listed the bill for debate in Senate on Wednesday 3rd Dec, preempting the HoR vote outcome - which is a common procedure to ensure time is allotted. Addressing the amendment is listed as #3 on the HoR notice sheet order of business for Monday 30th Nov, (see: parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;db=CHAMBER;id=chamber%2Fnoticer%2Ffae96170-a132-4cf4-bc98-1ee9a4bb1b3a%2F0002;query=Id%3A%22chamber%2Fnoticer%2Ffae96170-a132-4cf4-bc98-1ee9a4bb1b3a%2F0000%22) and it reads: Social Security (Administration) Amendment (Continuation of Cashless Welfare) Bill 2020 ( Minister for Government Services ): Second reading—Resumption of debate ( from 12 November 2020 —Mr Falinski, in continuation ) on the motion of Mr Robert —That the Bill be now read a second time— And on the amendment moved thereto by Ms Burney , viz. —That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: “the House declines to give the bill a second reading and: (1) notes that: (a) thirteen years after the Howard Government’s so-called Intervention in the Northern Territory, there is no evidence that compulsory, broad-based income management works; (b) the Minister decided to make the Cashless Debit Card trial permanent before reading the independent review by Adelaide University; and (c) this proposal is racially discriminatory, as approximately 68 per cent of the people impacted are First Nations Australians; and (2) calls on the Government to: (a) not roll out the Cashless Debit Card nationally; and (b) invest in evidence-based policies, job creation and services, rather than ideological policies like the Cashless Debit Card”. As you can imagine we wholeheartedly SUPPORT this amendment and encourage every minister of the 46th parliament, specifically those wishing to retain their seats, to stand and uphold the basic rights of ALL Australians. You can keep track from Monday onward by checking: 👉The Blue ( HoR): www.aph.gov.au/PI/dailyprogram👉 Dynamic Red (Senate):https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/chamber_documents/dynamic_red 👉 Senate Notice sheet: www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Chamber_documents/Senate_chamber_documents/The_Week_Ahead#TWAtabs-tab-1 👉 And watching here: Live PH video: www.aph.gov.au/news_and_events/watch_parliamentm.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2741800332724523&id=1668608406710393
|
|
|
Post by paddy on Dec 3, 2020 8:15:14 GMT 7
Credit to LNP MP Bridget Archer for coming out against the card. Just show some guts and cross the floor.
|
|
|
Post by bear on Mar 5, 2021 7:33:48 GMT 7
If you've ever thought things couldn't ever get any worse in the Welfafe sector; have a read of this, then set aside 45 min to view the video. Unbelievable stuff!! Cheers bear 🚨👉#Update #Nominee_Status_Issues Discovery: It has been revealed that a *service provider* based 777km's away from the mum who reported the payment nominee issue to us earlier this week, [ www.facebook.com/notowelfarecard/videos/335938927832590] was the one that had claimed nominee status over her payment without her consent or her awareness. This is truly shocking and the implications, legal and other, could be as deeply felt as the ramifications to this mother would have been had she not called in to check on the departments generic letter. The mum has been told by the department that the situation has now been 'sorted', and tomorrow if her payment arrives, we will see how genuine that response was. How long have agencies been allowed to do this, to just claim to be payment nominees over clients without even asking the person's permission much less gaining informed legal consent as required under the rule of law? How many more people are in the same position and just not aware of it? Australian Council of Social Service? A reminder that: 👉This parent had not given free prior and informed consent to anyone becoming her permanent payment nominee. 👉 She was initially denied information about who the nominee even was. Their name / location etc. 👉 She had not appointed or invited the specific provider to be her permanent payment nominee. 👉She received no letter informing her of the legal change to *her* status from the department at any time. 👉She was not aware that this provider had claimed nominee status over her at all until she rang the dept to clarify a generic letter she received. 👉An Indue card had *already* been sent to this service provider, giving them and denying her access to her income and personal details, and permitting them to access her online Indue portal, without her knowledge or awareness, or even so much as a letter from the department to inform her. 👉 The provider claiming legal agency over her payment was an agency located over 777kms from her residence. If you have had contact with a "service provider" community group or body, or local welfare agency or charity, especially if that agency is an Indue 'shop front' and if you have any concerns about your legal status, please begin by contacting the department directly, whether or not you received the generic letter informing of recent legislation changes to nominee arrangements. Like we have with this parent, in cases such as this, but from card declines to shoddy service, we implore you to make formal complaints to the financial complaints authority. [ www.facebook.com/AustralianFinancialComplaintsAuthority] On a more positive note, the shoes and sports gear this amazing mum helped to arrange with Donna from National Homelessness Service Melb, have arrived at Save the Children #Ceduna and will be distributed this week. m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2813619648875924&id=1668608406710393- Amanda
|
|
|
Post by bear on Mar 28, 2021 7:48:31 GMT 7
Update on Nominee Issues. Over 80 comments on original link. Cheers bear🚨🚨🚨#ENFORCED_NOMINEE_ISSUE:See: www.facebook.com/notowelfarecard/videos/335938927832590 for context. On receipt of this letter below, a curious and quick thinking forced cardholder in Ceduna rang the Indue hotline for clarification of what it meant. She didn't think it applied to her but wanted to check what it meant. To her horror she was told that: 1. Completely unknown to her, SHE herself had a nominee, and that HER card would be cancelled and her nominee would be taking over control of her finances. 2. When she asked directly, Indue would NOT tell her who this nominee was! She was told that an Indue card in HER name had ALREADY been sent out to this anonymous Nominee. 4. When she went to Centrelink, they confirmed a nominee had been appointed and even THEY would not tell her who this nominee is! 5. The forced cardholder has since explicitly removed consent for ANY nominee to preside over her and her finances and has been told by the Centrelink officer she spoke to, that since doing so, the nominee will not be able to access her income on any card. However, she was also told that the change may not come into effect in time for her next payment and indeed, her own Indue card may be cancelled as a result. Centrelink have told her that in that event, she will have to go to the tribunal to sort it out herself. 6. If this issue cannot be resolved, this family including a disabled five year old child, will have no access to ANY income at all apart from the 20% going to her private account, and not knowing who the nominee is, she cannot even contact them even if they wanted to, to arrange bill payment or food for their family. 7. This person is being terrorised in the #Ceduna community for sharing publicly, that parents of school aged children couldn't buy school shoes after a local shoe shop closed. Since stepping forward, she has been verbally assaulted, and had her property vandalized for, and we quote, " shaming and embarrassing the town" and "exposing what was really going on" for forced cardholders in Ceduna. 📍Clarifying for the record that this forced cardholder did NOT ask for or appoint a nominee at ANY time that she is aware of. She had no idea until this morning that one had, in their words, 'been appointed for her'. --- Please also note, that the original ABC Australia article exposing the plight of cardholders in Ceduna, was itself changed FOR CEDUNA. So while the rest of the nation saw the original article ( we do have copies of both) , Ceduna only saw a redacted version, provided by the ABC that was flattering to Indue policy and local LNP Rowan Ramsey. Donations of shoes for forced cardholders and low income families in Ceduna were raised via National Homelessness Collective Melbourne last month and are due to arrive at drop off point Save The Children Australia in Ceduna soon. If YOU have received a letter similar to the one posted below, a seemingly generic announcement from the department- please contact the Indue hotline AND Centerlink immediately and confirm/deny your nominee status with them. We are advised that it is ILLEGAL for ANYONE to claim nominee status over ANYONE else without their express, free prior and informed consent - consent is required by law. A Compulsory Nominee can only be appointed after a court ruling and in the presence of legal representation. Exceptional circumstances via the Family Court, and in express circumstances under The Mental Health Act, State Trustee and under some Guardianship provisions and Correctional services legislation do allow for compulsory status changes, however none of these apply to this forced cardholder. You certainly ARE entitled by law to know who your payment or correspondent nominee is. It is a REQUIREMENT of the law that you are informed. This situation is an absolute nightmare for this mother and for all people and especially parents currently forced onto the Indue card program against their will. We will be seeking further advice and support this mum as best we can, we ask you to please share this post with Senators and MP's, your groups and everywhere you can to try to raise awareness of what is happening. --- Senator Rachel Siewert Richard Marles MP Senator Sue Lines Senator Malarndirri McCarthy - Northern Territory Murray Watt - Senator for Queensland Senator Anthony Chisholm ABC Australia SBS Australia NITV Australian Welfare News Australian Council of Social Service Australian Financial Complaints Authority CPSU - Community and Public Sector Union Justice Connect Welfare Rights Centre NSW
|
|
|
Post by genx on May 12, 2021 15:45:22 GMT 7
Income Management is the wave of the future for Centrelink. Not as a way to manage income, but to make being on a Centrelink payment in a substantial way unbearable.
As this program rolls out generally, getting Indefinite Portability will be the only way to sidestep this process.
|
|
|
Post by bear on May 12, 2021 16:06:23 GMT 7
Income Management is the wave of the future for Centrelink. Not as a way to manage income, but to make being on a Centrelink payment in a substantial way unbearable. As this program rolls out generally, getting Indefinite Portability will be the only way to sidestep this process. Sadly I fear you are 100% correct on that genx and quite possibly going on past grandfathering events people may be required to be OS on a particular date to have it activated. Eg. Any DSP'er who was overseas on a particular date in 2004 was granted UP/IP simply for being OS. I think there were rules about losing it if you came back to Oz for longer than a set amount of time and not being reinstated to full pay on arrival but it was that easy back then.....then it wasn't so easy anymore!! Cheers bear
|
|
|
Post by genx on May 12, 2021 17:34:51 GMT 7
From looking at YouTube testimony of people on the Indue Card, it appears that you can apply to be taken off it but if you have even one credit default in your credit record, or rejected payment via direct debit, your request to be taken off the card will be rejected.
My suggestion to everyone here is to get your affairs in order to make sure that these credit defaults are not in your record. You can use a service like Credit Savvy to check what is on your credit file.
Most likely they won't be looking at any defaults more than a couple of years old, so if you get your affairs in order right now you may be able to get off the card as soon as you are put on the card. If your disability is related to alcohol or drug use then you are probably out of luck.
By the way, it's quite possible to have debts in your credit file that you had no idea existed. You can dispute these.
Good luck, everyone.
|
|
|
Post by bear on May 19, 2021 17:24:47 GMT 7
📌#BIG_NEWSWell we asked..then he asked..and here we go!
8:33 in...have a listen 👉https://facebook.com/marcuspaulinthemorning/posts/754686595208210 ALP on Cashless Debit Card today on #MarcusPaulintheMorning @2sm
ALP have confirmed they will offer limited government run IM system, not private corporate run. ALP acknowledge that a role for income management does exist on request. Acknowledges some women requested a tool to help them. For some communities a limited income management may have a role.
So now you know! Indue Cashless Debit Card as we know them will be out and a government run VOLUNTARY income management scheme for individuals or communities who give free prior and informed consent will be crafted. This position supports the Australian Law Council and Australian Human Rights Commission submissions to senate on Continuation Bill 2020.
This confirmation is a very BIG DEAL! Please pass the news on to all your contacts and groups.
Thank you Marcus!
|
|
|
Post by bear on Jun 20, 2021 6:45:20 GMT 7
No Cashless Debit Card AustraliaSue Haseldine, a 70-year-old indigenous local, is not on the card but says there is a stigma about it. “It is mucking people up mentally. They can’t plan their own life and they have no control over their own money. I feel like our Aboriginal people are still in chains,” she says. Another Aboriginal woman, former Ceduna resident Janette Milera, says it is an attempted throwback to the dark old days of white-black relations. “To me the basics card is like putting us back on rations – they are telling us how and where to spend our money. The money spent on the card would have been better used on community programs on the ground to address alcohol and drug issues.” Scott Wilson, director of the Aboriginal Drug and Alcohol Council in South Australia, says the card is ineffective. “At the end of the day people will collectively pool resources if they want to get on the grog. They will get around it. They also buy things that they don’t necessarily want because they can get it on their cashless welfare card and then sell those goods for cash. It is an ideological thing for the government,” he says. “Because a few people have severe alcohol and drug problems, we will punish the entire welfare sector for it.” In a scathing critique, the St Vincent de Paul Society says there is no evidence the card has improved the wellbeing of individuals or communities either by reducing substance abuse or by increasing employment outcomes. It highlights a risk of unintended, serious consequences including social exclusion and stigmatisation, increased financial hardship and the erosion of individual autonomy and dignity. “Ultimately, this is a ¬punitive and paternalistic measure that is driven by ideology rather than evidence,” it says. m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2891322341105654&id=1668608406710393Note:- Full expanded article available on General board under the heading ‘Still in chains’: playing the welfare card leaves a town divided.
|
|
|
Post by bear on Jun 20, 2021 12:19:25 GMT 7
🚨🚨🚨#ENFORCED_NOMINEE_ISSUE:
See: www.facebook.com/notowelfarecard/videos/335938927832590 for context. On receipt of this letter below, a curious and quick thinking forced cardholder in Ceduna rang the Indue hotline for clarification of what it meant. She didn't think it applied to her but wanted to check what it meant. To her horror she was told that: 1. Completely unknown to her, SHE herself had a nominee, and that HER card would be cancelled and her nominee would be taking over control of her finances. 2. When she asked directly, Indue would NOT tell her who this nominee was! She was told that an Indue card in HER name had ALREADY been sent out to this anonymous Nominee. 4. When she went to Centrelink, they confirmed a nominee had been appointed and even THEY would not tell her who this nominee is! 5. The forced cardholder has since explicitly removed consent for ANY nominee to preside over her and her finances and has been told by the Centrelink officer she spoke to, that since doing so, the nominee will not be able to access her income on any card. However, she was also told that the change may not come into effect in time for her next payment and indeed, her own Indue card may be cancelled as a result. Centrelink have told her that in that event, she will have to go to the tribunal to sort it out herself. 6. If this issue cannot be resolved, this family including a disabled five year old child, will have no access to ANY income at all apart from the 20% going to her private account, and not knowing who the nominee is, she cannot even contact them even if they wanted to, to arrange bill payment or food for their family. 7. This person is being terrorised in the #Ceduna community for sharing publicly, that parents of school aged children couldn't buy school shoes after a local shoe shop closed. Since stepping forward, she has been verbally assaulted, and had her property vandalized for, and we quote, " shaming and embarrassing the town" and "exposing what was really going on" for forced cardholders in Ceduna. 📍Clarifying for the record that this forced cardholder did NOT ask for or appoint a nominee at ANY time that she is aware of. She had no idea until this morning that one had, in their words, 'been appointed for her'. Please also note, that the original ABC Australia article exposing the plight of cardholders in Ceduna, was itself changed FOR CEDUNA. So while the rest of the nation saw the original article ( we do have copies of both) , Ceduna only saw a redacted version, provided by the ABC that was flattering to Indue policy and local LNP Rowan Ramsey. Donations of shoes for forced cardholders and low income families in Ceduna were raised via National Homelessness Collective Melbourne last month and are due to arrive at drop off point Save The Children Australia in Ceduna soon. If YOU have received a letter similar to the one posted below, a seemingly generic announcement from the department- please contact the Indue hotline AND Centerlink immediately and confirm/deny your nominee status with them. We are advised that it is ILLEGAL for ANYONE to claim nominee status over ANYONE else without their express, free prior and informed consent - consent is required by law. A Compulsory Nominee can only be appointed after a court ruling and in the presence of legal representation. Exceptional circumstances via the Family Court, and in express circumstances under The Mental Health Act, State Trustee and under some Guardianship provisions and Correctional services legislation do allow for compulsory status changes, however none of these apply to this forced cardholder. You certainly ARE entitled by law to know who your payment or correspondent nominee is. It is a REQUIREMENT of the law that you are informed. This situation is an absolute nightmare for this mother and for all people and especially parents currently forced onto the Indue card program against their will. We will be seeking further advice and support this mum as best we can, we ask you to please share this post with Senators and MP's, your groups and everywhere you can to try to raise awareness of what is happening. Senator Rachel Siewert Richard Marles MP Senator Sue Lines Senator Malarndirri McCarthy - Northern Territory Murray Watt - Senator for Queensland Senator Anthony Chisholm ABC Australia SBS Australia NITV Australian Welfare News Australian Council of Social Service Australian Financial Complaints Authority CPSU - Community and Public Sector Union Justice Connect Welfare Rights Centre NSW
|
|
|
Post by nomadic on Jun 20, 2021 20:24:43 GMT 7
It just continues to mirror Nazi Germany. Almost impossible to believe in Australia today. But from all our own horror stories I have no doubt it is.
|
|
|
Post by bear on Jun 30, 2021 7:16:23 GMT 7
Working two jobs but even earning $1.00 of earnings can see you on the card if you live in a trial area. Move out of the area; the card moves with you. Bear Video: fb.watch/6rswFBeZfX/
|
|
|
Post by latindancer on Jun 30, 2021 10:04:15 GMT 7
It's like something out of Russia, somewhere in the mid 20th century.
I am too stunned to make further comment.
|
|
|
Post by nomadic on Jun 30, 2021 20:32:37 GMT 7
It's like something out of Russia, somewhere in the mid 20th century. I am too stunned to make further comment. Your silent GROWL was heard by everyone LD.
|
|