BY CAREER POLITICIANS AND PUBLIC SERVANTS
BY CORPORATE EXECUTIVES - 2009 "The possession of unlimited power will make a despot of almost any man." Thomas Aldrich, 19th Century
Go to current observations and reporting of corrosion and corruption in Australia 2017
Mosaic Portal Network
COMMENTATOR AND OBSERVER OF THE
THE POWER ELITE
POLITICIANS AND CORPORATE EXECUTIVES
Editorials on Ethics
Corporate, Political and Social
In our modern day Australian managerial politics, a non politician, such as a female public servant, is what? Expendable in the bigger picture? "We must remind our politicians that we expect them to speak honestly and to be concerned about real issues, and not simply with the obtaining or retaining of power." so said DR DAVIS MCCAUGHEY It is not merely the people that are elected to our governments may be reprehensible, it is also the supportive (directly or indirectly) who place a greater emphasis on staying out of any contentious issue it in order to ensure they achieve objectives whilst tolerating an abuse of process and systems. Do they think public servants are not observant of the world beyond the agencies?
Australia's decline into degradation at the hands of politicians, union officials, corporate executives and unscrupulous individuals is a nauseating thing. Taking this on in this forum will be frowned on by many. Why should professionals on LinkedIn accept that there is always collateral damage, to people, in the corporate and political, cut and thrust, and it is acceptable? Are we cowards afraid to speak our opinions?
Is LinkedIn, representing the educated professional or is it just another forum for extolling corporate speak and mundane trite observations and thought bubbles? A sort of professional modelling forum. Is it okay to stand by while Australian government Ministers, who are just political thug, destroy a woman public servant or anyone else who happens by accident or plan to damage the politician's personal interests? I think not.
"In sum, the truth is that we luxuriate in the comfortable assertion that women enjoy equality. We have salved our consciences by eliminating the more obvious discriminations like unequal rates of pay for work of equal value. But, in fact, we have not eliminated the inheritance of the millennia that women are lesser beings, an inheritance which still manifests itself in a whole range of prejudice and other forms of discrimination."BOB HAWKE, on the position of women in Australia, The Resolution of Conflict". But how many will say enough is enough and demand that Australia's PM, Malcolm Turnbull set a standard that says no more if you want to be in the Parliament as a Liberal member. "We believe firmly in the existence of political parties, but this does not mean that we pledge ourselves to any particular man or body of men, but instead we pledge ourselves to a principle. We would not vote for any man we had just reason to regard as a bad man, just because he was a Liberal. "AUSTRALIAN WOMEN’S NATIONAL LEAGUE pamphlet
What do you, the silent majority connected to me on LinkedIn, who work in Australia think of this? Not the ordinary working people but the many bosses, in high places, in corporations and government agencies who are connected to me? Not many I hazard will express an opinion. I will watch how many of my executive connections respond.
I am in my old age tired of the highly paid people, who could be leaders and role models, but instead choose to ignore unethical behaviour for whatever reasons. "Will Australia have the intelligence, energy or guts to impose democratic and pluralist forms on the new technology, or will its ambiguities all be resolved in favour of the rich, the powerful and the status quo? Our timorous social history, the feeble grasp of complex matters exhibited by too many of our leaders, the low level of intellectual vitality, a lack of national self-confidence, our natural tendency towards bureaucracy, conformity, obedience and fatalism, the mediocrity of the business and academic establishment do not give us much ground for optimism."BARRY JONES, Sleepers, Wake!, 1982"
Many people in executive positions could not care and others will remain silent because they fear for their livelihoods and they need to interact with Australia's politicians. There is a furore in Australia over the ignorant, testosterone driven gladiatorial male club that operates openly, and brazenly, in our political sphere. Often we hear how Australian politics is a bear pit, and the incumbents seem to relish this seeing themselves as tough players in the circus.
Do we have a Prime Minister,in Malcolm Turnbull, and others in the Australian Government Cabinet of integrity, or do we have people passing through, who will never make it better for us beyond economics over which we have no control? We do have control over integrity but that does not rate very high on the agenda of must do in our governments.
First class folly: Jamie Briggs flouted ex-PM Tony Abbott’s first class travel ban and distributed photo of female public servant who lodged complaint. DISGRACED junior minister Jamie Briggs repeatedly flouted former prime minister Tony Abbott’s ban on ministers travelling first class — and personally distributed to colleagues a photograph identifying the female public servant who lodged a confidential complaint about his behaviour in a Hong Kong bar. After publicly stating that he’d chosen not to name the woman to “protect her privacy’’, Mr Briggs confirmed on Saturday that a pixelated photograph of the 26-year-old woman, published on the front page of TheWeekend Australian, was from his own mobile phone. The former minister denied leaking the picture to the newspaper — but confirmed he’d “sent it to a few people prior to the complaint and following’’. The Sunday Mail can also reveal Mr Briggs has accepted dozens of bottles of fine wines and champagne during his time as an MP. The Mayo MP pointed to the photograph as evidence of the “informal’’ and friendly nature of the evening. “I didn’t have anything to do with today’s stories. I called and apologised. I called (the public servant) because I thought it was the right thing to do.’’ Mr Briggs accepted flight upgrades to first class on five occasions after Mr Abbott announced he had “banned’’ the practice." (The Advertiser newspaper, Adelaide, January 2, 2016)
"Australia's major union representing public servants says the bureaucrat who complained about Jamie Briggs has experienced a "gross breach of privacy". The Community and Public Sector Union has called for the privacy of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade staff member to be protected after a photo of the woman was leaked to the media." (Jamie Briggs resignation: Outrage over public servant's privacy breach, January 3, 2016,, Phillip Thomson, Canberra Times)
Mr Brigg's staff, supporters and spin merchants will now work to ameliorate the damage and if necessary in the final moment to destroy the protagonist threat.
Briggs is just another person demonstrating the low grade quality of our political representatives. Some of the political cheer squad want to bring back Jamie at some later date. It says a lot about their integrity. Mr Briggs has form. He likes to party.
"Freed from the constraints of leadership, Abbott soon freed himself from his shirt during a wild party at Parliament House. Staff and supporters danced and drank in the Prime Minister's suite on the night Malcolm Turnbull snatched Australia's top job, with Abbott reportedly going shirtless at one point. "It came off, but it was back on pretty quickly," one witness told News Corp. A marble coffee table was reportedly smashed, with staffers grabbing shards as mementoes of their own shattered hopes and dreams, while Treasurer Joe Hockey and MP Jamie Briggs hit the dance floor hard. Briggs, the assistant minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development, emerged in a wheelchair the next day, but told the media he hurt himself while jogging that morning." (Wild, wet and semi-nude: how prime ministers party when they lose the top job, Date, September 20, 2015, Patrick Hatch, Sydney Morning Herald)
Then in the first week of January 2016 comes Jamie Brigg's mate the nasty foul mouthed Australian government Minister Dutton, in an erroneous text message. "he called a female journalist a “mad fucking witch”.
Mr Dutton has come under fire for the text message he accidentally sent to News Corp Australia’s Sunday political editor, Samantha Maiden, over her coverage of fallen junior minister Jamie Briggs’s late-night bar incident with a female public servant in Hong Kong. Mr Dutton has apologised for calling Maiden a “mad fucking witch” after she reported yesterday that Mr Briggs had sent colleagues a photograph of the diplomat who complained about his behaviour, which ultimately led to his resignation from the front bench. It is understood Mr Dutton accidentally sent the text message to Maiden instead of Mr Briggs in what was intended as a show of support for t Dutton’s ‘mad witch’ text apology, THE AUSTRALIA, JANUARY 4, 2016 2:38PM, Rosie Lewis.
Are we to believe that Dutton sent his text was about a journalist who reported on his mate or was he texting about the female public servant whom Briggs has resigned over? Now the spin merchants go to work in both Minister's office, all on our dime.
So it's all okay is it, just a joke is it, by these juvenile Ministers to whom we pay millions to keep in office?
These are the boys who think it is okay to call women fucking witches and to fob it all off? To text each other such descriptions. Is this a serious high quality federal government we have in Australia or just another imposition of low grade hacks of the political duopoly living on our dollars? "When the open, honest governance of an organisation lapses or becomes of increasingly secondary importance, then it becomes open to short cuts, unprincipled compromise and eventually plain sleaze. And if democracy and honesty are of declining relevance in the party, then broader democratic belief and practice at a parliamentary level also suffers. If obfuscation and bullshit prevails internally, then equally vacuous spin prevails externally."BOB HOGG". When is it that people in high profile corporate roles, and the general public overall, will say, enough is enough regarding the parasites in our society who take everyone's money for their livelihood and then abuse the privilege so blatantly whilst acting so preciously in their privileged worlds?
"People have become cynical about politics and this is unhealthy and dangerous for our body politic."BOB HAWKE, The Resolution of Conflict".
Individuals and business have to assist
Australia's agency AUSTRAC is responsible for tracking the movement of financial transactions with a value of $A10,000 or more. Banks are required to report the movement of large amounts of funds. In 2013-2104 some $A35 Billion of unreported financial transactions were uncovered. A small business sent $A21M overseas to undisclosed recipients. Large sums of funds are broken down into smaller packages to avoid detection. Some transactions are being undertaken in community centres and other non profit entities.
Money laundering has been around for years but is blossoming as technology develops to facilitate it.
Money laundering in Australia 2011
Money laundering global high risk
"Money laundering is a critical risk to Australia. It is the common denominator of almost all serious and organised criminal activity. Criminals generate profits from illegal activities such as fraud, drug trafficking, tax evasion, people smuggling, theft, arms trafficking and corrupt practices. They rely on laundering or cleaning this ‘dirty’ money to legitimise or hide its illegal origins.
Money laundering involves processing illicit profits in ways which mask ownership and make the funds appear to have come from legitimate sources. This enables criminals to hide and accumulate wealth, avoid prosecution, evade taxes, increase profits through reinvestment, and fund further criminal activity, including terrorism.
Money laundering is also intrinsic to serious tax fraud/tax evasion and a threat to revenue. Often, money laundering is a transnational crime. Funds are laundered to pay for imported illicit goods and services, distance criminal income from the underlying crime and ‘park’ it offshore, buy property or high-value moveable goods for investment or later return to Australia, and move illicit funds to transnational syndicates’ home-bases.
This international dimension creates opportunities for criminal networks and presents complex challenges for Australian law enforcement and regulatory agencies. Some countries and regions are considered significant money laundering threats because they are source or transit points for illicit commodities and services while others are attractive for money laundering due to preferential tax regimes. Source or transit countries for illicit commodities or services, and places of residence for members of criminal networks, are likely to remain high-risk destinations for money laundering." (Source: Money laundering in Australia 2011, AUSTRAC)
"Ross and Hannan (2007) identified three risk elements, each of which needs to be considered in effective money laundering risk assessments—probabilistic, consequence and vulnerability risks. Probabilistic risk assessment involves the establishment of an association between an observable action and an activity the observer would like to detect. If money laundering and identity fraud have a strong association, to use Ross and Hannan’s (2007) example, then the presence of identity fraud would suggest a high risk of money laundering. The assessment of consequence risk is tied to the potential impact of an activity. A small cash transaction may be illicit but its potential impact may be far smaller than a large illicit transaction. Monitoring large transactions in this example would be a better risk mitigation practice.
Vulnerability risks are those that impede effective monitoring or detection, such as regulatory deficiencies or the presence of opaque transactions. Kini (2006) argues that the high-profile AML/CTF regulatory enforcement activity in the United States around 2006 illustrates the significance of a considered risk assessment program. ABN AMROs correspondent banking business with Russian banks constituted a high-risk activity in a high-risk location; Bank Atlantic’s high net-worth business in Florida also entailed a high-risk business in high-risk locations.
The banks, in both cases, failed to employ adequate AML/CTF controls and FinCEN, the AML/CTF regulator in the United States, imposed large penalties on both banks (Kini 2006). These cases illustrate the need for regulated businsses of all sizes to have an effective AML/CTF plan in place to assess the level of ML/TF risks that face their operations and to respond to such risks appropriately." (Source: Perceptions of money laundering and terrorism financing risks. Australian Institute of Criminology)
The site also contains statistics and views of small, medium and large enterprises and their perceptions of the likely occurrence of money laundering and terror funding within their business and the sectorn at large.
The bulk of enforcement cost is borne by the taxpayer. Investigators are hampered by closed door business attitudes, secrecy and untehical business executives including criminals operating anonymously within big companies and banks.
Meanwhile retailers are selling prepaid debit and gift cards across the counter, in multiples of values up to $A4,000 each, without requiring the identity of the purchaser or the identity of recipient. Bogus names could be presented if no check of an instrument is required. These transactiions appear nowhere after the sale and the card is used. The cards can be used anywhere in the world.
The attitude of the business owners is that to require identity or to repport suspicious behaviour, and transactions, is an impost business should not be rquired to bear. They do not want to intrude into customer's privacy or have their business product sales, revenue and profits, in any way impacted or curtailed.
Big companies, and their distributors and resellers, are selling the technologies, systems and products that facilitate this activity. They are the providers to criminals who are engaging in money laundering, identity theft, fraud, tax avoidance, multiple identities hidden from authorities and regulators and tax offices, and others engaged in terror funding.
These sellers do not want to question why someone is buying a machine capable of producing driver licences, passports, credit card and debit cards, smart cards, when they are not a government entity and are not a bank or corporation that utilises the technologies for valid business. The manufacturers have littlle idea who the distributors, and resellers, are selling to. Business does not want accountability, responsibility or to curb their innovation in the public interest. More and more technology is being released that is supporting "dark web" and "circumventing regulators". Nationaln Security of nation states is threatened.
Amendments to Australian AML/CTF laws now out for consultation woould require compliance officers to be appointed (they are in banks and financial enterprises now) into every major enterprise that is engaged in payments and systems as described above. Company Boards, Executives, and Employees, would be required to monitor their client's activities, ask questions and report their suspicions to AUSTRAC within a matter of days. Failure to do so incurs penalties. The aim is to engage business in assisting with law enforcmenet and national security. They are resisting.
But no big corporation wants to be identified as being "anti-social or engaged in assisting criminals knowingly or not" so they resport to back rom lobbing through associations or spend money to defeat the legislators/regulators intent. They argue legal barriers, and privacy, such imposts are restraining open competition, innovation and development. All things in their favour, nothing in the favour of the public interest other than veiled consumer interests.
Large corporations like utilities, telecommunications, water, energy, transport, banking and finance, and other critical enterprises, do not spend om pysical security beyond the bare minimum. They want the state and law enforcement to protect them for the paltry taxes they may pay or not pay at all.
Below I outline their resistance and the techniques used to influence and thwart legislators and public servants from implementing protection across Australia and internationally. "Amendments to Chapter 4 (customer identification) of the (Australian) AML/CTF (Anti-Money Laundering and Counter Terrorism Funding) Rules, 10 June 2015
These amendments to Chapter 4 of the AML/CTF Rules provide a further version of the electronic safe harbour procedure for customers, broaden the collection of identification information from sources other than the customer, and extend current customer identification exemptions to include beneficial owners and politically exposed persons. A public consultation period is open from 10 June 2015 to 8 July 2015. (Source: Australian Government Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre, Austrac.gov.au)
AUSTRAC's 2014 typologies report is the eighth in the report series.
The 2014 report includes 20 real-life case studies showing how legitimate services offered by Australian businesses have been exploited for criminal purposes, including international drug smuggling operations, people smuggling and human trafficking syndicates and sophisticated overseas tax evasion schemes. By highlighting past examples of criminal activity, the report educates businesses on their money laundering and terrorism financing risks and helps them recognise and mitigate these risks. (Austrac.gov.au)
In one year Austrac identified about $A34 Billion in unreported funds transfer transactionsout of Australia to unknown recipients. $A21,000,000 transferred out of Australia, into Turkey, via a small business in Lakemba NSW Australia. Other instances .... $$ Millions transferred by banks. False identities, breeder documents, prepaid cards (with values of $10 multiples, $100 and so on, up to a single card maximum of $A4,000) are sold in Australian retail outlets requiring no identification. There is no limit on the number that can be purchased over the counter. Changes to AML/CTF laws would seek to impose identity and supicion reporting requirements on the companies and their employees.
$A34 Billion is not the total.
The technology, software and systems, that facilitate criminal activity are manufactured and sold by companies across the world. Many do not ask why someone is buying equipment or software, its purpose and use, sales people and their sales managers are driven to meet corporate revenue goals by Corporate Boards, and Executives, who put business interests first and who show no ethical or moral compass. Most believe that it is the responsibility of Government, police and agencies to catch the crooks. Most believe that the cost of government agencies, like Austrac, should not be borne by them even if they do manufacture the tolls that facilitate the crooks and terrorists. Through their Associations, and by direct lobbying, they seek to avoid and shift accountability and responsibility, to defeat legislators who mght be seeking to make the company executives participate, pay and contribute.
Below is one example of the subtle methods by powerful (big money) interests seeking to influence and place obstacles in the way of the legislators, bureaucrats, regulators and law enforcmenet officers.
Sent: Thursday, 25 June 2015 3:59 PM
Subject: Possible conflict between Anti-Money Laundering and Competition Law
Dear Kevin Beck
As you may be aware, some recent studies found that businesses consider the requirements of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (AMLCTF - especially the Know Your Customer (KYC) related) to be onerous and could potentially inhibit (or at least affect) the competitiveness of the entity and the sector within which it operates. There is also concern that the regulatory requirements inhibit innovations in the development and provision of financial services, for example uptake of digital payment systems such as Bitcoin.
We are a team of researchers (Milind Sathye + Bruce Arnold + Paula Chadderton) at the University of Canberra investigating whether Australian regulation aimed at encouraging competition and innovation, conflict with requirements for Know Your Customer (KYC), Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and privacy protection..The project is funded by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Transactions (SWIFT) Institute - the global payments system consortium - and will result in a report to be published by them besides academic publications.
Given your recent submission to the Review of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006, the Harper Review on Competition Policy and/or Murray Review of the Financial System, we thought you may be interested in contributing your views on the above issue. We value your expertise in these areas.
Kevin Beck AML Submission
We attach a questionnaire along with a participant information form and consent letter (a requirement of University's Human Research Ethics Committee).
You may like to email your views in using the questionnaire or other format that suit you. Alternatively, if you would like to speak to us, could you kindly let us know so that we can arrange it at a convenient time.
All the information will be held in strict confidence and used only for the purpose of this project. We will not reveal your details or those of your organisation without specific consent to that effect.
We look forward to your participation and cooperation in this important project which may lead to further consideration of how to overcome conflict between AML, innovation and competition law, and improve the business transaction environment. We will be grateful to receive your response by 30 July 2015. The response may be sent to Milind.Sathye ..... Thanks in advance and with best regards
Milind Sathye, Professor of Banking and Finance, (all Email, Address and Phone Contact details have been removed from this copy), Bruce Arnold, Assistant Professor, School of Law, University of Canberra. Paula Chadderton, Government Lawyer and PhD student at the University of Canberra
Participant Information Form - AML officers and other staff dealing with AML and competition law, privacy and intellectual property related matters.
Does regulation aimed at encouraging competition and innovation conflict with requirements for KYC, AML, etc.? Are the two sides compatible?
(1) To identify the challenges faced by Australian businesses in complying with KYC, AML and privacy frameworks (2) To understand what Australian businesses consider to be the areas of non-compatibility between those frameworks vis-à-vis competition and innovation initiatives (3) To prepare a matrix of non-compatibility issues in the frameworks by business types and characteristics (4) To understand what Australian businesses envisage to be the impact of non-compatibility of the frameworks on their business (5) To understand the policy-level and industry level interventions/initiatives necessary to eliminate or reduce non-compatibility in frameworks.
Benefits of the Project
The information gained from the research will be used to inform the development of policies for improving anti-money laundering regime
not only in Australia but globally. The granting agency email states that their governing council unanimously supported our proposal and would also like us to conduct a global study eventually. The present study would serve as a pilot study using Australian data for an eventual global study.
General Outline of the Project.
The SWIFT Institute (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) based in Belgium has provided a grant of Euro 15,000 to a team lead by by Professor Milind Sathye University of Canberra and consisting of Asst. Prof Bruce Arnold, University of Canberra, and Paula Chedderton, Government Lawyer (in her capacity as PhD student at the University of Canberra) for a project that aims to investigate whether regulation aimed at encouraging competition and innovation conflict with requirements for KYC, AML, etc.? and whether the two sides are compatible? The research proposes to understand the conflict that arises in the legislations for anti-money laundering (AML) and the competition/innovation and privacy laws and how these could be addressed.
Clients who agree to participate in the research will be asked to:
1) provide information about the various lines of business of the firms in which they work, provide examples of conflict in the AML and competition law/ privacy law and innovation law that they have encountered, what steps were taken to address the conflicts, what amendments are required in the AML regime or the other legislations so that such conflicts could be avoided and such other related issues. Such information would be sought from officers dealing with compliance issues in 'designated businesses' as per AML regime (that is, banks, superfunds, remittance providers, insurance companies and others) though structured questionnaire (More information about the exact nature of information that will be provided to the researcher can be obtained by asking the researcher to explain the details).
2) provide information by filling in the structured questionnaire which would take about 15 minutes to complete. The respondent would be provided with a self-addressed postage paid envelope to return the filled in questionnaire. The questionnaire consists of no more than 15 questions (as attached).
Participation in the research is completely voluntary and clients may, without any penalty, decline to take part or withdraw at any time without providing an explanation, or refuse to answer a question or be not prepared for audio/video recording of responses to interviewer's questions or for being photographed. Note that while it will be evident to the researcher whether a client agrees to participate in the research or not, this will have no effect on the service provided at any time. While the funding agency SWIFT / University of Canberra values and encourages participation, it respects the right of clients to choose not to participate in research. The only potential risks to participation relate to privacy and confidentiality. Please be assured that all the data collected from clients will be stored securely and only accessed by the researcher. Great care will be taken to ensure that any reports of the data do not identify any individual or their circumstances.
Confidentiality Only the researcher will have access to the individual information provided by clients. Privacy and confidentiality will be assured at all times. The research outcomes will be provided in a report to SWIFT Institute and may be presented at conferences eventually leading to publication of a research article. However, in all these reports, the privacy and confidentiality of individuals will be protected.
Due to the need to collect organization information from respondents, it is not possible for the research to be anonymous. However, please be assured that all reports of the research will contain no information that can identify any individual and all information will be kept in the strictest confidence.
The information collected will be stored securely on a password protected computer throughout the project and then stored at the University of Canberra for the required five year period after which it will be destroyed according to university protocols.
Ethics Committee Clearance
The project has been approved by the Committee for Ethics in Human Research of the University of Canberra.
Queries and Concerns
Queries or concerns regarding the research can be directed to the researcher, Milind Sathye whose contact details are at the top of this form. He welcomes answering any queries. (end of attachment)
RQ (1) What are the challenges faced by Australian businesses in complying with Know Your Customer (KYC) , Anti-Money Laundering ( AML) and privacy frameworks?
" When the firm/business/institution for which you work was established?
Less than 5 yrs ago
Between 5 yrs- 10 yrs ago
More than 10 yrs ago
How many people are employed in your business?
Less than 20 people;
20 or more people, but less than 200 people
200 or more people
" Which of the following are the major business lines of your firm?
Managed funds/Superannuation funds
Securities and derivatives
Funds transfers (international/domestic)
" What are the KYC requirements in each of the business lines of your firm?
" Are the KYC requirements similar for all business lines or are they stricter in some areas and less strict in others? if so, why?
" What difficulties are generally encountered in complying with the KYC requirements? How do you deal with these matters?
" Besides the KYC, what are the other AML related requirements that at your level you are asked to comply?
RQ (2) What Australian businesses consider to be the areas of non-compatibility between the frameworks vis-à-vis competition and innovation?
" Have you come across any areas where the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter Terrorism Financing (AMLCTF) legislation and the competition and innovation and privacy legislations are in conflict?
" Examples of how your capacity to be innovative or competitive have been restricted or hampered? Why?
" Could we ask how did you address the conflict?
" How can organisations ensure they don't lose out on business by wrongly assessing the customer?
" Organizations are increasing their AML budgets and their head counts despite this not adding any value to the customer. How can they ensure they leverage this cost and make the most out of the time and resources spent?
RQ (3) Are there differences in the non-compatibility issues in the frameworks by business type /characteristics?
" How do you manage different regulatory requirements relating to each of your business lines?
" Could you explain the AML, competition law, and privacy law issues that arise in your work?
" How frequently do these issues occur?
Neither rare nor frequent
" Competition and innovation law related issues
Neither rare nor frequent
" Privacy law related issues
Neither rare nor frequent
RQ (4) What does Australian business envisage to be the impact of non-compatibility of these frameworks on their business?
" How would you rate the impact of non-compatibility of these frameworks on your business (work) so far? Very-little Little Neutral Significant Very Significant " How would you rate the impact on your business in the future? Very-little
RQ (5) What policy-level and industry association- level interventions/initiatives are necessary to eliminate or reduce to the minimum the areas of non-compatibility in the frameworks?
" In your opinion, what changes are required so that such conflict can be avoided?
" Did you discuss the matter with your team leader?
" What response did you get from the team leader?
" Do you know if the matter was referred by the team leader to senior leadership?
" What was the response from the senior leadership?
" Was the matter referred to by your organisational leadership to the industry association or the government?
" Were you apprised of the response received?
" Where does the matter stand now? What do you propose to do further?
" What technological process changes could assist to overcome areas of non-compatibility? Why and how?
" In your opinion, if regulation is viewed as a burden, does this impede competition? and how does this occur? (End of attachment)
Consent Form - AML compliance officers and others engaged in work related to competition/innovation/privacy law in their organizations
Does regulation aimed at encouraging competition and innovation conflict with requirements for KYC, AML, etc.? Are the two sides compatible?
I have read and understood the information about the research. I am not aware of any condition that would prevent my participation, and I agree to participate in this project. I have had the opportunity to ask questions about my participation in the research. All questions I have asked have been answered to my satisfaction. Please indicate whether you agree to participate in each of the following parts of the research (please indicate which parts you agree to by putting a cross in the relevant box):
Participate in a structured questionnaire survey or interview with the researcher.
Participate in an interview for case study with the researcher.
Agree for audio/video recording of my responses by the interviewer.
Agree for being photographed by the interviewer.
A summary of the research report can be forwarded to you when published. If you would like to receive a copy of the report, please include your mailing (or email) address below.
End of attachment
Evidence research is one of the tools used used by big business along with lobbying through Associationns and direct by companies on legislators. In this case SWIFT Institute, on behalf of its members is using the Consultation Period.
Global tobacco companies commission research from universities to try and influence legislators and also to use in courts of law. During the Global Financial Crisis banks and financial institutions worked hard to protect their interests against those of the ordinary citizens whose interests they are purportedly serving.
The global companies, most notably US member corporations of the SWIFT Institute, may turn to using the US Free Trade Agreement and the Trans Pacific Partnership, between the United States of America and countries such as Australia.
In a democracy all interests, even those of criminals and their Accessories to Crime and their technology and services suppliers all have rights. The one's who pay, in the end, are the taxpayers and ordinary people whose rights are trodden on.
Corporations are, by law, real persons.
EROSION, CORROSION, AND CORRUPTION, OF AUSTRALIA'S DEMOCRACY, GOVERNMENTS AND PUBLIC SERVICES BY THE POLITICAL CLASSES AND PARTIES|
Parasites, and termites, who have engineered their place in the narrow gene pool of Australian politics are eating at the fabric of our democracy and governments. They infest our governments, at all levels, maintaining power and control.
The major political parties in Australia are prostituting representation, choosing the demographic constituency of our parliaments, blocking access to information, selling access and manipulating the system to their personal advantage and interests.
The members of Australias parliaments, and local governments, are in the majority honest and hard working. They are however shackled by their political parties and by the modern "management" of governments. If they want to keep their political careers in tack, most of them must toe the line. A few are of such stature as to be able to ignore the controllers. Our members of parliament no longer debate. Instead Governments have opted for the tactic of public relations, adopting sophisticated manegrial corporate practices. This includes maintaining control of journalism and the media. Manipulating the story, things like climate change, the global financial crisis, the extent of unemployment, hiding the massive failures and waste, avoiding the question and the answer, whilst wrapping themselves in secrecy. Public servants are cowed and made to serve the Ministers and the government of the day. They are no longer fearless and free to argue.
A handful of powerful political controllers keep order. They cajole, peddle fear, entertain retribution, solicit for donations and sell access to Ministers of government. They engage in activities to coerce and silence. They sell favours and engage in open croneyism. Some accept bribes. Some sniff chairs that women have sat on, others are inherently dishonest.
Invariably our system of control relies, and maintenance of office, relies on the ignorance, stupidity, lack of education, low cognitive reasoning skills, a person's inability to distill complex issues and ultimately the disinterest of Australians as to the quality of their governments. (Kevin R Beck, November 2009)
Is this Australia's Most Dangerous Government?
"Freedom going once, going twice, gone in a trice"
Peter van Onselen, Contributing editor From: The Australian November 21, 2009
THE law and order auction that is going on across the country is getting out of hand. Everyone wants to be able to walk the streets safely: that goes almost without saying. But how far can societies reach for this goal before the laws designed to curtail anti-social activities start to impinge on the rights of free citizens who have done nothing wrong? The most startling example of a piece of legislation that impinges on the rights of free citizens was passed by the West Australian Legislative Assembly this week. Next Tuesday, debate starts in the government-controlled Legislative Council. If the bill is passed into law, as is expected, police will have the powers to stop and search citizens at will, with no requirement of "reasonable suspicion" of wrongdoing. Civil libertarians have described it as the stuff of a police state, and they are not far wrong. Needing reasonable suspicion before frisking someone has been a bedrock of policing for centuries. WA Police Minister Rob Johnson doesn't seem to understand the significance of removing this provision. It is what stands between law enforcement officers serving the public and arbitrary policing.
The new WA legislation -- the Criminal Investigation Amendment Bill 2009 -- is poorly drafted and doesn't contain protections of citizens' rights under the law that have become a bedrock of modern Western liberal democracies. Even the most basic understanding of political philosophy teaches the importance of the preservation of liberty. Liberals in particular are supposed to jealously guard against the dangers of an encroaching state. Johnson, the architect of these draconian laws, should go back and read 18th and 19th-century philosophers Thomas Paine and John Stuart Mill." (Source of extract: The Australian Newspaper, 21st - 22nd November, 2009: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/)
The electorate lacks the education, awareness and the cognitive skills to understand, distill complex matters and arguments, They have no interest in demanding, or particpating and interacting, to ensure, quality government, ethical practice and performance from their elected officials at local, state, territory or federal government levels. Sadly the politicians in power, in Australia, in this modern age (2009)are not likely to alter the status quo that delivers, and maintains, the power of public office. The electorate is powerless to deal with underperfrming public services. Queensland presents a constant model of decay in public office emulated by other states, and territories, within Australia. (Kevin Beck, Australia)
|| New South Wales
|Western Australia||Northern Territory||Tasmania||
Australian Capital Territory|
November 2009: Failed States and Territories
The Northern Territoyr has given up any pretence that its elected parliament acts in anyone's interest other than their own and the power collective. Blatant stealing of federal allocated funds for purposes other than they are granted is endemic. These monies are used to feather the nests of a cotoerie that acts against democracy corrupting the process and operation. The parliament is a rabble of self interest and the public service is sycophant to the whims of the political and business class. The Australian government tolerates this indiacting that the current Prime Minister Kevin Rudd is both hypocritical and morally questionable.
"Nicolas Rothwell | October 24, 2009, Article from: The Australian
The Northern Territory is a lost cause. We've had three decades to get it functioning, and now it's time to admit the system doesn't work and needs to be replaced IN Australia we are used to seeing progress in governance, not failure. We expect governments in our jurisdictions that function well, provide efficient services, and maintain a fair match between the rhetoric of politics and the facts on the ground. There is, though, a failed state in our midst. That state is not Aboriginal north Australia, where the social fabric is in shreds and tatters. No: it is the jurisdiction largely responsible for entrenching this degree of indigenous disadvantage: the modern-seeming, self-governing Northern Territory. On the face of things, all the standard attributes of a democratic society are present here in Darwin: a parliament, political parties, government departments, a range of key social institutions that look much like their southern equivalents. But in fact the Territory is best understood as an interlocking set of interest groups. It is heavily dependent on outside funding, the bureaucracy is shot through with politics, almost all medium-sized business relies on public sector contracts and the entire system is founded on the administration of an Aboriginal underclass." ,,,,
"The unicameral parliament, housed in a large wedding cake structure, is the most visible of the Territory's failed institutions. On the 33 days a year that it sits, it is a place of confrontation, not a chamber for debate between its 25 members.
"With the state sector so all-dominating, and its patronage so rich, political affiliation matters. Why support an opposition party when you will be excluded from the circle of favour that expresses itself in consultancies, contracts and development opportunities? In this environment, a party-state comes into being, and both sides in politics have developed such a regime during their years in power. Bureaucrats carrying out party dictates, politicised appointments to key posts, a climate of obedience, a culture of prudent silence: these are features of the Territory's map. It is easy to blame the present regime for some of the system's more peculiar traits: the creation, for instance, of parallel constituency "offices of the chief minister" in regional centres, staffed by failed parliamentary candidates. But in their quarter-century in power, the conservatives presided over a similarly bizarre "total state", with implicit codes of loyalty and allegiance lying at its heart. Buttressing this inner cement of unspoken ties is a culture of vociferous announcement. At the core of the Territory system is a mind-set reminiscent of Pacific Island cargo-cults. An institution is named, set up, housed and lightly staffed: problem solved. Thus Darwin is full of facades rather than real structures: an Environmental Protection Authority without powers, an indigenous advisory panel without input, a climate change portfolio without policies, a museum with insufficient funds. Such facade institutions, and the philosophy behind them, infect the air. The government lurks, saviour-like, in the wings, and the declaration of a policy is sufficient to change the world."(source of extract as cited at opening)
In South Australia the speaker screamed "shut up" to the members of parliament who have allowed the house to deteriorate into a rabble of make testosterone driven hubris. The Premier, Mike Rann, leads people who are thugs in suits. As in the Northern Territory politics attracts some of the lowest moral characters and the ethically challenged on the ladder of society. These precious, shallow, politicians are cioncerned with ego and their own beleived prestidge.
THE Speaker of the South Australian parliament has threatened to resign after a second day of uproar over opposition probing of Premier Mike Rann's relationship with a former parliamentary barmaid. "The Speaker, Jack Snelling, stunned MPs, including a visibly shocked Mr Rann, by screaming at opposition whip Ivan Venning to "sit down" after he had complained of a threat made across the chamber by Treasurer Kevin Foley. Regaining his composure, Mr Snelling, a father of five and former union organiser, said: "If I don't feel that I am able to control this chamber, if members continue to ignore my calls of order, I will resign -- I will go over to Government House and hand in my commission. "The behaviour today has been nothing short of disgraceful. It makes me ashamed to be a member of this place." The extraordinary scenes came at the end of a tense question time during which Mr Rann was asked about the payment of legal bills associated with an incident at a Labor fundraiser on October 1. Adelaide businessman Richard Phillips, whose estranged wife Michelle Chantelois was previously friendly with Mr Rann, has been charged with aggravated assault against the Premier. The hostility between the two major parties was palpable as parliament resumed yesterday and the level of anger among MPs rose quickly."(Source: Extract Michael Owen, SA political reporter | October 30, 2009, Article from: The Australian)
In New South Wales the media reports that the Premier nathan Rees has resorted to spying on his colleagues. "NSW Premier Nathan Rees has ordered a spying crackdown on his ministers, with special phone-tracking equipment to be installed in their offices. Staff from the Premier's Department have met at least one company to discuss close monitoring of ministerial phones, with a plan to put sophisticated technology into Governor Macquarie Tower, where Mr Rees and his ministers are based. The move has outraged his colleagues, who accuse him of unprecedented interference and rampant paranoia. ''It took [former US president] Richard Nixon 30 years to get this paranoid - Rees has got there in 12 months," one said. At the same time, tensions are reigniting between former health minister John Della Bosca and the Premier over Mr Della Bosca's attempts to retrieve private information from his confiscated computer hard drive." (Source of extract: Rees spies on ministersLISA CARTY November 1, 2009, Brisbane Times)
One might well query the moral and ethical capacity of senior bureaucrats who would participate in this degradation of the people's democracy. But this is not surprising examing the calibre and operation of the NSW public service where appointment is clearly reminiscent of a by gone "royal court".
So as the foundations, and integrity, of our democracies, and parliaments, crumble away in the hands of corrupt and self absorbed egos and interests, the Australian people, and media, are consumed with 78 Sri Lankans on a boat off the coast of Indonesia. Kevin Rudd has mcuh more to deal with than a boat if he is to achieve anything worthwhile in his time as Prime Minister. But does he know what is important?
August 2009: Northern Territory, labor government |
fails to deliver to aboriginal people, wastes, and steals, federal funds for use in other government activity, spends millions of the $A675,000,000 federal grant paying consultants, trainers and others, before one house is built. Paul Henderson, Chief Minister, is in charge labor's public failures. The aboriginal people of the Northern Territory will eventually rise up, find their electoral voices and remove Labor from office at the 2012 election.