The Cashless Welfare Debit Card takes away a person's right to choose where they shop, how they pay their bills and does affect where they live. Indue control how payments are made instead of you, your banking and bill paying abilities are affected when you are forced to change to either Centrepay or Indue to make your regular payments. You have to ask permission and provide proof of your bills to Indue Some payments are not accepted on the Indue Card or Centrepay ( Some Car Loans, parents have been forced to hand cars back after defaulting due to Indue unable to allow funds for payments) and you are expected to manage those accounts on your 20% allowance to be paid into your nominated bank. Rents are a problem, especially 3rd party rents, periodic leases, and private rentals, as we have seen many people being left behind in rent, late fees, new charges to change to other methods of paying and some made homeless due to Indue not allowing enough cash to pay their rent. Breach notices and debts, snowballing as other bills fall behind trying to catch up. 80% is restricted to the Indue Visa debit/credit card. Leaving people having to "beg" for approvals to normal things they used to be able to do. Online shopping is restricted, no Ebay. Gumtree, Paypal, Woolworths Online or access to enough cash to be able to purchase secondhand items from Facebook sites, friends, markets etc.Family debt is also a problem to be able to repay loans from families. Most people on some sort of payment for example, a student rely on being able to buy secondhand text books, pay cash room rentals etc, bus trips, with the indue Welfare Debit card there is not enough accessible cash allowed to do such things. Most people on newstart, share accommodations, rent rooms, share houses and utilities and pay cash for those expenses, they also rely on cash for transport on regional buses, secondhand clothing etc. Many people on the card are also working , parents working or partnered with working partners too, we have seen many workers put on this card because they don't have 38 hrs a week full time We have seen across all sites, but most recently the Hinkler site is seeing people struggling as we saw with the first 3 sites, mental health decline, anxiety, stress, depression, sense of worthlessness as people are stigmatised when using the card, public comments when people are seen using the card like " oh that's one of those cards for druggies and alcoholics etc, oh that's that druggy card" etc. When the majority of people forced onto this card have no such problems. How does someone pay their mortgage on Indue??? Mixed info , we know of a farming family who had to change mortgages only to find setting up their mortgage with a new bank they still couldn't pay their mortgage, have now had to work a work around to keep their home,trusted to pay their employees, yet put on the card because they receive part family payments! Some people access cheaper items on Ebay or other online services, like home shopping, many DSP are not able to get out all the time to buy things on a card, at an approved place, We all know there are people in our communities , working and non working that have issues with drugs, alcohol, gambling. This card targets not only those on social security with such addictions, but blankets the majority that do not have any issues, addiction nor financially other than struggling on below poverty line payments and does not address the problems over all in society with the same issues for working people, who can continue to drink, drug and gamble their income away, thus affecting their families too. We would like to see the card scaled back to people on a voluntary basis, with proper supports put in place to help people, Costings should the gov't expand to taking over the Basics Card recipients across the NT and other regions will add up to $233 Million up to 2021 if the Morrison Gov't continue to roll this now program out/ That kind of money could provide good services for those that need it in the community, Housing, Rehabs Councelling *Emergency housing rental crisis funds have been cut as of 1st of Jan 2019 in the Hinkler region, leaving people struggling when Indue does not pay their rents with no where to go for help from losing their rentals! Australians are all supposed to be covered under law equally, The Cashless Debit card see aussies forced onto the card stripped of rights and protections under the social security acts that have been suspended to allow Indue to take over their payments, Privacy, Dignity, Autonomy, Self Determination and Human rights breaches leave card recipients as lesser citizens no longer protected under the law, and stigmatised to be made out to be somewhat lesser for receiving social security payments, combined with the punitive Robodebts, Work For the Dole, Path Traineeships, Parents Next and Job Agencies now more interested in punishments and compliance than helping people get jobs, or receive supports with dignity, The lie if it works just like a normal debit card needs to be called out, along with the media and certain ministers pushing that the card is aimed at Drug, Alcohol and Gambling and Intergenerational Welfare, when none of it is true, It's about control of people and profits for Indue, nothing more,

NSW LAND & ENVIRONMENT COURT JUDGEMENTS: "Mixed-Use is FUNDAMENTALLY INCOMPATIBLE." BUILDING STANDARDS, NSW FIRE & RESCUE plus DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION CRITERIA AND LEGISLATION ARE BEING IGNORED. ONE SET OF RULES FOR NSW TENANTS AND OWNER/OCCUPIERS, NO RULES FOR THOSE USING HOMES FOR HOLIDAYS. There is an AFFORDABLE HOUSING and HOMELESSNESS CRISIS STATE-WIDE. THE RIGHTS OF ACCREDITED ACCOMMODATION PROVIDERS ARE BEING IGNORED. SHORT-TERM LETTING STRIPS HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS FROM THE VALUE OF OUR HOUSING. HOMES NOT HOTELS...COMMUNITIY BEFORE PROFITS...NEIGHBOURS NOT STRANGERS www.neighboursnotstrangers.com

According to projections by GetUp, Wyong Hospital could lose up to $281 million in federal funding over the next decade. This is roughly the equivalent of 169 hospital beds, or 313 nurses, or 176 doctors.* These cuts are the outcome of changes to Federal-State funding arrangements made in the 2014 budget, which saw $57 billion ripped from local hospitals over the next decade. The Turnbull Government's recent budget restored just $2.9 billion, locking in $54 billion of these cuts. Meanwhile the Coalition is trying to argue that they have increased health funding. These enormous funding cuts come at a time when the Australian Medical Association and Australian Nursing ​& Midwifery ​Federation are warning of an imminent crisis unless hospital funding is increased. They could mean fewer doctors, nurses, or beds, and longer emergency room and elective surgery wait times. But there's hope. In this critical pre-election period, polling shows that protecting our universal healthcare system is the number one vote-changing issue for Australians. The Coalition's attack on public health is clearly ringing alarm bells for voters, and we have a plan to turn the volume up. In the lead up to this year's Federal Election, people will step up in their local communities to call on their Federal MPs and local candidates to commit to adequately-funded hospitals. Together, we will lay the foundations for a strong and secure future where all Australians can receive the quality healthcare they need. *The funding loss projections per hospital are based on figures provided by the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) and hospital bed figures (2013) provided by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). The projections are based on the full $57 billion cuts figure and represent our best estimate given the available data. For more information see: http://www.getup.org.au/hospital-funding

According to projections by GetUp, Westmead Hospital could lose up to $690.6 million in federal funding over the next decade. This is roughly the equivalent of 414 hospital beds, or 770 nurses, or 433 doctors.* These cuts are the outcome of changes to Federal-State funding arrangements made in the 2014 budget, which saw $57 billion ripped from local hospitals over the next decade. The Turnbull Government's recent budget restored just $2.9 billion, locking in $54 billion of these cuts. Meanwhile the Coalition is trying to argue that they have increased health funding. These enormous funding cuts come at a time when the Australian Medical Association and Australian Nursing ​& Midwifery ​Federation are warning of an imminent crisis unless hospital funding is increased. They could mean fewer doctors, nurses, or beds, and longer emergency room and elective surgery wait times. But there's hope. In this critical pre-election period, polling shows that protecting our universal healthcare system is the number one vote-changing issue for Australians. The Coalition's attack on public health is clearly ringing alarm bells for voters, and we have a plan to turn the volume up. In the lead up to this year's Federal Election, people will step up in their local communities to call on their Federal MPs and local candidates to commit to adequately-funded hospitals. Together, we will lay the foundations for a strong and secure future where all Australians can receive the quality healthcare they need. *The funding loss projections per hospital are based on figures provided by the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) and hospital bed figures (2013) provided by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). The projections are based on the full $57 billion cuts figure and represent our best estimate given the available data. For more information see: http://www.getup.org.au/hospital-funding

Newstart Allowance has not been raised in real terms since the 1994 Federal Budget, when the payment was raised by a mere $2.95. Over the last two decades, the payment has stagnated, falling increasingly behind the rest of community, and creating widespread poverty for unemployed people. At $260 per week, or $37 per day, it is one of the lowest unemployment payments in the developed world, and well below the poverty-line. Newstart is now only 18 percent of the average wage, and 41 percent of the minimum wage. The low rate of Newstart profoundly affects the well-being of unemployed people, as well as making it harder for job-seekers to search for work. - 40 percent of Newstart recipients unable to pay their bills on time or see a dentist - 46 percent are only able to afford second-hand clothes most of the time - 44 percent of those surveyed reported having unsustainable levels of debt, owing more than they could afford - A majority turn off their heating and cooling to save money - 32 percent have skipped meals over the past year - 25 percent were suffering from 'housing crisis' – were spending more than 50 percent of their income on housing - 20 percent reported not having enough money for essentials like housing, food, and electricity - 63 percent reported that their income had fallen behind cost of living over the past two years - More than half are unable to raise $2,000 in the event of an emergency With government data indicating there are roughly five job-seekers for every job, Newstart is not a short-term payment. Over half of the roughly 750,000 unemployed people in Australia, through no fault of their own, are stuck on the payment for long periods, simply because there are not enough jobs to go around. Raising Newstart is affordable. The increase could be easily funded through budgetary measures that would not only affect small groups of very well-off people but would raise significant amounts of revenue. Savings generated from scrapping negative gearing ($15 billion), eliminating superannuation tax concessions for those on high incomes ($10.5 billion), and closing various tax loopholes for big business, could fund the long-overdue increase to the payment, with billions of dollars leftover. These figures dwarf the cost of raising Newstart: increasing the payment by $100 per week would cost roughly $4.5 billion per year.

For labour market entrants facing an economy with 40% of us in insecure work, the choices (for those aside from a lucky few) are largely between waiting to be notified of shifts via text message, rolling short-term contracts in the public sector, or studying for years and years to end up in the same trap anyway. And that’s all before the economy really tanks. We create enough value for everyone to have a basic living income. Australia is one of the richest countries in a world that has never been richer. Our GDP is on track to reach AUD$73,123.05 per capita this year. That we live with poverty, insecurity and economic anxiety is a matter of political choice, not necessity. We create enough value for everyone to have a basic living income. That’s why I’d like to propose every citizen, every permanent resident, receive a basic income of AUD$30,000 per year. No exceptions. No means testing. A universal minimum income. Imagine the creativity, innovation and enterprise that would be unleashed if every citizen were guaranteed a living. Imagine the savings with no centrelink department required to police and punish citizens. Universal income provides the material basis for a fuller development of human potential. Social enterprises, cooperatives and small businesses could be started without participants worrying where the next pay cheque would come from. Artists and musicians could focus on their work. More of us would be freed to volunteer our time for the public good. Some workers would no longer be faced with the unenviable position of having to choose between supporting their families and degrading their local environment. And all of us would have the option to pursue further education. Universal income won’t solve all our problems, but it puts us in a stronger position from which to start to solve them. A universal income would drive productivity growth and innovation across many fields. All while guaranteeing consumer demand. True prosperity and progress never came from cutting margins here and there but rather from radically new ways of doing business.

The Spit is a vitally important community, tourism and environmental asset. It is a space for people to recreate and a break from the built urban density that is Surfers Paradise and Main Beach, leading to an environmentally significant recreational area defined by Marine Stadium, Doug Jennings Park and Federation Walk. It is vitally important to OPPOSE high rise development on The Spit for 10 main reasons: 1. one approval means the floodgates are open - goodbye low rise Mariners Cove, goodbye low rise Sheraton and watch EVERY other development go upwards - think of the money in this upwards land grab for developers and the losses it poses to the amenity of the Spit and Broadwater surrounds; 2. the GC Local Area Plan Map 26.3 (LAP), which is a product of community consultation and GCCC urban design planning, shows 3 storey height limits for the southern Spit area; 3. developer proposals to flout the LAP plan reflect greed alone; enabling high rise development dramatically increases their return upon investment, regardless of the community, local infrastructure and environmental impacts; 4. all developers who purchased southern Spit lands KNEW when they did so that height limits apply; 5. the community has consistently opposed increasing height levels for decades based upon a range of important issues and this is reflected in the outcomes of the Vision 2020 process; 6. height limits reflect the desire to frame the Broadwater appropriately: it is a precious community and environmental resource and surrounding it with high rises (once Southport became a high rise prime development area (PDA)) disregards its significance as well as increases pressures such as density, traffic, environmental and infrastructure footprint and the like; 7. height limits reflect the fact that traffic density in the area is already significant and increasing population in the area is just not practical; in particular, the traffic within Main Beach and to The Spit every weekend illustrates this fact; 8. importantly, the southern Spit accommodation represents a differentiated tourism product for the Gold Coast which MUST be protected. That is, it is high end, exclusive and expensive accommodation zone which caters for those who do not want a high rise experience. Yes, Justin Beiber stayed in Surfers - but U2 and Bruce Springsteen did not - they stayed at Versace and the Sheraton respectively. Why? Because a low rise, on the beach/ Broadwater experience is something to savour even for billionaires - and our tourism entities should be protecting that, not allowing it to be destroyed; 9. developers are free to construct high rises throughout the western side of the Broadwater in the Southport PD area; at present the hospital site remains open for development- Sunland are free to tender to construct their plans there which will of course yield all of the employment benefits they claim for their project; and 10. finally, we all know that one high rise means every developer will push for high rises from one end to the other of The Spit. GCCC propose draft amendments to the Town Plan (2015) which will facilitate high rise development on The Spit - see zone map 27 Southport (http://cityplan.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/pages/plan/viewerpdf.aspx?vid=10117) . We must protect this precious tourism, community and environmental asset from private exploitation - no matter what our political representatives say or do.

 Maryborough Historical Original Town Site is under threat of destruction as the FCRC wish to turn it into a new development site  Small businesses losing trade and closing their doors because of the relocation of the Maryborough Outdoor Markets  The foreshore of Hervey Bay has had its native vegetation removed causing erosion.  Disabled Parking Laws have been overruled by the Mayor instructing his Parking Officers to turn a blind eye to illegal disability parking.  New Road Works on Main street were not carried out in accordance with the provision of Disability parking Bays in accordance with Australian Standards AS2890.6  Road way into the Airport now classified as a council car park which affects the availability of Blue Disability Parking Permit holders rights.  The Mayor wants to close off the Esplanade to motor vehicles forcing tourists and visitors to park in the back streets then walk to the beach.  150 year old Fig Trees that form a canopy over the Esplanade are under threat.  Other vegetation along the Esplanade has been removed and destroyed in order to please the Business owners of apartments, hotels and other eateries to enhance their customer’s views of the bay  No current Shoreline Erosion Management Plan  No Foreshore Master Plan  FCRC has granted $10 Million to a sporting complex until 2017 yet sporting clubs are being bullied /forced to move from current location.  FCRC has neglected the rate payers maintenance needs in local parks and lake areas in order to spend the money on areas frequented by tourists.  FCRC wasting money on already existing parks that don’t need anything done to them whilst other communities require them urgently.  FCRC wasting money by repairing a rock wall three times and still is not constructed properly.  FCRC has closed meetings on the Monday before the Public Meeting on the Wednesday and most decisions have already been made  FCRC will not listen to the residents / rate payers - our protests and objections fall on deaf ears.  FCRC intends to relocate the Pialba Memorial Hall and Pialba Railway station which are a great part of Hervey Bays Heritage. Both Buildings are listed on the Local Heritage and Asbestos Registar  FCRC approves upgrades to roads that have been attended to within twelve month period.  This Council appears to look after the Business sector of town and has plans of turning Hervey Bay into another Gold or Sunshine Coast.  FCRC granted approval to their Business Buddies to make improvement to their eateries built on public owned Council land on the foreshores without any proper consultation with the rate payers, one business owner has now applied to extend his eatery from the beach out through parkland to the Esplanade and convert his business now into three separate identities, begs to ask the question as to what the mayor and his boys club are getting in order to pass this building application.....a free cup of coffee....I think Not...!!  People have moved from Interstate and big cities to escape to a sea change they don’t want what the FCRC are pushing for.  People are selling and moving because of the high Council & Water Rates ,the increasing crime rate and the increasing ongoing high unemployment rates.

My name is Subeta and I'm a university student in Sydney. I am constantly confronted with how many people are living below the poverty line and struggling to cope with basic costs. For the 10 million Australians who will menstruate in their lifetime, getting your period isn't just inconvenient and annoying - it's expensive! Half the population menstruates and they shouldn't be financially penalised for it. If you still aren't convinced, let's consider some statistics: on average women, who make up the majority of people who use sanitary products, earn $262.50 per week less than their male counterparts, and they are also statistically at greater risk of living below the poverty line. Furthermore, this tax disproportionately targets those who may already be disadvantaged, that is the homeless and unemployed. So why force this underpaid, at risk and disadvantaged portion of society to pay more for basic essentials? Right now, the Australian government is reviewing the entire Australian tax system, saying that it's looking to make taxes lower, simpler and fairer. This review is a once in a generation opportunity to put the tampon tax on the government agenda for serious consideration, and get this unfair tax removed once and for all. Sign the petition and tell Mr Hockey loud and clear that a period is not a luxury or societal burden, it is an aspect of reproductive health. After all, the government should support and facilitate the availability of sanitary products, not actively restrict it.

The Wet Tropics has been ranked the second most irreplaceable World Heritage Area in the world by a team of international scientists. Despite its significance, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) has classified the Wet Tropics as of ‘significant concern’ due to the threats posed by invasive plants, animals and diseases and climate change. The Wet Tropics World Heritage Area as high visitor rates and provides economic stimulus through tourism in Far North Queensland, an industry that much of the regions economy depends on. Without the work of the Wet Tropics Management Authority, there will be no independent body that can consider the diversity of the people and places that exist in the World Heritage area and how to properly Manage them

Under current systems, when someone becomes employed they lose most of their welfare payments. This means they can go from not working at all to working a full week, but not earn much more than they did previously, which acts as a disincentive to work. Under Unconditional Basic Income, when people become employed they would retain the same basic income payment, with their salary added to it, so this disincentive no longer exists. Remember this will not replace your wages, you will be able to earn your normal working pay on top of the the basic income. It is there simply as a safety net to ensure your basic human rights are fulfilled. Second, the Unconditional Basic Income support will help people adapt to the changing industrial structure and employment opportunities by assisting them to plan and develop their vocational training and career structure. Remember this won't just help the young, what about middle aged families with a mortgage and kids to feed and clothe? On the current system if you lose your job and you own a flash car or property, you are expected to sell those assets first, wait 12 months and then you can claim the dole. With my proposal of a Unconditional Basic Income for all, the anxiety and stress for these kinds of families would no longer exist as they will still have a means to survive and will not be forced to pack up their lives and move somewhere due to their budgets. Third, Unconditional Basic Income will provide people with a better opportunity to pursue training in cultural, recreation, and sporting activities in which they have special skills and aptitudes. Fourth, the financial support for people with special skills and aptitudes can have special benefits for rural towns and regional areas at present facing dwindling communities and a lack of career opportunities. - The greatest benefit to society as a whole will be the influence it has towards a more equal and egalitarian society. Please, prospective signers, take note - UBI can be many things to many people. It can be a - * stabilizer -it keeps the economy running and the dollar circulating * safety net - if you lose your job or incur a "shock expense" * liberator - frees you from domestic anguish and work exhaustion * chance giver - the time, money and opportunity to explore your goals. Added to campaign material August 8th, 2018 by David Upton *Please note members. I am now proposing the amount of $22,500/annum as a proposed basic income. Added September 8th, 2020 Hello again members. Please check out this table -. Observed UBI Effects From completed and ongoing trials ☺ Crime went down 42% ☺ Hospitalization rates decreased 8.5% ☺ Birth weights improved due to better maternal nutrition ☺ Consumption of fresh fruits and vegetables went up ☺ Consumption of alcohol and other temptation goods went down ☺ Child personalities improved such that kids were more honest and worked better together ☺ School attendance increased and grades improved ☺ Teen pregnancy rates went down ☺ Frequency of people being personally offended by each other went down ☺ Savings went up and debt went down ☺ Entrepreneurship quadrupled in one place and was 3 times higher than control groups in another ☺ Recipients worked more hours and earned more additional income ☺ Disproportionately positive effects overall were seen among women, the elderly and the disabled

The expansion to accommodate a projected 3000 ships per year will involve massive dredging, dumping of dredge spoil, land reclamation, risk of oil spills, air pollution, beach and cliff erosion associated with channel deepening, and loss of habitat. This has the potential to destroy the Western Port we know, love, and depend upon. Our beaches, fishing, wildlife, tourism economy, clean air, clean water. Western Port is a wetland of international significance, and Australia has obligations to look after it under the Ramsar treaty. Please take some time to learn about the proposed port expansion and its likely impacts. To stay up to date visit http://preservewesternport.org.au and http://www.wppcinc.org Thanks!