The APS submission (https://www.psychology.org.au/About-Us/What-we-do/advocacy/Submissions/Professional-Practice/2018/APS-Submission-to-the-MBS-Review-Better-Access?) recommends that over two thirds of registered psychologists (many of whom hold higher degrees, specialised training and significant experience in their field) but have not applied for “endorsement” would only be able to provide services to the estimate 10% of clients presenting with mild to moderate disorders. The complicated model states that psychologists may be given an opportunity to “demonstrate equivalent competence” to be able to treat what is, for many, their existing client base. Recognition would almost certainly come at a significant cost. The APS has yet to explain just how this recognition would occur, leaving experienced practitioners at a loss as to how they can protect their livelihood and deliver crucial services to clients. All registered psychologists are currently permitted to practice across all areas of psychology and mental health and can diagnose, assess and treat clients, regardless of whether they are endorsed or not. Ethical guidelines require psychologists to only provide services within their limits of personal competence. Endorsed psychologists primarily operate in urban areas, while the majority of psychologists operating in rural areas are non-endorsed. Data from the Psychology Board of Australia’s ‘Area of practice endorsement data tables: January 2014’, shows that only 23 endorsed psychologists work in remote communities across Australia; 212 in outer regional; while 7 969 work in metropolitan/capital cities. Our rural areas have some of the highest rates of suicide in Australia. If accepted, the APS recommendations will leave rural and regional Australians without access to vital mental health care services. The consequences to Australians in desperate need of mental health care will be disastrous. If accepted, the APS model will result in higher session fees, with clients unable to claim any Medicare rebate unless their preferred practitioner is “endorsed”. Market forces would likely push up out-of-pocket fees to see endorsed psychologists and waiting lists would blow out. By losing a major funding stream, many non-endorsed psychologists would be forced to close their practices, leaving vulnerable clients without access to vital and affordable health services. Many endorsed psychologists do not bulk bill, meaning only those in higher socioeconomic groups would be able to afford treatment for the most debilitating of conditions. There is no evidence to support that better health outcomes are achieved by “endorsed” psychologists. In fact, a significant amount of “endorsed” psychologists achieved this status through historical paid membership to special interest “Colleges”, and not through demonstrated experience or completing a masters/doctorate degree. Some psychologists were granted up to six endorsements via this process. The Australian Clinical Psychology Association stated that ‘More than half of those clinical psychologists currently endorsed by the Psychology Board of Australia do not have qualifications in clinical psychology...’ (source: https://industry.gov.au/Office-of-the-Chief-Economist/SkilledOccupationList/Documents/2015Submissions/ACPA.pdf). Therefore, many endorsed psychologists hold the same level of training and qualifications as non-endorsed psychologists. The APS position is a crushing blow to over two thirds of registered psychologists, many of whom will be unable to continue treating the majority of their clients if the proposal is accepted by the Government. It is clear the APS is not acting in the best interests of its members (who currently pay $640 for annual membership) or their clients, by advocating that the majority of psychologists lose access to the MBS. In fact, if the APS proposal is accepted, 66% of the psychologist board members who are “endorsed”, may personally benefit with increased client referrals, while 64% of registered psychologists will have very limited access to Medicare referrals. Questions must be asked about the ability of the APS Board to represent all psychologists equally, and whether the board members are at risk of breaching their fiduciary duties to the APS with a proposal which effectively destroys the livelihoods of the majority of registered practitioners, for the benefit of a few, including themselves. For over ten years now, clinical psychologist’s services have attracted a $39 higher rebate than non-clinical psychologists. Despite this higher rebate, fewer clinical psychologists fully bulk-bill their clients. Based on the current Medicare arrangements, the proposed changes will represent a significant increase to Medicare, as the cost of providing the same services already being provided by registered psychologists would increase by 47%. A notable research project commissioned by the Australian Government (Pirkis et al, 2011) demonstrated clearly that psychologists treating mental illness across both tiers of Medicare Better Access produced equivalently strong treatment outcomes (as measured by the K-10 and DASS pre-post treatment) for mild, moderate and severe cases of mental illness. This research demonstrates clearly that there is no difference in treatment outcomes when comparing clinical psychologists treating under tier one of Medicare Better Access with the treatment outcomes of all other registered psychologists treating under tier two of Medicare Better Access (Pirkis et al, 2011a). Reference: Pirkis, Ftanou, Williamson, Machlin, Spittal & Bassilios (2011a). Australia's Better Access initiative: An evaluation. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 45:726–739

It's important that we let the council know we care about Mt Panorama, the way it is used matters to the people of Bathurst and all the thousands of race goers and visitors that come here every year. It belongs to all people, not just one sporting club, which could easily be located somewhere else.

As psychologists, our livelihoods and the welfare of our clients depends on the Australian public's access to affordable psychological services. Currently, our clients receive a rebate of $84.80, while clinical psychologists attract a rebate of $124.50 for providing the same 50-minute session. Many non-clinical psychologists can’t maintain their practices due to this lower rebate and due to financial pressure, have to pass on some out-of-pocket costs to their clients. There are 29 213 registered psychologists in Australia with only 8298 of these holding endorsement as clinical psychologists (28%) (Psychology Board of Australia, 31 March 2018). The APS is split into a number of colleges representing each endorsed area of practice. We are concerned as the submission by the APS College of Counselling Psychology, advocates to maintain the current unfair and unfounded two-tier rebate system with their own members placed on their higher tier alongside their clinical colleagues. This means the majority of Australians will still need to pay substantial gap fees to see their psychologists. Polls conducted in our Facebook group suggest that more non-clinical psychologists could fully bulk-bill their clients if their rebate was the same as their clinical colleagues. Of the 9 Director/Psychologist positions on the APS Board, 6 (66%) hold endorsement as clinical psychologists, while less than 30% of psychologists hold clinical endorsement. The representativeness of the APS Board has been rightfully questioned due to these figures. The Australian Clinical Psychology Association (ACPA) has recommended to the MBS review to ‘cash’ the majority of psychologists out of Medicare and therefore prevent our clients from receiving any Medicare rebate for our services. How could 8298 clinical psychologists (who geographically congregate around the capital cities) service the Australian population? To add further insult, we discover that the author of the ACPA submission recommending the removal of rebates for non-clinical psychologists and their clients (https://acpa.org.au/submission-to-medicare-review/) is granted a place on the Medicare review committee. With submissions like these being made to the MBS review, non-clinical psychologists need representation and advocacy from the APS as their peak body. ACPA have spread false information and written multiple submissions to government departments and Medicare, denigrating all non-clinical psychologists. Unfortunately, the APS has not spoken out or reprimanded those who have denigrated the reputations of around 70% of their membership base. Many clinical psychologists hold the same level of training and qualifications as ‘generalist’ or ‘registered’ psychologists. In fact, a large portion of ‘generalist‘ psychologists hold postgraduate qualifications such as masters, PhDs or specific training in particular techniques such as EMDR. It is reported by the Australian Clinical Psychology Association (ACPA) that ‘more than half of those clinical psychologists currently endorsed by the Psychology Board of Australia do not have qualifications in clinical psychology…’ (source: https://docplayer.net/7212127-Skilled-occupation-list-sol-2015-16.html). Psychologists cannot be considered better trained or skilled by virtue of holding the title ‘clinical psychologist’. The quality, skills and knowledge of a psychologist cannot be deemed by endorsement status alone. All registered psychologists can diagnose, assess and treat clients, regardless of whether they are clinically endorsed or not. We also have nine areas of endorsement in Australia (health, forensic, counselling, educational/developmental etc.), however only clinically endorsed psychologists' services receive the higher rebate. Furthermore, there is no evidence to suggest that any type of psychologist is better or more effective than any other type of psychologist. A notable research project commissioned by the Australian Government (Pirkis et al, 2011) demonstrated clearly that psychologists treating mental illness across both tiers of Medicare Better Access produced equivalently strong treatment outcomes (as measured by the K-10 and DASS pre-post treatment) for mild, moderate and severe cases of mental illness. This research demonstrates clearly that there is no difference in treatment outcomes when comparing clinical psychologists treating under tier one of Medicare Better Access with the treatment outcomes of all other registered psychologists treating under tier two of Medicare Better Access (Pirkis et al, 2011). Pirkis, Ftanou, Williamson, Machlin, Spittal & Bassilios (2011). Australia's Better Access initiative: An evaluation. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 45:726–739 Consumers of psychology services should be able to receive the same rebate to see whichever psychologist best meets their needs and geographical location.

Scheme would drought proof most of western QLD & North west NSW. Below are links to all the information I could find about The Bradfield Scheme, a proposed Australian water diversion scheme, To make Western QLD and Northern West NSW Drought free for ever. https://www.queenslandcountrylife.com.au/story/3295673/beat-the-drought-build-bradfield/ http://www.fnq.cc/bradfield_scheme_a.html

The Lads Society are at Unit 9/158 Chesterville Road, Cheltenham near the Waves leisure centre and their commercial warehouse is leased on their behalf by Mr Thomas Sewell through Nixon Industries. The Lad’s Society is a clubhouse, training facility, recruitment centre and safe space for neo-nazis and others on the far-right. The Lad’s Society poses itself as ‘...an organisation consisting of young, Australian men, committed to restoring the elements of our nation, starting at the individual, and community levels’, and offers a gym, a place to drink and meet people. Concerningly, because of the way they’ve structured themselves as a kind of ‘men’s club’ with a nationalist bent, insecure and otherwise unaligned young men in the neighbourhood could be at particular risk of being radicalised toward Nazi politics in this space. As well, these men operating out of Cheltenham is an immediate danger to the multicultural neighbourhood, due to their violent histories and politics, and the fact they gather on Fridays from 5PM, drink, lift weights and fight each other until late in the evening. To say these men are nazis is not an exaggeration. One of the founders of The Lad’s Society is Blair Cottrell, who has been documented suggesting pictures of Hitler should be hung in every classroom, and Mein Kampf should be handed out to every student every year (evidence of his ideas are readily available by google search). He has also been convicted and served time for stalking and burning down an ex-partner’s house. He is the founder of United Patriots Front, a group he was the chairman of that involved other found members of The Lad’s Society, including Thomas Sewell, pictured below with Blair Cottrell celebrating Hitler’s birthday and flashing the ‘white power’ hand gesture. There are also active associations within The Lad’s Society with an explicitly Nazi group called ‘Antipodean Resistance’, who Stuart Von Moger (pictured above) is affiliated with. This group is known to recruit as a resurgence of Germany’s ‘Hitler Youth’. They’ve attacked international students, jews and the LGBTQIA+ community on university campuses and abroad with extremely racist propaganda and can be seen unfurling banners with swastikas on them from overpasses.

The amount of plastic that goes into landfill or directly into the environment, including soils and oceans is catastrophically high. People do not understand that this is an enormous crisis which requires much more leadership in this country. Other countries are way ahead of us and we could learn so much from them!

Now is the time for Aussies to contact our politicians and tell them that we are very concerned about the fact that since 1 January, China has refused to take our recyclable waste - this accounts for 30% of Australia’s recyclables. The Aussie government has not put in the recycling infrastructure to support waste processing on-shore but now we are at a crisis. Recyclable waste is being stockpiled in warehouses. Little media and press is covering this story. Australian's love recycling, and are deeply concerned about the impact this waste will have on our environment and communities. We want to make the most of it, and create new jobs and ways of recycling, here in Australia. For a united voice to be heard, we need every Australian to sign and share this petition, and contact your local politicians.

The UN announced we have a planetary crisis due to plastics. Single use plastics including bottles, are wasteful, polluting and lethal to marine life. Oil and energy are used in the manufacture of plastic drink bottles. Recycling them takes more energy. Now that China has stopped taking our waste in 2018, waste management contractors have reported that the bottles are piling up by the millions per day and are a fire hazard. There have already been serious fires in Victoria of large piles of plastic bottles and legal action by people in surrounding areas resulting in financial loss and health risks. Neither do we have the space in landfill to bury them and that's also not a sustainable solution. We MUST stop the problem at its source. People can bring reusable drink bottles to fill at refilling stations. To keep up to date with some in the world who are banning plastic bottled water see https://www.banthebottle.net/map-of-campaigns/

It's a false economy to not decently support chronically ill people, since the sickness benefit is so low it actually perpetuates a cycle of poverty, stress and excessive loss of basic human needs, exacerbating a persons ability to heal and recover, which then compounds their illness and leads, to a permanent disability long term.

V8 car racing outside residential homes is unsafe and unacceptable. The Supercar "Noise Management Plan" recommends residents living on the racetrack "Keep doors and windows closed; seal cracks, doors and window frames using commercial or make shift products. Basic protection measures may include: adhesive sealing strips for door frames and windows , temporary vent seals, under door strip seals/draught stoppers, fill cracks using commercial foam fillers or silicon; remain in back rooms; use hearing protection; leave property during some or all of the race period". Many residents living on the racetrack have no air-conditioning, and cannot afford to go away for the race period. They are faced with living in the above conditions for 3 x 10 hour days. Please note there are at least 3 ladies in the area that are pregnant, one of whom is expecting her baby to born the event weekend. The Heritage Conservation Areas of Newcastle and Newcastle East is wholly unsuitable for V8 Super Car street racing. The race preparations have seriously degraded residential amenity, homes are being damaged and convict hewn sandstone blocks are being sawn up for the benefit of the layout of the Supercars race track. Businesses are suffering some have closed and one successful business has already lost $70000 in takings. To add insult to injury hospitality is being outsourced to Brisbane or Sydney Supercars suppliers. The race will impact negatively on historic houses, buildings, public parks and the inhabitants on, and within, the racetrack. It will impede access to three aged care complexes located within the proposed racing area. There are over 4000 people residing in this predominantly residential area. NCC are unable to guarantee that sound levels are safe for all residents and that there will be no delay in response times to emergency and medical service. Preparations have resulted in reduced public safety and access to major tourist sites including Newcastle Foreshore Park, Horseshoe Beach, The Convict Lumber Yard, The Cowrie Hole, The Soldiers Baths, Nobbys Breakwall, Bathers Way, Newcastle Baths, Fort Scratchley, the Canoe Pool, and Nobbys and Newcastle Beaches. This will also be the case during the event. This race affects every user of the iconic East End in the lead up to and at the beginning of the peak holiday season. Our beautiful peninsula will be scaffolded and barricaded for three months each year and visitors will be discouraged from coming. The vast majority of people would detest having a 3 day car racing event on their street, or in their suburb. Please consider what residents and the wider community have been living through in preparation for, and during, 3 x 10 hour days of this car racing event. Residents are being asked to provide their private details, to a consortium, in order to be "accredited" to enter their own homes. Many residents will also be forced to walk through a concrete and wire structure, less than 1 metre from V8's racing, for over 200 metres just to get to a pedestrian bridge to get out of their home and away from this event. For residents with disabilities or mobility difficulties there is only one entry and exit, with only one lift to help over a thousand people. Supercars refuse to reveal the Sound Report and to add more insult to injury Destination NSW have given no conditions for which Supercars should comply to. We are trapped by this appallling legislation and we will be soon be trapped by an enclosure, and racing cars, circling our homes and suburb. ANALYSIS OF THE MOTOR RACING (SYDNEY AND NEWCASTLE) ACT 2008 (NSW) This is an Act that: 1. suspends the operation of other Acts protecting safety and the environment before, during and after the proposed event; 2. permits the event to be conducted on public land eventhough it would not be otherwise permitted under those other Acts; 3. permits the event to be operated by a private entity without charge and with the aim of making a profit for the private entity; 4. requires oversight of the event by a government agency, but with no right for any other person to legally challenge the competency or quality of that oversight; 5. severely restricts the actions of any other person in and around the public land where the event is being conducted; 6. prevents any other person suffering financial loss as a result of the event from claiming compensation from the private entity or the government agencies permitting the event; and 7. removes oversight of reinstatement of the public space after the event from the local Council and hands it to Destinations NSW, a government department that only has accountability for tourism. If you're interested in knowing more about the comparison of this track location in relation to other s'cars tracks in Australia head to this website https://rightracewrongplace.org/2017/07/07/compare-the-newcastle-circuit/ This video shows some of the destruction caused in preparation for this intrusive and dangerous event. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VPc_JXgiQB8&feature=youtu.be

Koala populations are already struggling in certain parts of Queensland such as Dalby. Habitat is critical to the survival of the koala and up to 80% of koalas who lose their habitat are likely to be wiped out. The proposed destruction of koala habitat is for new coal seam gas wells on Queensland's Western Downs. Coal seam gas mining is a threat to farmlands and water resources not to mention the public health risks which have not yet been properly assessed. Potential harm could include an increased risk of cancer. What else can we do? Write to minister Hon Jackie Trad [email protected] Write to the Premier of Queensland Hon Anna Palaszczuk https://www.thepremier.qld.gov.au/tools/contact.aspx Join the Animal Justice Party Queensland https://animaljusticeparty.org/join/ Donate to the Australian Koala Foundation https://www.savethekoala.com/

The Kulin Nation peoples have been the traditional owners of the lands on which the City of Boroondara is now established for tens of thousands of years and they still have a continuing strong cultural and spiritual connection to their country. Until early 2017, recognition of this traditional ownership had been normal at all Council meetings and events. In 2017, the City of Boroondara announced that recognition of traditional Aboriginal ownership would no longer be mandatory as it was regarded by some councillors as a 'token' reference rather than a ‘sincere’ – and therefore ‘meaningful’ - one. Following the Council’s decision, it will henceforth only occur at the discretion of individual Councillors. As the City of Boroondara has not renewed its Reconciliation Action Plan since 2013, we fear that this decision will result in fewer instances of the Acknowledgement of Country occurring; indeed, making it optional may lead to its total elimination. The City of Boroondara has in the past shown considerable innovation in their efforts towards Indigenous recognition and reconciliation; as the movements towards Constitutional Recognition and Treaty grow nationally, this action by the City of Boroondara can only been seen as a step backwards for the council and its previous leadership in reconciliation work.