radiofree.asia

Category: government

  • The Difference Between Totalitarian Regimes And Free Democracies

    Listen to a reading of this article:

    In totalitarian regimes they have massacres and wars. In free democracies they have humanitarian interventions.

    In totalitarian regimes they use torture. In free democracies they use enhanced interrogation techniques.

    In totalitarian regimes they fund terrorist groups to create instability. In free democracies they fund terrorist groups to create stability.

    In totalitarian regimes evil dictators bomb their own people. In free democracies we do it for them.

    In totalitarian regimes a single party upholds and enforces the status quo. In free democracies, two parties uphold and enforce the status quo.

    In totalitarian regimes the government controls the press and determines what information the public is allowed to have access to. In free democracies it is billionaires who do this.

    In totalitarian regimes they wage brutally violent crackdowns on protesters to quash dissent. In free democracies they do this also, but then they kneel while wearing kente cloth.

    In totalitarian regimes you know exactly who rules over you. In free democracies the true rulers hide behind fake puppet governments.

    In totalitarian regimes any elections they have are rigged, and challengers are hand picked by the authoritarian rulers. In free democracies the rulers rig the elections and hand pick the candidates, and they do this to other countries as well.

    In totalitarian regimes they imprison journalists for revealing inconvenient truths about the powerful. In free democracies they imprison journalists for revealing inconvenient truths about the powerful, and all the other journalists jump on social media to say he deserved it.

    In totalitarian regimes they don’t let political dissidents speak. In free democracies they just refuse dissidents any influential platforms and use algorithms to keep revolutionary ideas from being heard by a significant number of people.

    In totalitarian regimes they circle the planet with military bases, wage endless wars which kill millions, and work to destroy any nation which disobeys their government. Whoops, sorry, that’s actually free democracies.

    In totalitarian regimes political speech is heavily regulated by the government. In free democracies political speech is heavily regulated by the government via Silicon Valley.

    In totalitarian regimes the citizenry are kept impoverished while the rulers live lavishly with more than they could ever spend. In free democracies the citizenry are kept impoverished while the rulers live lavishly with more than they could ever spend.

    In totalitarian regimes there is lack. In free democracies there is artificial lack.

    In totalitarian regimes the government spy agency tells the news media what stories to run, and the news media unquestioningly publish it. In free democracies the government spy agency says “Buddy, have I got a scoop for you!” and the news media unquestioningly publish it.

    In totalitarian regimes bands of armed thugs patrol the streets to enforce obedience to authority. In free democracies bands of armed thugs patrol the streets to enforce obedience to authority and Hollywood makes movies about how heroic they are.

    In totalitarian regimes students are taught to mindlessly worship a picture of the evil dictator. In free democracies students are taught to mindlessly worship the flag.

    In totalitarian regimes students are taught never to question authority. In free democracies students are taught never to question the news reporters.

    In totalitarian regimes they commit evil deeds which free democracies could never get away with doing. In free democracies they have totalitarian regimes commit those evil deeds for them.

    In totalitarian regimes the people are kept too brutalized and cowed to rise up against their rulers. In free democracies the people are kept too propagandized and brainwashed to rise up against their rulers.

    In totalitarian regimes the powerful determine what happens regardless of the desire of the people. In free democracies the powerful determine what the people will desire to happen.

    In totalitarian regimes everyone is a slave to the powerful. In free democracies everyone is a Slave™ to the Powerful™.

    In totalitarian regimes you are forced to obey. In free democracies you are trained to think your obedience was your own idea.

    In totalitarian regimes you are not free, and you know it. In free democracies you are not free, and you don’t know it.

    ___________________

    The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff I publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for at  or on Substack, which will get you an email notification for everything I publish. My work is entirely reader-supported, so if you enjoyed this piece please consider sharing it around, following me on , , Soundcloud or YouTube, or throwing some money into my tip jar on Ko-fi,  or . If you want to read more you can buy my books. Everyone, racist platforms excluded,  to republish, use or translate any part of this work (or anything else I’ve written) in any way they like free of charge. For more info on who I am, where I stand, and what I’m trying to do with this platform, . 

    Bitcoin donations:1Ac7PCQXoQoLA9Sh8fhAgiU3PHA2EX5Zm2

    This post was originally published on Caitlin Johnstone.

  • Governments back privileged in education, public schools bear burden

    school funding and disadvantage
    Nearly half of students at public schools are considered disadvantaged – either living remotely, with a disability, having an Indigenous background or from a low socio-economic background – compared to just 20 per cent at private schools, yet private schools receive far more government funding. Trevor Cobbold reports.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Di was in constant pain from her multiple sclerosis, yet still rejected by the NDIS

    NDIS, disability scheme
    Misleading tactics from the NDIS have devastated many Australians. One mother had always been given advance notice that her son’s plan was being reviewed. This time, it was only at the end of the phone call to discuss her son’s support package that she realised the call was in fact the review. Natasha May reports.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Time to ‘release the hounds’ on ransomware gangs

    Labor has called on the federal government to get on the cyber offensive and “release the hounds” on global ransomware gangs following a series of high profile cyber-attacks against Australian companies and hospitals.

    Last week Australia’s largest meat processor JBS Foods was forced to shut down its local operations for a day following a ransomware attack against the global company that the US government has said originated from a Russian criminal organisation.

    Days later, the US Department of Justice confirmed that it would be upping its investigations of ransomware attacks to a similar level as terrorism.

    Speaking in Parliament last week, shadow cybersecurity minister Tim Watts said these events should be a wake-up call for the government, and reiterated his calls for a national ransomware strategy.

    “It’s a timely reminder of the economic cost of the scourge of ransomware – it’s a jobs and investment destroyer when the economy can least afford it. It also highlighted the urgent need for the Morrison government to adopt a national ransomware strategy to combat these attacks,” Mr Watts said.

    “The JBS Foods barbeque stopper should be a wake-up call for the Morrison government to finally take responsibility.”

    Tim Watts

    Mr Watts said the government should be proactive in its fight against ransomware gangs, and its spy agencies should be actively trying to disrupt these organisations.

    In Senate Estimates last week it was revealed that the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) did not take any offensive operations against those responsible for the cyber-attack on Nine, despite appearing to know who was behind it.

    “As part of a national ransomware strategy, the Morrison government needs to get serious about using its signals capability to disrupt cybercriminals and deter attacks on Australian targets,” he said.

    “To date, these ransomware crews have been able to target Australian organisations with impunity. No wonder we’ve seen these attacks increasing in their scale and frequency. In general, the position of the Morrison government is not to tell us or the cybercriminals targeting Australia what they are doing to disrupt them. A secret deterrent is no deterrent at all.”

    The ASD should create a “target list” of the top 10 ransomware groups targeting Australia and ramp up efforts to disrupt their operations, he said.

    “The scourge of ransomware has become an intolerable burden on our nation – a $1 billion annual burden, collectively. It’s time that we said enough is enough. It’s time to release the hounds on these ransomware crews,” Mr Watts said.

    “Ransomware groups should fear the consequences of being added to ASD’s targeting list. We need to end the age of impunity for ransomware attacks and teach these ransomware groups that there are consequences for targeting Australian organisations with ransomware attacks and that these attacks are not worth the potential benefits.

    “The Morrison government has left Australian governments, businesses and community groups to combat these international ransomware groups for too long,” Mr Watts said.

    “It’s time it took responsibility, did its job and developed a national ransomware strategy. These groups are the modern day pirates, and it’s time we treated them that way.”

    Mr Watts also recently called for the government to implement a mandatory ransomware notification scheme, with businesses or individuals to report details of an attack to government agencies. At Senate Estimates last month, Home Affairs secretary Mike Pezzullo confirmed it was “likely” that such a scheme would be introduced.

    The post Time to ‘release the hounds’ on ransomware gangs appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • Landforces’ brothers in arms: how a weapons peddler qualified for charitable status

    AMDA weapons charity status
    The Coalition is cracking down on charitable organisations. However, the Australian charity promoting arms deals on behalf of weapons makers that profit from humanitarian catastrophes is unlikely to be in the government’s sights. With the weapons expo LandForces wrapping up in Brisbane this week, Michelle Fahy delves into the charity behind LandForces.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Senate Misled: Watergate deal negotiated directly with Swiss-based Cayman Islands director

    Crans-Montana, Switzerland
    New documents show the government negotiated the controversial $80m Watergate deal directly with the Cayman Islands company founded by Energy Minister Angus Taylor. The Department failed to notify the Senate. Jommy Tee investigates the email trail between the Department, then overseen by Barnaby Joyce, and secretive Switzerland director and Taylor associate Connor Maloney. 

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Breakthrough Aussie war drone may target civilian protestors

    Black lives Matter
    An Australian breakthrough in drone technology, making it easier to locate hidden enemy on the battlefield, could also be used to target civilian protesters. The US government has already used surveillance drones to monitor Black Lives Matters protests, while Israel last week reportedly used small drones to drop tear gas on Palestinian protesters. Michelle Fahy investigates.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • More will be Given: home owners rewarded in budget as homelessness continues to surge

    homelessness and older people
    Rates of homelessness are rising alarmingly, particularly among Australians aged 65 to 74. The government offered them nothing in the budget, in defiance of the Aged Care Royal Commission recommendations. Jeff Fiedler reports.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Black Mark on Red Cross: decision to ignore 5c test for contaminated blood proved fatal

    The Red Cross. Infected blood scandal
    The Red Cross failed to deploy a 5c blood test which could have averted thousands of Australians being infected with contaminated blood. Elizabeth Minter reports.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Going to War: power rests in the hands of one Australian, Prime Minister Scott Morrison

    Morrison bombers
    The power to send Australian troops to fight in foreign wars rests in effect with the Prime Minister alone, yet a huge majority of Australians think parliamentary approval should be required. With both major parties refusing to budge, Australians for War Powers Reform has launched a GoFundMe campaign Be Sure On War to put pressure on them to change their stance. Alison Broinowski reports.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • J’Accuse! Peddling government propaganda, media over-hypes “drums of war” with China

    China and the military
    The use of disinformation campaigns and cyber attacks by authoritarian states has rightly attracted much criticism in the mainstream media. However, the US and its democratic allies decades ago pioneered the use of disinformation in their own propaganda campaigns. Brian Toohey reports.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Red Cross defied basic principles of blood safety by recruiting Hepatitis C-infected donors

    Australian Red Cross
    The Red Cross actively encouraged people it knew were infected with Hepatitis C to continue to donate blood in defiance of basic principles of blood safety. As set out by World Health Organisation guidelines, a safe blood donor is healthy and has no risk factors for HIV or other infections. Knowingly including infected blood into a therapeutic setting is a basic breach. Elizabeth Minter reports Part II of the infected blood scandal investigation.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • How the lack of industry action on chemicals in Canada is related to Canada’s outdated toxics law

    Burger King burgers - pollution fit for a king

    Just last week, Wendy’s became the fifth fast food chain to commit to eliminating toxic PFAS chemicals from its food packaging – shortly after McDonald’s and Freshii! This is big news in the fight to end the uses of “forever” chemicals that continue to contaminate drinking water and threaten our health. 

    Now the big question is, will industry laggard Burger King finally take action? Recent testing found that PFAS chemicals are likely being used in packaging at Burger King—including the wrapper for their Whopper. With more than 2 million Whoppers sold per day, Burger King’s inaction impacts millions of people each week across the country. Join us in telling Burger King and its Canadian parent company Restaurant Brands International to stop polluting our bodies and the environment with toxic trash!

    Red button that says "take action"

    Why is Canada so far behind in protecting us from toxics like PFAS?

    It’s not just Burger King and Restaurant Brands International that are lagging. In this year’s Who’s Minding the Store retailer report card, most of the reviewed Canadian companies received poor grades, with a highest score of only a C given to Loblaw Ltd. In contrast, three U.S.-based grocery retailers received grades of A- or above (Target, Walmart and Whole Foods Market).

    So why are Canadians disproportionately exposed to toxic chemicals compared to the U.S.? One explanation may be Canada’s antiquated regulatory system for managing chemicals and their risks. The Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) is over two decades old and fails to protect our health and environment from the impacts of toxics and pollution. This is especially concerning for vulnerable people like racialized communities that live next to polluting industries that contaminate their air and water, and workers who are forced to handle and inhale all sorts of toxic chemicals while on the job. In the absence of effective government action, companies such as Burger King have less incentive to clean up their act. 

    Reforming Canada’s Environmental Protection Act

    Fortunately, earlier this month, the federal government introduced Bill C-28: Strengthening Environmental Protection for a Healthier Canada Act. If passed, we may see stronger protections from toxics coming our way. But the Bill currently needs to be strengthened in several key ways:

    • Ensure – and not just pay lip service to – proper assessment and control of toxic chemicals, especially in regard to their cumulative effects and impacts on particularly susceptible groups in society. The impacts of individual chemicals add to each other in ways that far exceed what can be detected when they are assessed on a one-by-one basis. Those impacts are also greater in people at particular life stages, such as children or pregnant women, people living near chemical contamination sources, and people experiencing the biological consequences of poverty and systemic racism. 
    • Require Canada’s notoriously outdated risk assessment process to incorporate modern scientific understandings of cumulative impacts and environmental injustice. These risk assessments must draw on rigorous independent research and not just large industry-funded studies, which tend to neglect low-dose and cumulative impacts.
    • Regulations need to be implemented in a timely manner, including increased mandatory labelling of chemicals in consumer products like cleaning products and furniture, and meaningful enforcement of the newly-proposed  ‘right to a healthy environment’ in the reformed CEPA.    

    We can’t wait any longer for protections from toxics – we’ve already waited over two decades for updates to CEPA. We will be working hard with our partners to address such critical issues as the Bill is reviewed and revised by the federal Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development.

    The post How the lack of industry action on chemicals in Canada is related to Canada’s outdated toxics law appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • NSW stands out in digital govt services survey

    New South Wales led the way in improving digital government services across Australia during the pandemic, according to a new report by Salesforce which calls for more government data sharing and personalisation of services.

    The CRM provider, which counts several Australian governments as clients, commissioned Boston Consulting Group to complete a report based on a survey of 3,000 people across Australia and New Zealand and interviews with 24 “government leaders and independent experts”.

    The results point to at least slight gains in the quality of digital services over the last 12 months, along with what Salesforce claimed is a commensurate lift in trust in government, and a desire from citizens for more personalisation.

    According to the results, 39 per cent of Australians’ most recent interaction with digital government was at least “somewhat better” than the one prior. More than 50 per cent of resondents reported it being approximately the same while only 6 per cent said it was worse.

    Sydney
    NSW service delivery stood out over the last year, according to a Salesforce survey.

    At a state level, NSW was “the stand-out”, recording the highest increase with 45 per cent of respondents saying digital services had improved at least slightly. It was followed by Victoria (40 per cent) Queensland, South Australia and Northern Territory (each 38 per cent), Western Australia (37 per cent) and the Australian Capital Territory and Tasmania (both 36 per cent).

    The report also suggested citizens want more proactive, tailored, and personalised service engagement and delivery.

    A quarter of respondents said they want their government interactions “tailored” to their situation based only on general information and advice. A further 39 per cent want it tailored only on what a government knows about “people like me”.

    Only a quarter want the services tailored based on what the government knows about a specific citizen. Just 12 per cent would be happy for governments to use the private sector’s data to tailor services.

    Asked about personalising services to their specific “situation”, most respondents agreed that would greatly improve the service. This is evidence of customers’ desire for more personalisation, according to the report.

    The report has been released in the same week as Salesforce’s annual event and a major government services summit in Canberra. It also comes just days ahead of a final report from the Senate inquiry into legislation for the federal government’s controversial data sharing scheme.

    The government argues the scheme would create a “new path” for data sharing between agencies, departments and private sector organisations, and lead to improved service delivery.

    However, the Senate inquiry has heard expert warnings about the dangers of inter-agency and private sector data sharing and criticised the haste of the federal government’s latest legislation, which removes consent requirements and has been criticised by security and privacy advocates.

    Salesforce claimed its survey shows Australians are more than comfortable with governments data sharing and most think services would be “greatly improved if they were personalised to my specific situation”.

    Respondents also reported their experiences with digital government services led to a greater trust in government, which Salesforce argued is a causal link.

    More than half of those surveyed said their trust in government had increased in the last year, though most of those said it was only a slight increase. Nearly 40 per cent said their trust in governments had stayed the same, while 8 per cent reported a downturn.

    Last year the Australian Information and Privacy Commissioner surveyed Australian’s attitudes to privacy across a range of issues, including data sharing by governments.

    It found more Australians were uncomfortable with government agencies sharing their personal information (40 per cent) than those that were comfortable (36 per cent). Australians are far less likely to be comfortable with government agencies sharing their personal information with businesses in Australia (15 per cent comfortable, 70 per cent uncomfortable), according to the Privacy Commissioner’s survey.

    The post NSW stands out in digital govt services survey appeared first on InnovationAus.

    This post was originally published on InnovationAus.

  • New Nationals candidate rejects dirty tricks, Nats junk fake websites, yet John Barilaro defiant

    John Barilaro, David Layzell
    Following Michael West Media’s report on domain squatting by the NSW Nationals in the lead-up to the Upper Hunter by-election, the Nationals candidate has directed the party to relinquish the domains, in apparent defiance of Nationals’ leader John Barilaro. Callum Foote reports.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Domain Squatters: Nationals play dirty website tactics to defeat foes in NSW by-election

    Troll Barilaro
    The Nationals are counterfeiting the online identities of their political foes in a critical by-election in NSW by registering other peoples’ domain names, once again employing “bad faith” tactics that a regulator criticised them for using in 2019. Callum Foote reports.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • VICTORY: Stronger protections from toxic chemicals are finally coming

    Victory

    After many years of pushing for stronger protections from pollution and toxic chemicals in consumer products, Environmental Defence’s work has paid off and the federal government has introduced a Bill to modernize the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). And it’s because of your endless support over the years! You’ve sent letters and postcards to decision makers, set up calls and meetings with your MP, participated in days of action, and so much more – and for this, we are forever grateful. 

    It has been over 20 years since CEPA was last updated. With each passing year, our exposure to pollution and toxics like BPA on receipts, PFAS in food packaging, or phthalates in cosmetics has increased, while our scientific understanding of risks to these chemicals has advanced.

    Bill C-28: Strengthening Environmental Protection for a Healthier Canada Act introduces critical improvements to CEPA like: 

    • Recognition for the first time in federal law the right to a healthy environment. Canada currently lags behind the 156 other UN member states that have already enshrined the legal right to a healthy environment in their constitutions, laws, court decisions or regional treaties. If developed meaningfully, these new rights should provide citizens with a path to ensure prosecution of polluters and to see toxic chemicals and GMOs evaluated for their risk to human health and the environment.
    • New rules that require the assessment of the impact of toxic chemicals on vulnerable populations like racialized communities and workers who are disproportionately exposed to toxics because they live nearby or have high workplace exposures. Some people can be at increased risk because their stage of life makes them more sensitive. For example, hormone mimicking chemicals like BPA can have disproportionate impacts on children and pregnant women.
    • A commitment to examine the cumulative impact of multiple chemicals. 
    • The creation of a priority list of the highest risk chemicals that need to be prohibited. This list will focus on chemicals that are mutagenic, carcinogenic or interfere with reproduction and/or bioaccumulate. Chemicals like PFAS should get priority.
    • Mandatory ingredient labelling of everyday products like flame retardants on furniture and the complete disclosure (including fragrance ingredients) in cosmetics and cleaning products will occur through several regulations and consultations on the rules that will begin this September with action promised for next spring.

    Bill C-28 is the first step in bringing what is arguably Canada’s most important environmental law into the 21st century. Everyone in Canada deserves to be protected from pollution and exposure to toxics that threaten our health and environment.

    This action is even more important during the COVID pandemic as we have learned that pre-existing health conditions increase people’s susceptibility to the virus and we know that exposure to toxic chemicals can be a key factor in reducing overall health and ability to fight disease.  

    All political parties must now make Bill C-28 a priority. MPs must work together to move this bill into committee for consideration and improvements as soon as possible. We can’t wait another 21 years to reform Canada’s most important environmental law. 
    But for the moment, let’s celebrate how far we have come and this important step for environmental law in Canada. Stay tuned as we will need YOUR help to get Bill C-28 improved and passed.

    The post VICTORY: Stronger protections from toxic chemicals are finally coming appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Environmental health advocates welcome first federal recognition of right to a healthy environment in bill to better protect Canadians from toxics

    ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE, ECOJUSTICE, DAVID SUZUKI FOUNDATION, CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICIANS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT AND BREAST CANCER ACTION QUEBEC

    Parliament must prioritize modernization of Canadian Environmental Protection Act

    OTTAWA/TRADITIONAL, UNCEDED TERRITORY OF THE ALGONQUIN ANISHNAABEG PEOPLE –

    Environmental and health groups have welcomed the introduction of Bill C-28: Strengthening Environmental Protection for a Healthier Canada Act that will modernize Canada’s most important environmental law, the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA). These groups urge all political parties to prioritize passage of Bill C-28 with improvements. 

    Bill C-28 includes amendments to CEPA recognizing – for the first time in federal law – the right to a healthy environment . 156 UN member states already recognize this right in law, treaties and constitutions. The recognition of a right to a healthy environment in CEPA is an important step forward.  However, the bill should ensure that this right has a positive impact on the lives of everyone in Canada, especially vulnerable populations who have long been denied environmental justice and disproportionately experience cumulative impacts of multiple interacting hazards. 

    Bill C-28 gives greater authority to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to prohibit the use of substances of the highest risk, although loopholes if not removed could allow for ongoing use. The Minister must endeavour to look for safer alternatives to dangerous substances.

    It is encouraging that the Minister of Environment and Climate Change has committed to a new regulation to require ingredient labelling of everyday products including flame retardants in furniture and the complete disclosure of chemicals in cosmetics and cleaning products. The Minister must commit to adopting this regulation as soon as possible. 

    Bill C-28 is important as we continue to face the COVID-19 pandemic. A strengthened CEPA will be the backbone of a green and just recovery. Everyone in Canada needs adequate protection from environmental pollution and exposure to toxic chemicals that threaten their health and increase their chances of developing serious illnesses.

    All political parties must now make Bill C-28 a political priority. MPs must work together to move this bill into committee for consideration and strengthening amendments as soon as possible. Canadians cannot wait another 21 years to reform Canada’s most important environmental law.

    CEPA is the legislation that is intended to protect the environment and people in Canada and the environment safe from toxic chemicals, harmful substances, pollution and wastes. This law regulates the release of pollution and the use of toxic chemicals in consumer products – a source of our daily exposure to toxics. 

    A report from the House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development in 2017 recommended sweeping reforms to the law, which dates back to 1999. 

    Jennifer Beeman, Executive Director, Breast Cancer Action Quebec said: Breast Cancer Action Quebec has been educating on toxic chemicals and their health effects for decades. Citizens know about the very serious health problems like cancers, neurological disorders, reproductive disorders, impacts on the immune system associated with flame retardants in furniture, BPA/BPS in cash receipts and the lining of canned goods, phthalates in air fresheners, dryer sheets, perfumes and cosmetics and now highly toxic PFAS in our water, among many other chemicals.  What citizens don’t understand is why we have these problems. Our toxics regulatory system has been failing us badly, but the federal government, with this proposed reform, has a real opportunity to protect the health of Canadian citizens and our environment. We need to get this reform right.

    Dr. Ojistoh Horn, Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment Board Member said: “As a Mohawk physician I understand that the health of my community is connected directly to the health of the land. I have seen the impacts of toxic exposures on Indigenous peoples. CEPA reform based on science and justice is necessary to ensure all people – Indigenous peoples, racialized people, workers – are fully protected from toxic exposures. In the spirit of the Two Row Wampum, this legislation needs to ensure that the voice of the people are listened to when concerns about the health of the environment are made. We physicians are doing everything we can right now to care for our communities during this pandemic. Now that this legislation is announced, we need and expect all parties to do everything you can to ensure that it moves forward quickly and provides proper protection for the health of all people. “

    Lisa Gue, senior policy analyst, David Suzuki Foundation, said: 

    “If passed, Bill C-28 would be the first federal law to recognize the human right to a healthy environment – a long-overdue paradigm shift that will help ensure all people in Canada benefit from environmental protection measures. Too often, pollution and environmental degradation harm vulnerable people and disadvantaged communities disproportionately. Bill C-28 could start to reverse this trend by applying a human rights lens to decision-making under CEPA, and requiring much-needed protections for vulnerable populations.”

    Tim Gray, Executive Director, Environmental Defence said:  “Canadians are exposed to more and more dangerous chemicals every year. They cause cancer, trick our immune and hormone systems and wreak havoc to ecosystems. We all deserve to be protected from these chemicals, in particular those whose race, physiology or economic status means that they have been disproportionately put in harm’s way. Strengthening CEPA is our last best chance to put the health of people ahead of the profits of chemical companies.”

    Dr. Elaine MacDonald, Ecojustice Healthy Communities program director said:

    “Ecojustice is pleased to see long-overdue reforms to CEPA introduced in the House of Commons today. We now urge all parties to work together to move this bill through the legislative process and make it law as soon as possible.  

    For too long, an out-of-date CEPA has left Canadians — often the most vulnerable populations in our society — exposed to dangerous levels of toxic pollution and chemicals.  A strong CEPA that enshrines every person in Canada’s right to a healthy environment in federal law will be an essential tool for protecting human health and the environment in the face of 21st-century threats.”

     

    – 30 –

    To request an interview, please contact:

    Sarah Jamal, Environmental Defence, sjamal@environmentaldefence.ca

    ABOUT Breast Cancer Action Quebec: BCAQ is a feminist, environmental health organization dedicated to the prevention of breast cancer. In partnership with a wide range of local, regional and national organizations, we work for systemic changes based on social justice principles to prevent breast cancer and a range of diseases in women, with a particular focus on the gendered and racialized dynamics of toxic exposures. 

    ABOUT Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment: CAPE is a physician-directed non-profit organization working to secure human health by protecting the planet. For further information, visit www.cape.ca.

    ABOUT the David Suzuki Foundation (DavidSuzuki.org): DSF is a leading Canadian environmental non-profit organization, founded in 1990. We collaborate with all people in Canada, including government and business, to conserve the environment and find solutions that will create a sustainable Canada through evidence-based research, public engagement and policy work. We operate in English and French, with offices in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry, and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate, and healthy communities.

    ABOUT Ecojustice: Ecojustice uses the power of the law to defend nature, combat climate change, and fight for a healthy environment. Its strategic, public interest lawsuits and advocacy lead to precedent-setting court decisions and law and policy that deliver lasting solutions to Canada’s most urgent environmental problems. As Canada’s largest environmental law charity, Ecojustice operates offices in Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Ottawa, and Halifax.

     

    The post Environmental health advocates welcome first federal recognition of right to a healthy environment in bill to better protect Canadians from toxics appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • End neo-liberal experiment: gutting of bureaucracy led to vaccine and aged care failures

    Outsourcing public services is failed model
    The vaccine rollout debacle is further evidence that the federal Department of Health should not be in charge of reforming the aged care sector, as recommended by one of the Aged Care Royal Commissioners. And when will governments of all political persuasions finally wake up to the failed economic model that is neoliberalism? Dr Sarah Russell and Elizabeth Minter report.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Public Jabs: multiple doses of lies, spin and obfuscation in Covid vaccine roll-out

    Coalition vaccine rollout
    Scott Morrison and the Coalition keep changing their story on why the Covid vaccine rollout is a debacle. Are they betting the public will be unable to keep up with the rewriting of history? Elizabeth Minter reports on the Government’s world-leading program of false premises.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Foreign war lobby gets a billion for missiles, media fawns

    ASPI, the Australian Security Policy Institute
    Scott Morrison’s latest billion-dollar missile spend was deftly leaked to the media then talked up by ASPI whose sponsors have raked in $51 billion in Defence Department contracts while doling cash to the conflicted “think-tank”. Marcus Rubenstein investigates.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Gender equality in Australia deteriorates again, rapidly, yet the rage for change remains undaunted

    Women's rights
    Australia has plunged down the global rankings on to gender equality. Some 300,000 older live in poverty. Emma Dawson writes that the structural discrimination baked into our economic system is still punishing women for being women fifty years after they took up the fight against the patriarchy. 

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • State Capture: Coalition assault on GetUp backfires, catches a rash of fossil fuel donors

    Liberal Party, Labor Party, political donations
    It was a magnificent shot-in-the-foot, a political “own goal” directed at its ideological foes, and driven by a relentless campaign by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, but an own-goal which backfired and caught all the Coalition friendly lobby groups in a red-tape nightmare. Stephanie Tran reports on political donations.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Prime Minister Scott Morrison: a “tin ear” or a contempt for women?

    Prime Minister Scott Morrison
    In his inability to listen to women, Prime Minister Scott Morrison keeps digging a bigger hole for himself, as evinced by the his popularity slide in Newspoll and his latest failure to take a stand against the trolling of women by Coalition MP Andrew Laming. Yet the repeated failures indicate this is not just a matter of a “tin ear” but rather a contempt for women, reports Elizabeth Minter.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Memorial Rorts: how the Australian War Memorial expansion was rammed through despite public opposition

    Flanders Australian War Memorial
    “The strongest arguments for the Australian War Memorial have always come from the old white men whose names will appear on foundation stones and for whom these 24,000 square metres of new space will stand as a lasting legacy. And lasting, too, will be the memories of the flawed process that led to this outcome.” David Stephens reports on the failure of process and the public opposition which have marred the half a billion dollar AWM expansion.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Disadvantage accelerates as private school funding rises six times public schools over the decade

    School funding wars just beginning
    By 2029 public schools will be underfunded by $60 billion; private schools overfunded by $6 billion. In the decade to 2019, private schools received an extra $2,164 per student, public schools just $334 per student. The huge costs to society as a result of such disadvantage includes higher unemployment, poor health and low economic growth but Minister Alan Tudge claims the school funding wars over. Trevor Cobbold reports.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Christian Porter responsible for serial breaches of the law, now cries “rule of law”

    Attorney-General Christian Porter
    Christian Porter is responsible for serial breaches of the law, as documented here last year. These revelations alone should be enough to see Porter removed from official duties but his relentless persecution of Witness K and Bernard Collaery – both denied natural justice and prosecuted in secret – are hardly the stuff of a model litigant. Yet now the besieged Attorney-General calls for rule of law to apply in respect of the rape allegations against him. Elizabeth Minter reports. 

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Health Care For Trans Youth Is Under Attack In The UK

    Fourteen years ago, Susan Evans left her job as a psychiatric nurse at the UK’s Tavistock GIDS clinic (the Gender Identity Development Service for child and adolescent patients) where she’d been working between 2004 and 2007. Her reason for leaving, she said, was her discomfort with the clinic providing hormone replacement care to older trans teens. She thought the clinic should be providing psychotherapy rather than “affirming” trans youth.

    Following the British government proposing reforms for the Gender Recognition Act in 2015, a wide range of new anti-trans organizations were formed targeting different areas of trans rights, health care, sex education and inclusion policies in schools. Within this growing interest in organizing against trans rights and health care, twelve years after she left the Tavistock clinic, Susan Evans connected with a parent (named in the case as Mrs. A) who claimed she was concerned that her child might one day be referred to the Tavistock for treatment.

    The post Health Care For Trans Youth Is Under Attack In The UK appeared first on PopularResistance.Org.

    This post was originally published on PopularResistance.Org.

  • Free speech for the Public Service? Friends only, foes face prosecution

    High Court of Australia
    The Department of Parliamentary Services has been in the news following reports that it withheld its security incident report into the Brittany Higgins case from the Australian Federal Police, despite multiple requests, and was only provided after the police escalated inquiries. It seems the DPS has form in wanting to bury bad news. Marcus Reubenstein reports.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.

  • Laughing Stock: Australia’s new media code rivals our climate policy for absurdity

    Google good, Facebook bad. That sums up mainstream media coverage of the Coalition government’s bizarre new media code. Google paid up, Facebook decided it was extortion and called Josh Frydenberg’s bluff, banning Australian news. Kim Wingerei and Michael West report on the corruption of mainstream media.

    This post was originally published on Michael West.