Aged care group concerned over welfare laws

Having people wearing bracelets that identified where they came from, [which] had a very strong flavour of infantilising older people ...

A national body representing aged care providers says there is a danger of older people being treated like children, if the aged care sector becomes over-regulated.

A Senate committee is taking evidence on proposed changes to aged care laws.

One idea is to make nursing homes and other care providers notify the Aged Care Department each time police are called to an incident.

But Greg Mundy from Aged and Community Services Australia says he is concerned it could be the first of a string of measures which would dramatically restrict the freedom of residents.

"[This] also includes things like having electronic locks on doors," he said.

"Also covered [was] having people wearing bracelets that identified where they came from, [which] had a very strong flavour of infantilising older people ... saying they actually have fewer rights to movement than anyone else in the community."

See-through scanners an 'invasion of privacy'

Civil liberty advocates say a new airport security scanner that can see through a passenger's clothes "goes way too far" and invades peoples' privacy.

The hand luggage and body scanners will be tested on passengers at Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide airports on a voluntary basis, and was put on display at Melbourne airport today.

The head of the Australian Council for Civil Liberties, Terry O'Gorman said that the technology allows virtual strip searches.

He says it has grossly overstepped the mark.

"You have to ask yourself, 'has the war against terrorism got to the stage where we, in effect, have to have our genitals shown, viewed by someone in another room, in the name of airport safety?'" he said.

"We say this goes too far.

"We say it skews the balance between proper security on the one hand and the maintenance of basic civil liberties, particularly bodily privacy, on the other."

Mr O'Gorman says airports may be only the first application for the scanners.

"You can bet once it's introduced at airports there will then be calls for it to be introduced at sporting stadiums," he said.

"There will then be calls for it to be introduced at public malls to deal with teenagers carrying knives, etc.

"It will not stop at airports."

Related:

Privacy, health, fears over airport X-ray
AIR travellers will be invited to take part in "virtual strip searches" [X-rays] at Australian airports when the Federal Government begins trials of security screening measures this month.

Privacy, health, fears over airport X-ray

Invasion of privacy, radiation fears... at your own risk.

AIR travellers will be invited to take part in "virtual strip searches" [X-rays] at Australian airports when the Federal Government begins trials of security screening measures this month.

The measures include a body scanner [X-rays] that can see what lies under a person's clothes. The Government says the scanner could detect weapons and explosives, but critics say it is an invasion of privacy.

"It provides detailed images of a person's body … which many people might find highly embarrassing," said Stephen Blanks, of the NSW Council for Civil Liberties.

"It's not normal for security to require strip searches of people getting on aeroplanes, and why should this virtual strip search become the norm?"

The executive director of the Government's Office of Transport Security, Paul Retter, said: "During the trial, travellers will be able to choose the existing hand luggage scanners and walk-through metal detectors, or they could choose the technology trial lane and provide feedback on the technologies."

Measures existed to ensure passengers' privacy and dignity would be protected, he said. Officers examining the images would not see the actual person. "Faces are blurred and images are not saved."

He said the scans were safe [?] and emitted only a minute amount of radiation.

The trial will also include [X-ray] machines that detect explosives, and liquid analysers.

Public acceptance of the technologies and their effect on passenger throughput will be monitored in the trials, which will run from mid-October to the end of November in Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide.

Quote: No one needs another dose of radiation, we get enough as it is. Is the state going to be there on your cancer death bed with insurance?

Gold Coast nightclubs fingerprinting people

The Australian Council for Civil Liberties has accused Gold Coast pubs and nightclubs of going too far by fingerprinting patrons.

Queensland police and licensed venues are trialling fingerprint and drivers' licence scanners as part of a safety program that includes more security cameras and communication systems.

Australian Council for Civil Liberties (ACCL) president Terry O'Gorman says he is surprised the Queensland Government is going along with it.

Mr O'Gorman says it is a major invasion of privacy and clubs and pubs should not be trusted with that sort of information.

"There are some people - particularly women - who have good reason to be concerned about where this information might end up," he said.

"I mean unlike police who are subject to strict regimes of accountability people who work in pubs and clubs are not subject to any privacy regime at all.

"We say that this procedure is dangerous to women's privacy because there is just nothing to stop someone who takes a fancy to a woman to simply put down her address and then go around and look that woman up.

"This privacy infringement has to stop."

Quote: The corporations have to be stopped and the patrons have to stop them by not going to these places and start their own pubs and clubs. A place where they can do what they want with respect and with friends in privacy. It wouldn't be such a bad idea to force people out of corporate run pubs and clubs. There half out the door already.

Perth lawyer gets suspended sentence

A 33-year-old Perth lawyer has received a one-year suspended sentence for counselling a witness not to testify in a trial involving her partner.

Josephine Pepe pleaded not guilty to perverting the course of justice in a phone call with prison inmate Gary Edward Fitzgerald, who rang her in August 2006.

Mr Fitzgerald had been considering testifying against Pepe's de facto partner Julian Murray, who was accused of conspiring to assault a pregnant woman.

On the day of their conversation, he decided not to give evidence.

"This honestly won't do anything for you except to f**k me up," the court heard Ms Pepe had said to Fitzgerald.

"You just say: 'Look, I think I got the details wrong. I don't want to give evidence any more'.

"If they threaten you, tell them it's crap, you don't have to do this."

Ms Pepe's lawyer had said that while his client had fallen well short of being professional, that did not make her actions criminal.

While she was also in a position of conflict, her conduct did not fall within the parameter of the charge against her, lawyer Stephen Shireff had said.

During the trial, Justice Alan Fenbury asked whether it was common knowledge among lawyers that all outgoing calls from prison were recorded.

Overhaul of privacy laws recommended

A report on the nation's privacy laws recommends federal legislation for serious invasion of privacy, where a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Some media organisations had opposed such a move, arguing it would hinder investigative journalism and infringe freedom of expression.

The report, launched today by the Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland, also recommends national consistency, stronger penalties for breaches of the legislation and a simplification of privacy laws and regulations.

The Special Minister of State, John Faulkner, says the Federal Government will consider the recommendations in two stages, and expects to legislate on the first stage within 12 to 18 months.

Related:

Australia: Concerns of a police state
Cameron Murphy NSW Council for Civil Liberties...a massive reduction in police accountability to the community. NSW police now have special emergency powers to bug or track people for up to four days without a warrant. Under the biggest shake-up to the state's surveillance laws, police will have up to four days to monitor people before needing to apply retrospectively for an emergency warrant from a Supreme Court judge.

Planned ASIO surveillance laws under fire
A Senate Inquiry has been told proposed amendments to electronic surveillance laws will allow ASIO and police to further intrude on people's privacy. The inquiry sitting in Sydney today is looking at proposed changes to the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Bill.

Reforms urged after sex attacks bungle

The Council for Civil Liberties says the wrongful detention of a man over a string of Sydney sexual assaults highlights the need for tight controls on what police can release to the media.

The 23-year-old went to police to clear himself on Saturday after he saw himself in CCTV pictures that were released to broadcasters and newspapers.

He was initially charged with stalking and assaulting six girls and refused bail, but was released two days later after forensic testing cleared him.

The girls, as young as 16, were assaulted by a man armed with a knife near bus shelters in western and north-western Sydney.

Council for Civil Liberties president Terry O'Gorman says police need a court order to intercept phone calls and similar rules should apply before they publicly release images of possible suspects.

"A public splashing of your face is even more destructive to your reputation than listening in to your telephone calls," he said.

"That's why we say, particularly because of this incident, but this incident has brought to a head simmering problems in this area for a long time."

Related:

Joey's weekend of hell mistaken for a rapist
Joey De Mesa said... I have got records at work that show that I was at work but they didn't do any research. A 23-year-old man wrongly locked up on Sunday by police who suspected him of stalking and assaulting teenaged girls says he barely slept or ate while incarcerated.

Australia: Concerns of a police state

Cameron Murphy NSW Council for Civil Liberties...a massive reduction in police accountability to the community.

NSW police now have special emergency powers to bug or track people for up to four days without a warrant.

Under the biggest shake-up to the state's surveillance laws, police will have up to four days to monitor people before needing to apply retrospectively for an emergency warrant from a Supreme Court judge.

NSW Attorney-General John Hatzistergos said the new police powers flowed from an inter-governmental Australian terrorism summit in 2002.

"I don't believe the threat of terrorism has disappeared," Mr Hatzistergos said. "The law says the emergency powers may be used if there is an imminent threat of serious violence or substantial damage to property, or if a serious narcotics offence could be committed.

"To adequately track and prosecute terrorists, we need to be able to monitor computers, as well as be able to watch and listen with whatever means available."

Mr Hatzistergos said police would come under the full scrutiny of the issuing judge and be audited by the Ombudsman. Reports would also be made to the Attorney-General and State Parliament.

Only material relevant to a possible prosecution could be kept and it must be stored in a secure place. If a judge refuses to grant a warrant, all records gathered must be destroyed.

Under the Surveillance Devices Act 2008, which came into effect on Friday, NSW Police can now also cross state borders, and the operational time for surveillance warrants has risen from 21 days to 90 days.

NSW Council for Civil Liberties president Cameron Murphy said the new powers were a massive reduction in police accountability to the community.

"We have seen a number of high-profile police in NSW and Victoria in trouble," he said. "It raises the question: 'Can we trust them with these powers where there is an accountability-free zone?' "

Robo cop: The New World Order


DRESSED like a storm trooper in a sci-fi movie, the modern NSW police officer now has access to enough body armour and high-tech gadgetry to [oppress people.]

Each member of the public order and riot squad is kitted out with more than $8500 in gear.

The squad's commander, Chief Superintendent Steve Cullen, who has been in the force for 30 years, said there had been extraordinary developments in protection gear in that time. "Back in the '70s and '80s, there was a tactical response group but, of course, they were never kitted out to this extreme," he said.

"There would have been perhaps an improvised army helmet, an old-type ballistic vest and a Remington 870 pump action shotgun. Not much else."

He said the new equipment showed the world had become a "far more dangerous place than it was 20 years ago".

[It also showed the world that states and territories have become more oppressive and violent towards citizenry and their dissent.]

"What we are wearing is a direct reflection of society today. I have seen an escalation in violence towards police and a loss of respect for law enforcement in general."

[What police are wearing is a direct reflection of police today. People have also seen an escalation in violence towards citizenry and loss of respect for people, protests and dissent.]



G20 Protest: The Frontline


Two protestors sit in front of a line of police at the end of a day of demonstrations and violent clashes between protestors and police near the venue of the 2006 G20 Summit, Melbourne, November 18, 2006.


During the 30 August to 1 September the Forbes Global CEO Conference in Sydney. Police outnumbering surrounded protestors. For instance attend some demonstrations or protests (left Wing) to be surrounded by police bridging up.

If a police officer is confronted with a "high risk" situation, the Public Order and Riot Squad is called in.

The unit is able to quickly deploy up to 75 fully equipped officers. That number is planned to increase to 100.

"We get called to public disturbances, brawls, sieges, riots, protests and demonstrations, but we are fully prepared for any other high-risk scenario that could possibly come our way," Superintendent Cullen said.

Protected by a bulletproof vest, ballistic goggles as well as arm and leg guards, each riot squad officer is essentially a "mobile arsenal vehicle".

The officers' chief weapon is a Glock 22 semi-automatic pistol. Strapped to their flameproof overalls, they also carry the much publicised X26 Taser electric stun gun. It fires needle-tipped darts that disable violent suspects with a high-voltage shock.

Officers also carry a bigger version of the traditional capsicum spray bottle, spare rounds of ammunition, a short baton, long baton, utility knife, handcuffs and cable tie flexi-cuffs.

Squad member Sergeant Andrew Grace said fully fitted-out officers needed to drink 1.5 litres of water an hour to combat dehydration.

"If it's a situation like a Redfern or a Macquarie Fields [riot], the last thing you're thinking about is the additional weight. It's never a consideration. You're totally focused," he said.

Superintendent Cullen said today's uniform was all about "protection and having a number of less lethal options" available.

"If they are heading out in the full kit, it's based upon the risk of the threat confronting us at the time." He cited last year's APEC demonstrations in Sydney as an example.

"We had significant intelligence that there were people intent on causing violence and damage."


Riot squad masses in central Sydney


NSW Police unleash their latest weapon against unruly protestors just in time for APEC.

Superintendent Cullen said the first response in any volatile situation was still "the mouth".

"You never stop talking to people. That's what it's always about and that's how you always hope to resolve a situation, regardless of where you are."

[Do what you're told? No protest? Get back? Affirmative Action? Crack Down?]

Quote: Significant literature shows that if people are not treated with respect by governments and authorities by using dialogue to solve problems - then police-using violence against them only drives a wedge and doesn’t provide for any long-term solution to community concerns. Violence does not win so why not lead by some form of example? Violence begets violence. If the military, police and governments use violence against people then how can they expect the community to learn that violence does not win? Isn’t that what they are trying to prevent? Note: that having no access to demonstrate leaves room for people who want to break through baracades. Why not just invite elected democratic representatives for the people to the conference? Why not provide public space close to the venue for people to demonstrate their concerns?

Related:

Tough police powers outlive APEC
CONTROVERSIAL powers granted to NSW police during last year's APEC summit are likely to be made permanent - or at least available to police for any special event - under a proposal to be taken to state cabinet. The powers made it possible to exclude people from certain zones during the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation summit in September. Police were given extraordinary rights to search people.

The QUICKTIME REPORT You Tube 20/11/06 - SEE GLOBALLY!




A review of news, opinion and photography recorded from the Indymedia Newswire. Free to rebroadcast. The world & recorded for the community archive! November 20 2006.

Civil libertarians angered by police website

Civil liberties campaigners have attacked a new Crimestoppers website that encourages Canberrans to help police solve crimes.

The website displays mugshots of wanted criminals, CCTV images of people who police want to contact because they have witnessed crimes, and a secure information line to police.

Bill Rowlings from Civil Liberties Australia says that invades the privacy of innocent bystanders.

"It's not reasonable if you are walking down the street or going on a bus or going about your business that suddenly you are plastered all over a website by the police when you have done nothing wrong," he said.

"They can generally appeal for witnesses, people know whether they were near an event or a crime or whatever."

But Police Minister Simon Corbell says the website obeys all federal laws, and privacy does not automatically trump competing concerns.

Civil liberties are very important and protection of people's privacy is a very important consideration but that does need to be balanced against broader public interest in solving crime and achieving a safe community.

Police say they hope the website will lead to more arrests.

Planned ASIO surveillance laws under fire

A Senate Inquiry has been told proposed amendments to electronic surveillance laws will allow ASIO and police to further intrude on people's privacy.

The inquiry sitting in Sydney today is looking at proposed changes to the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Bill.

This morning the secretary of the New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties, Stephen Blanks, said the changes would allow police and security agencies to monitor communication equipment that had not been identified in a warrant.

"The police will be able to add devices to warrants without any independent scrutiny so that they can intercept telephone calls and other telecommunications without any independent oversight," he said.

Greens leader Bob Brown has slammed the proposed electronic surveillance laws.

Senator Brown says the bill allows surveillance authorities to spy on people who are not even being investigated.

"There shouldn't be a blank cheque which allows the agency to pick and choose which devices it's going to listen in to, and inevitably the surveillance of completely innocent people," he said.

Related:

Email spy powers 'a licence for witch hunts'
Mr O'Gorman says the existing legal framework provides enough protection against terrorism."We have passed so many laws in the name of fighting terrorism that we're at ... serious risk of losing the balance between giving the intelligence services sufficient powers to fight terrorism while at the same time keeping longstanding and cherished civil liberties," he said.

Push for overhaul of laws on terrorism
Anti-terrorism laws are just 'state sanctioned terrorism' aimed at 'innocent people' and using them as 'scapegoats' for Australia's 'alleged war on terror'. These laws were meant to project 'fear' in the community that we somehow need to be protected so that the government can wage war on innocent people for resources around the world unchallenged.

Email spy powers 'a licence for witch hunts'

Employers would be able to read their staff's emails under proposed new national security laws being considered by the Federal Government.

The new laws would give companies extra powers to monitor their computer networks to prevent cyber-attacks.

They would be allowed to check their staff's emails and internet communications without their consent.

Deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard said the proposed changes would step up national security of Australia's computer networks.

"We want to make sure that they are safe from terrorist attack," she said.

"Part of doing that is making sure we've got the right powers to ensure that we can tell if there's something unusual going on in the system.

"So it's a national security move, not a move about an unseemly interest in people's private emails."

A spokesman for the Attorney-General says cyber-threats are growing and that privacy experts and unions will be consulted about the proposed laws.

Dale Clapperton, from the internet-rights watchdog Electronic Frontiers Australia, says it is an over-reaction.

"Our concern is, that if given these powers, they're more likely to be used for eavesdropping and corporate witch hunts rather than protecting Australia from some kind of cyber attack."

The head of the Australian Council of Civil Liberties, Terry O'Gorman, says tighter laws to protect Australia against cyber terrorism threats are not needed.

Mr O'Gorman says the existing legal framework provides enough protection against terrorism.

"We have passed so many laws in the name of fighting terrorism that we're at ... serious risk of losing the balance between giving the intelligence services sufficient powers to fight terrorism while at the same time keeping longstanding and cherished civil liberties," he said.

Opposition legal affairs spokesman George Brandis says he is concerned about giving companies the power "to act in effect as a quasi-law enforcement or investigative authority."

Quote: This is definitely a move about an unseemly interest in people's private emails. Any person who wants to look at another persons mail is invading that persons personal privacy. Any law that intends to give another person that right is draconian and an invasion of that persons privacy. Shame on you Gillard.

Push for overhaul of laws on terrorism
[However anti-terrorism laws are just 'state sanctioned terrorism' aimed at 'innocent people' and using them as 'scapegoats' for Australia's 'alleged war on terror'. These laws were meant to project 'fear' in the community that we somehow need to be protected so that the government can wage war on innocent people for resources around the world unchallenged.]