LESBIAN AND GAY SOLIDARITY NEWSLETTER NUMBER 68

            LESBIAN AND GAY SOLIDARITY

                                   N E W S L E T T E R

PO Box 1675, PRESTON SOUTH, VIC.3072, AUSTRALIA. Phone: (03) 9471 4878.

Formerly: Gay Solidarity Group(GSG), Est. 1978.   Email: josken_at_josken_net

ISSUE 1, 2009            NUMBER 68                         JULY 2008 – DECEMBER 2009

 

This issue is dedicated to all those activists who worked so hard to achieve equality for the gay, lesbian, transgender and HIV/AIDS communities by overcoming the homophobia and reactionary right-wing religious bigotry of the Australian Federal Parliament –la lucha continua –the Struggle Continues.

 

WHY NO LGS NEWSLETTER SINCE JUNE 2008?

When the Rudd Government announced in May 2008 its intention to eliminate discrimination against same-sex couples and children of same-sex relationships in a wide range of federal laws, we realised as did many others we were in for a bumpy ride on a very uneven road.

 

Between July and December 2008, we were kept busy with submissions to public inquiries by the Senate’s Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs into amendments to the Federal Family Law, Superannuation, and the Evidence Acts all of which would be affected by the elimination of discrimination against same-sex couples in a general reform bill amending 84 Commonwealth laws. The latter Bill had also been referred to the Senate Standing Committee by the House of Representatives for a Parliamentary Inquiry.  

 

THE CAMPAIGN

In December 2008 the Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws –General Law Reform) Act 2008 became law by equating same-sex relationships with de facto heterosexual relationships. De facto status provides privileges but same-sex couples, unlike married couples, have to prove their relationship to be genuine. The Rudd Government still refused to eliminate the discriminatory clause (between a man and a woman and no other) in the Marriage Act to permit same-sex marriages in Australia which remains the most discriminatory Commonwealth Act of them all.

 

It was obvious that those in same-sex relationships on Age pensions, Disability and Unemployment benefits were about to suffer outing and reduced income. So into the fray went LGS along with Friends of Dorothy and a broad lobbying organisation of 30+ groups some sporting individual campaign leaflets like S.O.A.P. (stop outing aged pensioners), and One Person-One Pension. Ministers on the receiving end of the barrage of letters and leaflets included Families, Community Services, Human Services, Ageing, Health, Social Inclusion, Housing and Home Affairs as well as the Attorney-General and the Treasurer. The  media were also targeted including The Age, the SMH, The Senior, Fifty~Plus, LOTL, SSO, MCV, SX, Southern Star and the eevolution publications etc., together with the world wide web.

 

THE ATTACK  

The government agency, CENTRELINK, was going to assess same-sex couples as de facto relationships. To do so, it would force them out of the closet with the big stick of the ‘shortest possible’ deadline and reassess their pension to the lower interdependent couple rate. Where a partner is still working, the other may lose his or her pension or concession card entirely once the partner’s income and assets are taken into account by Centrelink. Unlike the understanding that exists between elderly heterosexual (especially married) couples, mutual or total financial dependence of one gay (or lesbian) partner on the other was not part of the original living together deal.

The government tradition of treating same-sex couples differently from hets also had to be attacked. The Rudd Government steadfastly refused to include a ‘grandfather’ clause in the legislation to minimise harsh financial consequences for those already in the Centrelink system or to allow a longer implementation time for the changes to take effect. The government refused to accept that most of these 70, 80 and even 90 year olds had been forced to live their lives in a closet due to these discriminatory laws and the hate engendered by religious fanaticism.

 

Here then are some of the campaign highlights which we think ought to receive wider readership than simply by the spin-doctors and ministerial side-kicks in parliamentary offices.

 

Dear Minister,

The members of this group have had time to consider some of the consequences of the recent change of legislative status, to take effect on 1^st July 2009, for same-sex couples who are already receiving age or disability pensions.

 

The government has gone to some length to inform us that, with this legislation, it has removed same-sex discrimination from a wide range of Commonwealth laws. That may well be so on paper but as far as pensions are concerned the Rudd government has just added its own new brand of discrimination against us.

 

Every significant change to social security laws passed in the last 15 years has included a ‘grandfather’ clause to minimise harsh consequences for those already in the system (Adele Horin, SMH 6.12.08). Why wasn’t there a grandfather in this legislative change, for lesbians and gays? It looks as though it may well have been intentional to let us know that our relationships aren’t really in the same class as hetero marriages.

 

However, there is still time to give us a grandfather clause allowing those already in the system to be exempted. We think it could be done by one of those convenient regulations that don’t always have to be approved by parliament. I think you’ll find that Ministers in the previous Howard government used the regulatory system in a raft of anti-terror laws to cover some controversial sections.

 

The next best status to a marriage is de facto because there is no binding official recognition like a Marriage Certificate so the government equates a same-sex relationship to de facto provided we tell them we are in a marriage-like relationship or Centrelink decides to use its guidelines to determine two people living in the same house are in a marriage-like relationship and therefore a same-sex couple. We had a badge back in the 70s which we wore with pride which said: ‘How dare you assume I’m heterosexual!’ Now we need to change it to ‘How dare you assume that mine is a marriage-like relationship!’ Your government joined the previous government to amend the Marriage Act as a union between a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others. So, really it’s discriminatory to call a same-sex relationship ‘marriage-like’ because the government has refused to give us the equivalent status of a regulatory licence, and it has said so, because it would look like a marriage. It’s not just discriminatory it’s hypocritical to expect us to accept the inappropriate interdependency lower couple rate of pension.

 

You can get over the whole problem by simply dispensing with the outdated 19^th century couple rate and instead pay the single adult rate to each individual of a couple. It would save a heap of money by doing away with Centrelink’s intrusive and costly investigations into people’s lives. What an unexpected gift from this government to all those different-sex couples, too. It should be a strong recommendation by Dr Jeff Harmer (Secretary, FaHCSIA) to the Review Panel chaired by the Secretary to Treasury, Dr Ken Henry, of the Inquiry into Australia’s Future Tax System. It’s the obvious solution to the vexing problem of the couple rate in pensions which is a throw-back to the time when a woman was regarded as a chattel of her husband.  

Sincerely, Kendall Lovett for Lesbian & Gay Solidarity (Melbourne) by email 7.1.09.

 

AN OPEN LETTER

Sent by Mannie De Saxe to the Health Minister Nicola Roxon with copies to the PM and gay community newspapers and dated 7 January 2009.

I have received a letter dated 24 December from Julianne Quaine of the Department of Health and Ageing in which she states that you have asked her to reply on your behalf to the email of 28 November 2008 which I wrote to the Prime Minister about the men’s health ambassadors.

 

I notice that you did not reply to the email I sent to you personally about the appointment of the homophobic Barry Williams as one of your ‘ambassadors.’

 

As an 82-year-old gay man, I would not consider for one moment consulting with, or having anything to do with, a group of people which contained those who actually wish to see people like me eliminated from the face of the earth.

 

It is incumbent on you as the Minister for Health and Ageing to consider the characters of people appointed to positions in which they would be dealing with a diverse group of men whose sexuality is a sensitive issue, and has been for most of their lives.

 

Dealing with a government which is basically homophobic and constrained by religious principles in its responses to people of different sexualities does not inspire confidence in a Minister who persists in retaining her appointment of a known hater of homosexual men.

 

Ms Quaine’s letter states: “More men’s health ambassadors will be appointed from a range of professions, in order to have a cross-section of the population capable of representing a wide range of men.”

Strange, therefore, is it not, that you have not appointed any gay men or any men who are knowledgeable about HIV/AIDS. Strange too, that you have remained silent about the complaints from the gay community about your appointments. The Prime Minister has also declined to respond to these complaints and has instead referred the letter to him to you for your response.

 

The words gay and HIV/AIDS do not appear anywhere in that response. The rest of the letter is just political fudging in the classical “Yes Minister” mode.

 

It is time you dismissed Barry Williams as one of your men’s health ambassadors, for that he is certainly not. Signed: Mannie De Saxe, Lesbian & Gay Solidarity (Melbourne).

 

IMPACT OF THE CHANGES ON THE OLDER GENERATION

With help from Dr Jo Harrison of the University of South Australia, we were able to team up with a broad coalition of social welfare agencies and community health organisations calling on the Federal Government to give older same-sex couples extra time and resources to adjust to new legislation affecting their Centrelink payments as well as independent other groups campaigning on issues relating to the Same-Sex Relationships Equal Treatment legislation. Here’s a campaign letter addressed to the group of politicians associated with the federal legislation, from one of those groups. The subject is quoted as ‘Same-sex relationships and grandfather clause’ and dated 7 January 2009.   

COALITION OF ACTIVIST LESBIANS—AUSTRALIA (COAL) is a national community based Non-Government Organisation. We advocate on behalf of lesbians in Australia. COAL is an accredited NGO with the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) as well as the Division for the Advancement of Women.

 

We are thankful that the government has legislated to bring about equality for lesbians and gays, however there are some who will suffer from the changes such as those on income support/social security payments eg aged pension and disability/carer payments. COAL members are currently meeting regularly to discuss the impact of the changes on individual lesbians. We have serious concerns.

 

We believe that legislation, policy and programs must promote substantive justice, and therefore should reflect the reality that the playing field is not level. Equal actions do not achieve equal results. Outcomes should always be considered. In every major Social Security reform for the past 15 years grandfathering clauses have been included. We do not understand why this has not occurred here.

 

Lesbians experience our social position and financial security as being strongly influenced by both gender and sexual orientation. Generally women earn less, have few years in the paid work force, little superannuation and have spent years caring for children and others in need. The new legislation will create hardship to a great many lesbians who have planned their living, financial, social and retirement arrangements – including mortgages – on the basis of two financially independent beings. The changes have come too suddenly for people to plan or rearrange their long-term finances and housing. COAL has case studies available.

 

COAL urges the Federal Government to use regulatory measures to create a grandfather clause to guarantee that lesbians and gay men already receiving income support do not lose their existing entitlements thereby jeopardising their current living arrangements.

 

COAL further urges the Federal Government to fund an independent advocate to assist lesbians who will be significantly affected by the new legislation. Law reform is a part of the picture but we also need resources to protect those that have already lived a vulnerable life. COAL requests a meeting with the Prime Minister, as a matter of urgency, to discuss these issues.

Sincerely, Sandra Hall and Wendy Suiter, on behalf of COAL-Australia.

 

ANOTHER OPEN LETTER this time to the Prime Minister

The following letter, written by Noel Tovey, appeared in ACT Gay on the 14^th of January 09 and is reproduced here in full.

Dear Prime Minister,

I write to you as an elder Indigenous man about a matter of grave concern to me.   

 

Our old people suffered great hardship and trauma in the past and you moved to apologise for this and acknowledge that pain. You demonstrated a deep understanding of the significance of respecting elders, acknowledging mistreatment and minimising harm. We will always treasure your respectful treatment of our elders on that day of apology, and in years to come.

 

I am an Indigenous artist and writer and am myself 75 years of age. As an older indigenous man who is also gay, I am deeply concerned at the suffering of gay elderly people, who, like me, have experienced severe trauma in the past due to the ignorance of those around us. I was taken away from my family in 1940. In 1951, while living on the streets of Melbourne I was charged with ‘The Abominable Crime of Buggery.’ Several of my friends have committed suicide rather than live a life of fear and shame.

 

I have grave concerns about the ‘same sex equal treatment’ reforms and the way in which these may compound the suffering of elderly gay people, including Indigenous people. Elderly gay people are from a generation that preceded civil rights and they were subjected to shock treatment, lobotomy and other horrors. They hid from view and remain mostly hidden today. Nevertheless, they are elders of our gay community who deserve protection.

 

I implore you to protect these elderly people from the harm of being forced to reveal their identities, even in confidence, to officers from Centrelink. For this generation, there is no safe confidential context in which to ‘come out.’ The thought of having to do so now is causing them extreme anxiety and consequent physical harm.

 

Please give your urgent consideration to enacting grandfathering arrangements in relation to age pensioners to protect gay elders from harm. I am mindful that had my own life story not become a fortunate one, I would more than likely be a hidden gay age pensioner myself today. I know you to be a man of compassion and I appeal to your sense of justice, which was so visible to a proud nation on the day of the apology.

 

I would be very happy to talk with you further about this serious matter. Yours Sincerely, Noel Tovey.

 

MEDIA RELEASE, 3 February 2009

Written by Concerned Older Lesbians, distributed by the Coalition of Activist Lesbians-Australia.

THE CASE FOR ‘GRANDFATHERING’ THE AGE PENSION FOR LESBIAN AND GAY COUPLES AND THOSE OVER 55 ON DISABILITY SUPPORT PENSIONS.

Many benefits will result from the Commonwealth Government’s formal recognition of the legitimacy of same-sex couples. However particular problems will be experienced by lesbian and gay couples receiving the age pension. The problems have not been addressed by many of those asking for instant ‘equality.’

 

Cuts in income for same-sex couple age pensioners prove problematic when most have had no capacities to officially share certain past couple advantages in income, taxation, health insurance, superannuation and other aspects of financial planning and melding of incomes. There are two more aspects that muddy the equality arguments: one is the continued prejudice and discrimination against lesbians and gay men; the other is the particular problems of gender, ie the financial disadvantage of older women re pay and care, and the foisting of financial independence on same-sex couples who have had no experience of the model of breadwinner and dependent spouse.

 

The changes to the age pension that raised the qualifying age for women from 60 to 65 were introduced gradually over a period of 20 years. The wife pension, which enabled younger women married to pensioners to also qualify for a pension, was abolished in 1995 but recipients of the time were protected. Changes to the widow pension and other entitlements were also ‘Grandfathered.’

 

As part of the process of change, the Government should therefore introduce ‘Grandfathering’ for all lesbian and gay age pensioner couples and those over 55 receiving Disability Support Pension and unlikely to rejoin the workforce. This would avoid the distress and stress caused by:

+A loss of up to $92.60 per fortnight per person on full pension ($185.20 couple).

+The stress of possibly being assessed by Centrelink as a ‘marriage-like’ couple rather than two people in a loving relationship who still considered themselves financially independent.

+The problems of losing eligibility for all income support because of being emotionally/socially partnered with another person with higher income.

+The danger of being ‘outed’ through a Centrelink investigation which threatens arrangements where family and local circumstances, as well as personal morality, have allowed two people to see themselves as close friends but not a couple.

+The possibility of mistakes being made where genuinely friendship based home sharing is classified as coupled by Centrelink.

 

We ask for an exemption (grandfathering) to be offered to lesbian and gay Age Pensioner couples and those over 55 on Disability Support Pensions.

Contacts: Diana Goldrick 0414587699, Dorothy McRae-McMahon 0420550900 Jack Draper, COAL 4285 6747.

 

SEND A MINI CAKE OF SOAP TO THE PM with a S.O.A.P. leaflet!!!

This was a campaign started in the eastern states targeting Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. The text of the leaflet was as follows:-

S.O.A.P. Stop Outing Aged Pensioners.

It is an outrage that you continue to discriminate against same-sex couples re Centrelink.

Your same-sex “equal treatment” laws are a big problem!

You knew that for us to gain rights some would suffer losses. You kept very quiet  about this! You didn’t listen to the less vocal. You didn’t  ask those to be disadvantaged and the aged and disabled pensioners.

Older Australians will suffer poverty, homelessness, relationship splits, ill-health, and further disadvantage because your government wants to look good by providing “equality”-Equality without fairness. A hollow promise indeed!

Find a way of protecting same-sex age pensioners and over 55s on disability pensions or carers allowance.

There must have been hundreds of envelopes with a piece of soap and a leaflet sent to the PM as well as postcards with the same message but minus the soap cakes.

 

REMEMBER THOSE TOOTH BRUSHES & HAND TOWELS advertisements?

From around the 30^th March 2009, Centrelink ran a series of these advertisements in gay and lesbian community papers and in the main daily newspapers in all States supposedly explaining to its existing age, disability and carer  clients in same-sex relationships that they would be assessed in the same way as opposite-sex couples and that they were required to declare the relationship by the 1^st July. The federal attorney-general had been busy telling us in replies to our letters that the government had given same-sex couples 15 months to adjust to the equality status of de facto. Fifteen months? This fabulous change in our status didn’t become law until December 2008 and here were the first official public announcements to its clients that they were being forced to come out and suffer loss of income ONLY 3 MONTHS BEFORE THE DEADLINE! Of course Centrelink didn’t call it ‘coming out,’ its  advertisements called it ‘to ensure you receive the correct payment.’ To declare your relationship or find out what the changes mean for you contact 136280 or visit a Centrelink Service Centre, and the advertisements said it in the smallest possible orange-coloured type, a size and colour anyone with poor eyesight or the elderly would have found very difficult to see let alone read. And who needs to get in a telephone queue or a queue-line at a Centrelink office?

As a letter in The Sunday Age, 29.3.09, concluded “…the humiliating experience dealing with Centrelink. Even the design of Centrelink offices, where everyone in the long queues can hear about your personal life, only seems to shame the unemployed.”  And for that matter elderly pensioners and the disabled forced ‘to come out.’

Imagine the situation of 70, 80, 90-year-old age and /or disability pensioners possibly closeted for a lifetime, standing in such a queue and having to disclose the most intimate detail of their lives –their loving relationship with another human being of the same sex. Is there no end to the humiliations to be heaped upon some of the most vulnerable people in the country?        

 

LGS ISSUES A MEDIA RELEASE to counter the Feds Couples are Couples campaign!

There are certain matters which need to be addressed by the Federal Government’s same-sex legislation in relation to Centrelink’s new guidelines:   

1)       Same-sex relationships have no automatic legal recognition such as the Marriage Act confers, which means continued discrimination, homophobia and other abuses by employers, religious institutions, private education colleges, child care and a host of other non-government organisations in the current ongoing pattern.

2)       The Attorney-General has persisted in stating, ad nauseam, in his replies that the gay, lesbian, transgender and HIV/AIDS (GLTH) communities have had 15 months to adjust to the new changes and grandfather clauses are not warranted because grandfathering would undermine the purpose of the government’s reforms. This patently is not the case.

3)       There has been the very minimum of publicity provided by this government in the media, gay and straight, of these legislative changes which for an Australian federal government are major considering that it has never recognised same-sex relationships until in 2004 when the Howard government supported by the Labor opposition amended the Marriage Act to contain the words ‘between a man and a woman and no other’ for fear of the religious minority being outsmarted by gays and lesbians obtaining  marriage equality with the perfectly reasonable wording in the existing Act. The government therefore needs a continuous strong advertising campaign to explain its meaning of ‘de facto’ as it now applies to the broad Australian community. So far it has failed miserably.

4)       From 30^th  March to 1^st  July 2009 is three months not fifteen, and even now (29^th March) Centrelink’s quarterly magazine (Autumn edition), News for Seniors, still hasn’t arrived in the post with information about the same-sex changes for existing age pensioners, disability and veterans customers.

5)       It is ludicrous that pensioner couples whatever the genders of the partners still have to receive the interdependent rate and not the single rate each. This is the 21^st century when most households need two incomes to survive in the modern world. What would it cost the government to treat all couples as individual pensioners on the single rate? Nil, if it was prepared to withdraw the tax-free status to religious institutions and their organisations. It is after all the most iniquitous deal ever forced upon a modern society especially when Australia is a secular society with a constitution that separates church and state irrevocably.

6)       To refuse a grandfather clause to same-sex couples already in the pension system merely perpetuates discrimination. Past laws forced same-sex couples into the closet and particularly those now in their 70s, 80s, and 90s to hide their relationships. Do you really think equating our relationships with heterosexual de facto will suddenly get rid of religious bigotry?

7)       Most same-sex pensioners stand to lose up to at least $100 each a fortnight and those who pay rent at current rents demanded by landlords for very inferior accommodation, will certainly become the new poor well below the breadline. Is this what the government is aiming for?

8)       The proposed changes have been mishandled from the start. Consultations with the GLTH communities have been limited, and many voices have gone unheard. For instance, LGS was never consulted about the de facto status despite the countless submissions it has made since the beginning of the 21^st century to the federal government Senate inquiries on issues of security, health, human rights and other bills. These Senate committees of inquiry have always had members of the two major political parties sitting on them. So, regardless of the party in power, members of this government would surely have been aware of us. No one could accuse us of not being blatant on the streets of Melbourne exercising our right to demonstrate on all these issues as well as gay rights. Yet, when we telephoned Centrelink for copies of the community information kit about the same-sex relationship changes for distribution to our members, the staffer did not know anything about the kit or where to direct us. The operator put us on hold while endeavouring to discover to whom to direct our call.

9)       Of course there are so many other important issues for our governments to address and correct but equality with heterosexuals for lesbians and gay men is really such an unfair thing which could be fixed with the stroke of a pen, and would hurt no one, if Australian governments weren’t so frightened of howling religious bigots, to take the step by allowing marriage to include same-sex partners. The marriage licence is nothing more than a means for the government to provide benefits to and demand responsibilities from two people who want to live together in a loving relationship.

10)    Finally, it’s worth noting that so many of us are swelling the retired population or are more aware of what can affect future retirement finances, and will continue doing so, and, yes, we still have the ability to exercise our vote. A federal election is due in 2010, and we will vote.    

 

DISCRIMINATION IS AN ONGOING ISSUE IN EVERY DEMOCRACY

A documentary shown at the 19^th Melbourne Queer Film Festival on Saturday, 28 March 2009, is one which ought to be necessary viewing for all politicians in our federal parliament. The title of this multi award-winning U.S. documentary is “For My Wife.” It chronicles the making of an activist.

Charlene Strong’s challenging journey, resulting in the passage of Washington State’s historic Domestic Partnership legislation, began the afternoon her partner Kate was taken to hospital after an accident at their home. From being denied her wife’s dying moments by hospital staff who demanded proof of her relationship to Kate, and to be ostracised by a funeral company employee, Charlene experienced the most horrific discrimination. (Directed by David Rothmiller, USA, 2008, video 76min.)

The For My Wife documentary bears out our contention that removing discrimination from 84 laws by equating our relationships with the heterosexual second class de facto status without giving us marriage rights means we have to prove our relationship to the satisfaction of any old tom, dick or harry, business or organisation including sporting bodies --that won’t be easy.

 

PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE

But equality really is a long way off. There have been gains with the same-sex relationship legislation enacted by the Federal Government in December 2008, but there have also been some significant losses. Activism will need to continue until we have equality which will see the end of sexual apartheid in Australia. The first national action & rally since December is scheduled for Saturday, March 13, 2010.

  

NEWS BRIEFS ON OTHER SIGNIFICANT ISSUES:-   

 USA LIFTS TRAVEL BAN:  a 22-year old ban on HIV-positive people entering the US was lifted by President Obama in November. “If we want to be the global leader in combating HIV/AIDS, we need to act like it,” the President said. Due to visa difficulties for delegates, few international AIDS conferences get held there.

IN AUSTRALIA, one in five gay men with HIV may not know they are living with it, according to a survey conducted in Melbourne in 2008. Investigators in the ‘Suck-it-and-see’ study (Burnet Institute) collected saliva samples from 745 men at a number of gay community venues throughout Melbourne, only to discover that 20 out of  the 100 men whose samples tested  positive were unaware of the fact. –MCV and Positive Living, 3/12/09.

 

INDIGENOUS SOCIAL AFFAIRS COMMISSIONER: the Rudd Government has decided to appoint former ATSIC chief executive Mick Gooda commissioner. Regardless of Gooda’s abilities, the appointment of another man to the position is a Government backhander to Aboriginal women and sadly, a predictable affirmation of the status quo. This appointment was an opportunity to recognise the strength and talent that exists among Aboriginal women. It was time to affirm the leadership qualities they play in their communities –Age 16.12.09.

SPAIDS 35: The 35^th tree planting at the Sydney Park AIDS Memorial Groves on Sunday 2 August 2009 took place on a clear, balmy, Sydney mid-winter day with temperatures in the low 20s. The turnout during the day topped at least 70 and included Sydney’s Lord Mayor Clover Moore who had time to plant a few trees. We estimate about 300 trees were planted during the day, and the Groves, which have been very lucky this year with ample rainfalls, are looking magnificent. In July 2008 SPAIDS made a submission to the Federal Department of the Environment and Water Resources to nominate the SPAIDS Memorial Groves for inclusion in the National Heritage List. To date (January 2010) we have had no response other than an acknowledgement on 18 July 2008.

PALESTINE: In December 2008 Israel launched a brutal and vicious attack on the Gaza strip during which about 1400 Palestinians, many, if not most being women and children, were killed. Over a year later Israel is still barricading the borders into Gaza and attempting to starve the Gazans into total submission and surrender to the Israeli butchers. The outside world has stood by and allowed this to continue and the human rights abuses continue unabated. Retired Jewish South African judge Richard Goldstone chaired a UN Commission into the Gaza attack and much of the report condemned Israel for its brutality and the illegality of its use of phosphorus against civilian targets. Israel would not allow Goldstone into Israel and Gaza and has condemned the report as biased and without foundation. Currently a delegation of Australians is among hundreds of people from around the world who are holding mass protests in Cairo and Gaza on 1 January 2010 over Israel’s continuing blockade of the Palestinian enclave. A spokesman for the Israeli embassy in Canberra, Dor Shapira, denied there was a blockade of Gaza, saying there was a border that Israel monitored (LGS editors’ italics). People such as these should be charged with war crimes and tried at the International Court in the Hague. The Australian government’s on-going, unquestioning support for the Israeli regime is unacceptable.

LET THE REFUGEES IN! Australia is a privileged democratic country so why wouldn’t people desperate to escape from wars and dictatorships want to come here? Our population is tiny, our space huge. We should accept these asylum seekers in the same way we accept the so-called quota allocated by the world refugee organisation. The Prime Minister should not be bargaining with Indonesia to accept responsibility that in effect is ours when Indonesia’s population and space is in reverse to Australia’s. Christmas Island is a prison without any day release.

A NEW ‘COALITION OF THE WILLING’ has stitched up the poorest countries: George Monbiot says that when the climate talks in Copenhagen ended in failure, the immediate reason can be summarised in two words: Barack Obama. The man elected to put aside childish things proved to be as susceptible to immediate self-interest as any other politician. Just as George Bush did in the approach to the Iraq war, Obama went behind the backs of the UN and most of its member states and assembled a coalition of the willing (including Wong and Rudd) to strike a deal that outraged the rest of the world. This was then presented to poorer nations without negotiation. Either they signed it, or they lost the adaptation funds required to help them survive the first few decades of climate breakdown. What happens now? Monbiot says ‘that depends on the other non-player at Copenhagen: you. For the past few years good people have shaken their heads and tutted and wondered why someone doesn’t do something. Yet the number taking action has been pathetic. Demonstrations that should have brought millions on to the streets have struggled to mobilise a few thousand. As a result, the political cost of the failure at Copenhagen is zero. –George Monbiot is a Guardian columnist.

TRANSVESTITE ELECTED TO OFFICE IN THAILAND: Called ‘Je Kob’ or older sister by villagers, Choochat Dulayapraphatsorn decided to run for the post of Village Head after serving as an assistant. He beat three other candidates. After decades of service to his community, his appointment as village chief of Ban Moo 3, tambon Tai Ban Mai, Muang district in Samut Prakan justifies his openness and  is evidence of his acceptance as a trans person. From an LGS corresponding member.

We wish all our newsletter recipients a happy new year

 

ONE PERSON-ONE PENSION

MARRIEDS   AND    SINGLES

ONE PERSON ONE PENSION

SAME-SEX  AND  DE FACTO

 

SAME-SEX   RELATIONSHIPS

EQUAL  MARRIAGE RIGHTS

3-IN-5 AUSTRALIANS AGREE

GALAXY POLL IN JUNE 2009

 

NB.RUDD Govt/Centrelink

ONE PERSON-ONE PENSION

EQUAL  MARRIAGE  RIGHTS