• Don't build 14 storey towers above Eastlakes Shopping Centre, 6 storeys is enough!
    This is the fourth modification by the developer Crown Group to increase the size of the development. The new proposed modifications put forward recently want to see it grow by one third! They are seeking to increase the building height from 6 to 14 storeys, thus increasing the number units from 292 to 468 and floor area by an extra 15,336 sqm. There is huge concern that these modifications will: - Create extreme traffic issues in the area as there isn't any proper infrastructure in place - Obstruct the views of many residents in the immediate area - Obstruct the sunlight to Eastlakes Reserve which is very popular with locals - Create increased parking issues for existing residents in the area - Create more delays to existing overcrowded public transport as no new buses will be allocated - Increase traffic noise due to a 24hour loading dock - Look like an eyesore and not represent the true character of Eastlakes
    106 of 200 Signatures
    Created by Kelly Dos Santos
  • Save Historic Evans Head Primary School
    This site holds great historical and cultural significance for our town. Its location in the heart of town provides Evans Head with a connection to its past, giving character and a great feel that a new building cannot offer. To date there has been no community consultation. We cannot sit back and allow our history to be taken from us!
    105 of 200 Signatures
    Created by Linda Wythes
  • Don't Frack Surat
    The little town of Surat on the Balonne River in QLD with a population of about 500 people (if they've got visitors) is about to be surrounded by gasfields. Armour Energy wants to frack. We have til 4.30pm on 5 November 2018 to tell them Don't Frack Surat. The gas industry is trying to expand to every state in Australia. They are huge multinational companies whose overriding objective is profit. There is ample evidence put together by people who don't receive a cent for doing it, including doctors and scientists, that fracking and CSG is harmful to humans and the environment.
    339 of 400 Signatures
    Created by Leanne Brummell
  • Save Byron
    It is important to protect the residents and community as well as approved accommodation operators, to protect their local residential amenity from the detrimental effects of the new Bill recently passed by the NSW State Government which will come in to effect in 2019. Residential houses and apartments are built for the specific purpose of domestic use and not built or rated for commercial use unless a second development application has been lodged to change the purpose of the building to commercial use. Short Term Holiday Letting is just that - it refers to the short term use of a property - meaning for a limited number of days - not every day. The every-day use of the building for tourism constitutes a commercially operated business. Residents who are neighbours of these STHL properties are being victimised and denied their residential amenity. Approved operators are also disadvantaged with a playing field that is far from level. Genuine operators have abided by the law and are now being under-mined by this Bill. Houses and homes are not meant to be party venues or pop-up hotels. Residential houses are meant to be used as permanent housing which is the intended purpose of residential zoning. While our zoning laws are not being upheld, our community continues to deteriorate. Affordable housing is already in very low supply in our area and virtually nonexistent. Homelessness is on the rise and the impact on our community is highly visible – with scout groups shutting down and whole streets being made into pop-up hotels rather than being used for residential housing. Our zoning laws are being ignored which were designed to protect the community. Many of our residents are citing no sleep in 2 years and some have shared their experiences of verbal and physical abuse by STHL guests. The owners of these properties think it is their right to run unregulated tourist accommodation from residential premises and have also been cited as causing abuse to neighbours. This Bill is creating hostility and is dividing the community. There are minimal choices available for permanent housing as rental prices are exorbitant, however there’s also an invisible homelessness occurring – these are the folks that do have rentals but are evicted for incidental tourism. For example, we have been contacted by a resident that is evicted from her rental for 4-5 months of the year because her landlord insists in profiting from a higher tariff during the music festival weekends and peak seasons such as Christmas and Easter. This particular resident is a professional who operates two businesses and has a 6 year old daughter - this is not only a housing issue but also a human rights issue and duty of care with children. In those times that this resident’s landlord evicts her for weekends or weeks at a time, she sleeps in her car with her child. This 6 year old falls asleep at school. This issue will continue to systematically and quickly rip our community apart. We fear that we are heading for ghettos in our quiet residential areas and this has recently led to increased burglaries with streets full of empty houses. Byron’s infrastructure and roads are also being eroded and without enough funding from Council to maintain these amenities, our infrastructure will fall further into disrepair. Enforcing these STHL to become compliant and paying commercial rates will give Council the ability to raise revenue from our tourists in a fairer way rather than a voluntary tourism tax. We want to offer an amazing experience to our visitors, have our residents engaged, and support a community that offers accommodation and a lifestyle for diverse economic backgrounds. Please hear us when we say that Byron Shire is heading for ruination if we are not granted exemption from this Bill. Sincerely Yours Byron Residents & Approved Operators
    1,173 of 2,000 Signatures
    Created by Byron Residents & Approved Businesses
  • 'Enough is Enough'….All consumers and psychologists in Australia deserve equal access to Medicare!
    The APS submission (https://www.psychology.org.au/About-Us/What-we-do/advocacy/Submissions/Professional-Practice/2018/APS-Submission-to-the-MBS-Review-Better-Access?) recommends that over two thirds of registered psychologists (many of whom hold higher degrees, specialised training and significant experience in their field) but have not applied for “endorsement” would only be able to provide services to the estimate 10% of clients presenting with mild to moderate disorders. The complicated model states that psychologists may be given an opportunity to “demonstrate equivalent competence” to be able to treat what is, for many, their existing client base. Recognition would almost certainly come at a significant cost. The APS has yet to explain just how this recognition would occur, leaving experienced practitioners at a loss as to how they can protect their livelihood and deliver crucial services to clients. All registered psychologists are currently permitted to practice across all areas of psychology and mental health and can diagnose, assess and treat clients, regardless of whether they are endorsed or not. Ethical guidelines require psychologists to only provide services within their limits of personal competence. Endorsed psychologists primarily operate in urban areas, while the majority of psychologists operating in rural areas are non-endorsed. Data from the Psychology Board of Australia’s ‘Area of practice endorsement data tables: January 2014’, shows that only 23 endorsed psychologists work in remote communities across Australia; 212 in outer regional; while 7 969 work in metropolitan/capital cities. Our rural areas have some of the highest rates of suicide in Australia. If accepted, the APS recommendations will leave rural and regional Australians without access to vital mental health care services. The consequences to Australians in desperate need of mental health care will be disastrous. If accepted, the APS model will result in higher session fees, with clients unable to claim any Medicare rebate unless their preferred practitioner is “endorsed”. Market forces would likely push up out-of-pocket fees to see endorsed psychologists and waiting lists would blow out. By losing a major funding stream, many non-endorsed psychologists would be forced to close their practices, leaving vulnerable clients without access to vital and affordable health services. Many endorsed psychologists do not bulk bill, meaning only those in higher socioeconomic groups would be able to afford treatment for the most debilitating of conditions. There is no evidence to support that better health outcomes are achieved by “endorsed” psychologists. In fact, a significant amount of “endorsed” psychologists achieved this status through historical paid membership to special interest “Colleges”, and not through demonstrated experience or completing a masters/doctorate degree. Some psychologists were granted up to six endorsements via this process. The Australian Clinical Psychology Association stated that ‘More than half of those clinical psychologists currently endorsed by the Psychology Board of Australia do not have qualifications in clinical psychology...’ (source: https://industry.gov.au/Office-of-the-Chief-Economist/SkilledOccupationList/Documents/2015Submissions/ACPA.pdf). Therefore, many endorsed psychologists hold the same level of training and qualifications as non-endorsed psychologists. The APS position is a crushing blow to over two thirds of registered psychologists, many of whom will be unable to continue treating the majority of their clients if the proposal is accepted by the Government. It is clear the APS is not acting in the best interests of its members (who currently pay $640 for annual membership) or their clients, by advocating that the majority of psychologists lose access to the MBS. In fact, if the APS proposal is accepted, 66% of the psychologist board members who are “endorsed”, may personally benefit with increased client referrals, while 64% of registered psychologists will have very limited access to Medicare referrals. Questions must be asked about the ability of the APS Board to represent all psychologists equally, and whether the board members are at risk of breaching their fiduciary duties to the APS with a proposal which effectively destroys the livelihoods of the majority of registered practitioners, for the benefit of a few, including themselves. For over ten years now, clinical psychologist’s services have attracted a $39 higher rebate than non-clinical psychologists. Despite this higher rebate, fewer clinical psychologists fully bulk-bill their clients. Based on the current Medicare arrangements, the proposed changes will represent a significant increase to Medicare, as the cost of providing the same services already being provided by registered psychologists would increase by 47%. A notable research project commissioned by the Australian Government (Pirkis et al, 2011) demonstrated clearly that psychologists treating mental illness across both tiers of Medicare Better Access produced equivalently strong treatment outcomes (as measured by the K-10 and DASS pre-post treatment) for mild, moderate and severe cases of mental illness. This research demonstrates clearly that there is no difference in treatment outcomes when comparing clinical psychologists treating under tier one of Medicare Better Access with the treatment outcomes of all other registered psychologists treating under tier two of Medicare Better Access (Pirkis et al, 2011a). Reference: Pirkis, Ftanou, Williamson, Machlin, Spittal & Bassilios (2011a). Australia's Better Access initiative: An evaluation. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 45:726–739
    6,888 of 7,000 Signatures
    Created by Australian Psychologists
  • Save Mount Panorama
    It's important that we let the council know we care about Mt Panorama, the way it is used matters to the people of Bathurst and all the thousands of race goers and visitors that come here every year. It belongs to all people, not just one sporting club, which could easily be located somewhere else.
    211 of 300 Signatures
    Created by Susan Douglas
  • Stop foreign ownership of the Albany wind farm
    - You have caused the loss of local employment effectively losing 28 years of experience on those very machines. - You have revoked a contract to a West Australian company who currently maintains the wind farm and given it to a multi-national company effectively causing more job loss and local money leaving the state. - Your government promised in the election that you would not sell power assets and now you have broken that promise.
    158 of 200 Signatures
    Created by Ben Fairhead Picture
  • Save Jesmond Bush
    Have you been to George McGregor Park? It’s a verdant refuge for native species nestled amongst the suburbs in Jesmond. The edges of the bush have been slowly encroached upon by suburban development for decades, and what remains is some of Newcastle’s last remaining habitat for impressive and unusual species like the Powerful Owl and the Squirrel Glider, the Black-eyed Susan and Hakea bakerii, all rare and protected. The Jesmond to Rankin Park bypass will be constructed right down the middle of this native habitat by Roads and Maritime Services. The design was recently updated by RMS to better accommodate connectivity for cyclists. What about connectivity for the animals living in Jesmond bush? The current design sees a giant wall of dirt blocking the path and free movement of the fauna in Jesmond bush, impacting their ability to breed, feed and ultimately survive. There are alternatives to the current design that would improve the outlook for wildlife, such as the use of pylons which will in the long run leave less of a clearing footprint and better accommodate the animals inhabiting this beautiful patch of native bush. We the undersigned call on Roads and Maritime Services to improve the design of the Jesmond to Rankin Park bypass to maximise habitat connectivity and ensure local wildlife populations continue to thrive . Sign the petition and let Sonia Hornery, Member for Wallsend know that we value the species living in George McGregor Park and the long-term preservation of local habitat.
    153 of 200 Signatures
    Created by Hunter Community Environment Centre Picture
  • Ban NSW buses with automatic access ramps
    The access ramps for these buses never work and are either not serviced or drivers are not trained on how to use them. As a person in a wheelchair that relies on buses for transport, I have often had to wait hours often out in the cold for the next bus in the timetable (sometimes multiple buses) because the ramp doesn’t work.
    124 of 200 Signatures
    Created by Oliver Morton-Evans Picture
  • Save Sydney's Luna Park
    Luna Park is a battle fought and won by the people, almost fifty years ago. The owners of Luna Park have worked hard to make this a viable operation, a venue used for a mixture of events and its bread and butter fun park rides. I grew up with this venue, where a kid from not only, the western suburbs, but visitors from around the world could enjoy our harbour from these rides. The greed of this government and the clandestine nature of its operations makes me think there is a hidden agenda. One which would no doubt include a "sell-off". STOP IT
    448 of 500 Signatures
    Created by Richard O'Neill
  • Protect Families and Children From Gun Violence - Let's give women and children a say!
    Last week two teenagers, Jennifer and Jack Edwards, were shot dead by their father, John Edwards, a 68-year-old Financial Planner. Mr Edwards was able to join St Mary's Indoor Shooting Centre, he then obtained a firearms licence and permit before legally buying two high-powered firearms, which he used to shoot his children. Mr Edwards was estranged from his wife Olga Edwards and custody proceedings had commenced in the Family Court. As the law currently stands, when a person applies for a firearm licence or permit to acquire additional firearms, the spouse of the applicant does not need to be notified or consulted, even when a family law matter has commenced in the courts and there has been previous history of threats and fear. If the law had required police to notify and consult with Olga Edwards before approving Mr Edwards' application for a firearm, then his firearm application could have been denied. Samantha Lee, Director of GCA states, “Current gun laws fail to adequately protect women and children from gun violence because the law requires an AVO to be in place or a charge for a criminal offence before a firearm may be revoked or suspended. By then, it may be too late to save a life.” “What GCA wants to see happen is a more pro-active approach which gives woman and spouses a voice in the gun licence continuation, application or acquisitions process.” Gun Control Australia (GCA) is calling for the implementation of robust new family law firearm safety checks to better protect families from gun violence. The call comes after the recent horrific shooting of two teenagers in West Pennant Hills by their father who legally obtained several firearms including high-powered handguns. Under the current law, police do not have to notify a spouse when their partner or ex-partner applies for a gun licence or a permit to obtain additional firearms. GCA is calling on all State and Territory Attorney General's to support our proposal for family law firearm safety checks.The checks would be compulsory and required to be undertaken once a proceeding has been lodged in the Family Court. The checks would include: (1) Firearm Licence Review, and (2) Spousal notification for all new applications for a firearm licence and permits to acquire a firearm application Firearm Licence Review The Firearm Licence Review (FLR) would require police to check if any party to the family court proceedings has a gun licence and if so, if there is any concern for the safety for the firearm licence holder, their immediate family or the public. The police would have the power to suspend or revoke a licence or not issue a permit. Spousal notification Spousal notification would require police to notify the spouse/ partner who is a party to family law custody proceedings when the other party has a gun licence or has made an application for a firearm licence or an application to obtain a permit to acquire a licence. The notification would then allow the spouse/partner to object to the continuation of the licence or the application on the grounds of concerns for personal safety to himself, herself or others. Full Scale Review We also call for the commonwealth and state parliaments of Australia to initiate a full-scale review of our nation's gun laws, which have been steadily weakened after decades of pressure by an NRA style gun lobby here in Australia. We need your support to change our gun laws to better protect families from gun violence. This petition is endorsed by Women's Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Service NSW Inc. Samantha Lee Director Gun Control Australia https://www.guncontrolaustralia.org/
    9,774 of 10,000 Signatures
    Created by Gun Control Australia Picture
  • Make big developers compensate small business during construction
    Big developers should be responsible for the community they are moving into and should be made to compensate for the loss of business they cause.
    32 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Chelsea Kate Picture