• No New Coal Bacchus Marsh - Moorabool Environment Group
    The proposal is for open cut brown coal mining and drying (using a technique not yet successfully attempted on a commercial scale) then transporting to Geelong for shipping to India. We are against this open cut mine for a number of reasons; just three: brown coal is the dirtiest way of producing electricity and adds to greenhouse gases, the farm land threatened is needed for the production of food and there are heath risks associated with an open cut coal mine close to Bacchus Marsh.
    12 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Tom Kingston
  • Funding for research for chronic neurological illnesses (ME/CFS) & (MCS)
    Currently, some 180,000 people are affected by ME/CFS and MCS (R.A.C.P 2004). ME/CFS was identified by the World Health Organisation in 1969 (ICD G93.3), as a chronic neurological complex illness, with multiple debilitating symptoms. Despite recognition by the WHO, no universally recognized treatment protocols are available. Many sufferers were diagnosed as far back as the 1980's, but due to lack of research for these illnesses, there is still significant lack of knowledge and understanding amongst the medical profession, Government institutions and the wider community. Sufferers spend between $5000 and $25000 on alternative medicine treatments, forcing many families into financial ruin and dependency. Living with ME/CFS and MCS is extremely stressful, isolating and frustrating, as it impacts on all areas of a person's life. Due to belated diagnosis thousands of sufferers have been permanently damaged. This is why the government of Australia must invest in funding for research as soon as possible.
    429 of 500 Signatures
    Created by Ariette Singer
  • Putting a price on plastic bags, bottles and aluminium cans.
    This would discourage people from using plastic bags that are creating masses of plastic in our waterways and oceans, killing our bird and sea-life. A price on aluminium cans and bottles would cut down on rubbish dramatically and encourage recycling.
    10 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Steve Dewar
  • Equal Rights for all in Land Use Planning - Third party appeal rights in Planning
    Why are third party rights of appeal important? Planning Law gives applicants for development privileged rights, conferring on them two rights of appeal: one against refusal of development, the other against conditions attached to development approvals. Residents, by contrast, have been stripped of any right of appeal. No matter how bad the decision may be, residents adversely affected by a planning decision have no right to appeal against that decision The City of Albany, under pressure from the WA Planning Commission and the Minister for Planning, has agreed to remove existing (in the Shire Scheme) and proposed third party right of appeal in its new Local Planning Scheme. The City was the last Local Government to hold these rights, rights that have been systematically removed over recent years Human rights are commonly understood as "inalienable fundamental rights to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being." Under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966 -in force from 23/03/1976 in Australia) all persons are equal before the law. We believe the removal of third party appeal rights is a fundamental breach of human rights. As democratic citizens we should have the right to query any administrative decision made under an Act of Parliament. By having this right we can assist with balancing the system against poor judgement, corruption or misrule There is no evidence that TPAs swamp the system. In South Australia, the ratio of third party to applicant appeal has been around 50 - 440 per annum (figures are prior to 2009). If you are not convinced of the need for vigilance in Planning matters have a look at the following websites - the Dirty Sexy Money show from 4 corners a few years ago: http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2008/s2214216.htm The Independent Commission Against Corruption 28 May 2008 found former Wollongong City Council Planner Beth Morgan and developer Frank Vellar guilty of "serious corrupt conduct". http://www.abc.net.au/news/2008-05-28/sex-for-development-pair-found-corrupt/2451238
    50 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Juliet Albany
  • Onshoring offshoring
    We want to grow as a nation and offer our children lots of opportunities. So many corporations are moving jobs overseas under a false sense of economy and value, in the end decreasing the amount of money circulating in our economy. The benefits of onshoring would be all encompassing - such as higher employment, keeping the money in Australia and the joy of actually having a process that works. Also review Taxes Subsidise Off-Shoring: The Australian taxpayer currently subsidises corporations to send jobs offshore. Among the companies in our industry that have sent jobs off-shore are ANZ, NAB, Westpac, and Suncorp. Between them these companies recorded combined after tax profits of $18.44 billion last year. Here’s how your tax subsidises these profits. When a corporation is sending jobs off shore the following tax results flow: • All set up costs are deductible (including travel, legal, off-shore skills development, IT etc) • All implementation costs are deductible (including redundancies) • All fees paid to the off shore provider for the “new” service are deductible against Australian income • None of the wages paid to the offshore provider’s workforce are taxable in Australia • None of the off-shore provider’s profits are taxable in Australia (e.g. Genpact in based in India but registered in Bermuda, a renowned tax haven). To make it worse, employers who send jobs offshore don’t pay State payroll taxes on the salaries of the off shore workforce. It’s time for an urgent review of tax treatment of off-shoring
    60 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Jan van Riel
  • End puppy farms in Australian Capital Territory
    I have personally experienced two animals in a property close to me whose lives were alarmingly sad and neglected. It took a lot of phone calls to the RSPCA to have them removed. I know there are more dogs out there who need a much better life. If there were no puppy farms around there would be much less dogs in deprived situations, as there would be less opportunity to obtain a dog on impulse. Of course we must also think about the females who produce these puppies. Their stories are horrifying. I am aware of an organization called www.oscarslaw.org which is trying to end puppy farms. The government can make the biggest change in the lives of dogs by making a law to end puppy farms and the indiscriminate sale of pups without any knowledge of the source. I know there are many organizations doing a wonderful job in rescuing and rehomeing dogs who have been abused or neglected, but the animals have to suffer prior to being rescued and that is totally unacceptable in a modern educated society. Please consider the need to make a law banning puppy farms. there is a lot of money spent on rescuing dogs from horror situations, this money could be used to assist owners train and care for their dogs.
    35 of 100 Signatures
    Created by Doris Andrews
1 2 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 182 Next →