MCC NSW Media Comments April 2019

Smh comments 15 April 2019 published

A comment to the SMH (15/4/2019 Story: ‘Our approach is to remove the hard right’: GetUp raises $12 with url shown below:

Getup is not a political party but it contributes well to our democracy in terms of checks and balances in either supporting or campaign against a candidate. As it is has wide membership, more than both major parties, it cannot be ignored as an influential participant in our democracy. I believe that donation from ordinary Australians are just as important as other political donations by unions and businesses. Their social justice policies are sound or otherwise their supporter will vote with their feet. It is no point labeling them as owned by the Labor Party, as they are non-party political. Perhaps if the trend continues, their membership will far exceeds the political parties, then they may consider become the third political party with a bite.

Anthony Pun says: comment on Abul Rizvi article pulished

20 April 2019 at 5:29 PM

A comment on “Exploitation of low skilled immigrants” published in the article on 20April2019 with url shown below:

Successive attempts to put skilled worker stream into regional area have not worked well because there is a lack of infrastructure to hold these new immigrants in the regional area. Once they satisfy their settlement period in the bush, they packed up moved to the city.
As Abul Rizvi correctly pointed out the bottom category of unskilled immigrants is akin to “indentured labour” (of the British Colonial Empire) and just slight better than modern day “slavery”. The restriction imposed on this group, ie. lack of permanent residency prospective and the inaccessibility of social welfare benefits were unthinking some decades ago where there was adequate union protection for unfair work conditions and a sense of social justice for workers.
There has been some very bad publicity for 457 temporary visas being exploited by employers. Despite the statement of 12/3/2019 by DHA “All workers in Australia have the same rights and protections at work regardless of citizenship or visa status”, some unscrupulous employers will always find a way around it.
The result of a “seven-day wonder” temporary visa category will be an increase of “unlawful” immigrant in Australian cities and they will be subjected to further exploitation, just like the “undocumented” immigrants in the US. Is this a breach of human rights?
Whilst overseas visitors with approved working holiday visas can do seasonal farm work, other regional professions are not easily filled. Unless Australian government has a long-term plan for regional immigration together with a will to spend money on infrastructure, it will not attract the right immigrants.
The “bandage” solution creates the low skilled visa category with no protection from exploitation and safety net protection on health, is a recipe for disaster and create an adverse international reputation that Australia is nation that exploits overseas workers.

Comment JM 21 April 2019

A comment on “Morrison and Dutton lost control of border” published on the journal with url shown below:

Abul Rizvi should be thanked for showing us some immigration data not easily available in the net.  This article is consistent with his previous article which concluded that Australia is creating an underclass of immigrants, who are basically “unlawful” and easily exploited by unscrupulous employers. This underclass is very similar to those “ethnic underclass” frequently mentioned by the “ethnic community leaders” of the 1990s and a source of creation of “ethnic ghettos” and these statements were fondly made by the late Bill Jegarow, the founding Chair of ECC NSW and FECCA.

In his second article, Rizvi attribute the cause of backlog to loss of control of our borders (visa systems) by PM Morrison and Dutton; and with Dutton claiming that the backlog is due to greater scrutiny.

The presentation of the number of cases using back door techniques to stay after arriving in Australia, featured well with people from Malaysia, China and India (all Asians).  In the absence of other nationalities, one could easily perceive that there is another explanation for “greater scrutiny”, ie. the criteria for a class of visa could have a higher indirect discriminatory content and the English proficiency criteria is a good example. 

Asylum seekers also qualify for the “greater scrutiny” and public debate led by political leaders with an alt right agenda, has already placed enough fear in ordinary Australians about the suitability of these people to settle in Australia.

Rizvi’s conclusion is spot on however, it did leave out an important highlight, that “greater scrutiny” means higher indirect discrimination.  Dutton has not loss control of the borders but has made it harder to these people to get regularised.  Cynically, we need some cheap labour and let them suffer a few more years before we allow them to stay!  This reminds me of the Chinese student days (1990s) when the Hawke government finally gave them residence after having been in limbo for several years.

Another discriminatory action by the present government regarding the introduction of the English test at University level, for Citizenship applications has resulted over 230,000 Australian citizenship applications held in limbo and wait time exceed two years.  This action has created a “second class” citizenship category for these applicants.  This statement was made by me during a SBS TV interview together with GetUp last year.

Finally, when a person is locked in by immigration regulations, he/she has a right to seek lawful alternatives to overcome those “chains”.  The response by the applicant should not be consider crafty or improper simply because they

are reacting to a set of rules.  Do not cure the symptoms, go and fix the primary cause.

Letter to elicia 7 April 2019 acknowledged

Complementary medicine crackdown by Medical Board has doctors fearing natural therapies ban

A letter in response to Elicia Kennedy’s article on the ABC news “Complementary nmedicine crackown by Medical Board has doctors fearing natural therapies ban,” (see url below)

7 April 2019

Dear Elicia,

My first impression on reading your article was this: the MBA intends to curb my fundamental rights in choosing whatever treatment I prefer by removing or preventing me from getting the complementary medicine I require.  On this issue, the consumer will not submit to such draconian measures made in the name of patient safety.

The discussion of this proposal by MBA should divided into two parts, the legalistic part which could infringing my fundamental rights (could be human rights) to choose and the merits part, which describes the controversy involving the efficacy and safety of complementary medicine and alternate medicine (CAM).

The ban on doctors practicing CAM is an indirection violation of my fundamental rights to choose my treatment.

I also understand the global conflict between Big Pharma and the CAM practitioners.  This conflict has been narrowed down to “profits” and the constant bashing of CAM based on insufficient evidence is revealing. 

More clinical studies and medical publications are emerging from China and the US are giving evidence-based credibility to CAM.

Yes, there are anecdotal cases of death caused by CAM, and also death caused by quacks, witch doctors, etc., but these deaths are in small numbers compared those caused by conventional medicine.

For example, Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) is an wholistic approach to health and it is not voodoo but emerging as a re-discovery of its biological efficacy with evidence-based research.  In time, both convention medicine and TCM will merge as scholarly research reveals more of its secrets.

It is not surprising that the Chinese civilization is continuous for 5,000 years and their health system based on TCM, with recorded experience in the Imperial Medical Corp of every dynasty, must have rendered adequate protection to maintain a continuous increase in the population and their use in countless military campaigns within China.

If we allow the banning of western trained doctors to use CAM then the ban should equally applied to all registered practitioners of TCM in Australia.  This unthinkable ban is not only unfair to the practitioners but would completely deny any choices by the patients.

Hence, I would make a plea to you, on behalf of the community to join us to opposing such moves by the MBA.

Yours sincerely,

Anthony Pun, OAM

Chair, Multicultural Communities Council of NSW

National President of the Chinese Community Council of Australia

President, the Australian Health Reform Association

and finally, the Anzac Day Article’

What does Anzac Day mean to Asian Australians.