'Red tape' problem solved for thousands of homebuyers in one state
Victoria
Melbourne
Australia
national CONTACT US
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Herald Sun
2 hours ago
- Herald Sun
Protesters rally against Allan government's anti-protest laws
Don't miss out on the headlines from Victoria. Followed categories will be added to My News. Up to 200 serial protesters, extremists and legal figures have gathered on the steps of the Victorian parliament to urge the Allan government to drop its upcoming anti-protest laws. The state government is gearing up to introduce laws banning face masks, terrorist flags, rope, locks, chains and glue in a bid to shut down major disruptions and extremist behaviour at protests. The move, however, has attracted huge backlash among Melbourne's activist community who claim the proposed laws impede on free speech. About 200 activists from dozens of pro-Palestine, Indigenous, legal and union groups, gathered in the rain outside parliament, partially blocking Spring St, to condemn the proposal on Tuesday night. Organisers, Defend Dissent Coalition, claimed that the banning of masks would prevent protesters from being 'Covid safe' and being shielded against capsicum spray launched by police. They also claimed that the banning of terrorist symbols would put 'restrictions on symbols of resistance'. The activists are also arguing that a ban on 'dangerous devices' such as locks, ropes and glue goes against Labor's idolising of unionist and women's rights campaigner Zelda D'Aprano, who used chains during her protests. Indigenous activist Robbie Thorpe and Greens MP Katherine Copsey were among the speakers. Ms Copsey told the crowd the state government was attempting to shut down their right to 'peaceful protest'. 'Rather than listen to people, Labor is continuing to forge ahead with legislation that seeks to suppress citizens in this state,' she said. 'Shame,' activists yelled. One anti-Israel speaker called out Anthony Albanese over his recognition of Palestine, saying that was 'not what we're asking for'. 'Too late, buddy,' she said. 'We demand sanctions now.' Some held up signs reading 'Jacinta Allan it's time to start listening: hands off protest rights'. It comes after Ms Allan hit out at 'anti-Semites' and 'extremists' who targeted Jewish philanthropists, the Gandels, at a protest which sent the NGV into lockdown last month. Over the weekend, Ms Allan also condemned a group of about 150 neo-Nazis who marched through the CBD in balaclavas, calling them 'cowards' and 'goons'. 'Our criminal anti-vilification laws come into effect next month. We will introduce powers for police to unmask cowards at protests after that,' she said. 'We're not afraid of these goons — but we won't tolerate them, either.' Ms Allan first announced she would introduce new laws that would fill gaps in federal anti-terror legislation, unmask protesters who wear face coverings and ban the use of glue, rope, chains and locks used for maximum disruption in December last year following the terrorist bombing of Adass Israel Synagogue in Ripponlea.
The Age
3 hours ago
- The Age
Anthony Albanese walks a tricky geopolitical tightrope
To submit a letter to The Age, email letters@ Please include your home address and telephone number below your letter. No attachments. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published. MIDDLE EAST There is no doubt that Prime Minister Anthony Albanese is walking a geopolitical tightrope as he tries to negotiate the competing narratives of this awful conflict between Israel and the Palestinian people (' Former Israeli prime minister rejects Palestinian recognition ', 12/8). On one side is the almost continuous insistence by the Israelis that they have a right to defend themselves (as they do) against the terrorist organisation Hamas. The Israelis also have a right to request, or try to retrieve, the hostages taken in the attack on October 7. On the other side are the rights of the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip, the collateral in this conflict. Had the Israelis stuck to a more surgical operation to dislodge Hamas from Gaza and retrieve the hostages without the need to reduce the Strip to rubble or starve the population, then collective countries might have stuck with them in this aim. However, the ongoing devastation has caused various countries, including Australia, to start the path to recognise a Palestinian State under the prospective leadership of the Palestinian Authority – it is important to note that numerous world leaders have said a precondition is that Hamas is excluded from staying in power. In staring down the criticism from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Trump administration, Albanese has joined a group of countries that have taken a more moral and practical path. Words, however, are not actions. And Australia must now apply more pressure on the Israeli government to come to the table and work towards achieving lasting peace. Jeremy de Korte, Newington Hitched to the wrong leader It's interesting that Sussan Ley believes that Australia is out of step with the US, our major ally, when it comes to recommending the recognition of Palestine statehood. The Dutton Coalition lost the last election in part because it hitched its wagon to Trump. Yet Ley continues to fail to read the room by offering a policy out of step with the rest of the world. Kurt Elder, Port Melbourne Fluid borders Michaelia Cash states that because Palestine does not have defined borders it cannot be recognised. You could argue that Israel's borders are ill-defined because they keep taking more and more land from Palestine. The same could be said of other countries such as Russia or Ukraine. Trump wants his borders to grow as well – Greenland anyone? Are we meant to block them all? Alan Inchley, Frankston A way to peace Palestine Action Group organiser Amal Naser is critical of the Australian government for offering us 'recognition ... as though that is what we have been demanding' (' Recognising Palestine is a distraction ... ' 12/8). Instead of a Palestinian state, she advocates punishing Israel. This points to the problem underlying the conflict. Since 1948, the Palestinian leadership has repeatedly put the destruction of Israel ahead of the wellbeing of its people. Since 1948, they have launched multiple attacks on Israel and rejected a number of proposals for a Palestinian state, most notably in 2000 when Israel PM Ehud Barak offered Yasser Arafat more than ever, including control of East Jerusalem and a corridor connecting the West Bank and Gaza. The suffering in Gaza would have ended years ago, if numerous Israeli peace and statehood offerings had been accepted. Former Israeli PM Golda Meir was right in the 1970s when she said 'peace will come when the Arabs love their children more than they hate us'. Henry Kalus, Southbank Path to peace Congratulations to the Labor government on its decision to recognise the state of Palestine; however, it should have been recognised at the same time as Israel. Now, Israel must withdraw from Palestinian and Syrian territory and then the Arab nations need to acknowledge the state of Israel. Only then will peace occur in the Middle East. Geoff McDonald, Newtown Further recognition Recognition of statehood for Palestine in the absence of a viable and representative government? Well, the Gazan people certainly have been suffering recently, but what about the Kurds, the Tibetans and the West Papuans? Is their suffering and denial of nationhood/sovereignty still to remain 'unrecognisable'? Is the key lesson that you really need to make the neighbours suffer a lot before your own national suffering can be recognised with statehood? Compared to Gaza, Taiwan seems to be pretty much a nationality and a country, decently organised and run by a representative government, so if the powers of the world can tolerate a two-state solution in the Middle East, then why can't we have another one in North Asia, with two Chinas or one China and one Taiwan? Garry Dalrymple, Earlwood, NSW
Sydney Morning Herald
3 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Allan flags possible work-from-home carve-out for small businesses
Premier Jacinta Allan has left open the possibility of exempting small businesses and probationary employees from her proposed working-from-home laws as the Victorian government begins consulting business owners and workers on its plans. The government launched an online survey on Tuesday that will run to the end of next month to gauge current practices and attitudes towards working from home. The survey will be followed by a series of formal discussions with business groups, unions and other stakeholders. The proposed laws will be drafted next year in the lead-up to the November 2026 state election. Allan's pledge to give anyone who can work from home a legislated right to do so two days a week has prompted a fierce backlash from employer groups. The Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the Australian Industry Group and members of the premier's business advisory have warned the move will damage productivity, confidence and the state's reputation as a place to do business. The chamber's chief of staff, Chanelle Pearson, said while flexible work arrangements were an essential and accepted part of the state's labour market, the government was yet to explain how working-from-home rights would operate. Loading 'There is no need for this kind of legislation,' she said. 'We don't think it is warranted in Victoria. The onus is on the state government to tell the business community how this is going to work.' The Victorian opposition has refused to join the criticism, with Liberal upper house leader David Davis on Tuesday acknowledging 'pretty clear' productivity benefits associated with work-from-home arrangements. Allan said her government's consultations would focus on the size of companies the laws would apply to and how working from home would be defined. When asked whether small businesses would be exempt, she said this would be a question canvassed during consultations.
