An undercover cop “chased himself round the streets” for 20 minutes in a town in southern England after a surveillance camera operator wrongly identified him as a suspect.

The junior officer was patrolling the area by foot, after a rash of burglaries, when a CCTV operator radioed him, warning of a man “acting suspiciously” in the vicinity, according to the latest issue of the Police Federation’s Police magazine.

Monitoring the “suspect,” the operator then directed the cop to the man’s location. The officer – not realising that he was the “suspicious” character – began searching for his shadowy suspect.
The fruitless pursuit ended 20 minutes later when a sergeant entered the CCTV control room and pointed out that the cop and the suspect were the same person.

“Every time the man darted in to another side alleyway, the PC [police constable] was turning immediately into the same alleyway, but every time the CCTV operator asked what he could see there was no trace,” an officer, who was not named, told Police magazine.

“With the sergeant’s sides aching from laughter he pointed out to the PC that the operator had been watching him unaware that he was a plainclothes officer – thus the PC had been chasing himself round the streets.”

None of the parties involved in the incident were identified. A Sussex Police spokesman told the (London) Daily Telegraph “without the date or location, confirming the details and locating the officer is harder for us than it was for the CCTV operator.”

With flights delayed and cancelled due to the ferocity of the storm which saw hailstones the size of cricket balls damage property, numerous sailors were early this morning still finding their way to Sydney.  But by midday all the missing sailors were accounted for and on their way out to the start of the 628-nautical mile race south.  Food had been found to feed them during the race south along with thermal clothing, wet-weather gear and bits of equipment for the yachts.  The sailing community had rallied to render assistance with the crews affected including Living Doll, Scarlett Runner, Calm and Chutzpah.

At the height of the wild weather international and domestic flights were diverted to Sydney and many other flights grounded in Melbourne as airlines waited for the storm to vent its fury.  A stormy first night at sea is on the cards for the 88-strong fleet contesting the 67th Rolex Sydney to Hobart.

Source: Malcolm Farr, National Political Editor
From: news.com.au
August 31, 2011 5:16PM

The High Court has vetoed the Malaysian asylum seeker swap in a ruling that has smashed the Government’s entire strategy to halt people smugglers. It also could spell the end of its plans to set up any off-shore processing of refugee applications. The Full Bench, in an expedited judgment, found by six to one that Malaysia was not bound to look after the human rights of the 400 asylum seekers now under Australian care. It found Immigration Minister Chris Bowen could not declare Malaysia to be a country where people could be sent to be processed as refugees. The court ruled that no country could receive asylum seekers from Australia unless it was legally bound by international law or its own domestic law to provide access for asylum seekers to protection pending processing of their applications for refugee status.

Malaysia is not a signatory of the United Nations conventions on refugees.

“Today the High Court held invalid the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship’s declaration of Malaysia as a country to which asylum seekers who entered Australia at Christmas Island can be taken for processing of their asylum claims,” said a statement from the court.

“After an expedited hearing before the Full Bench, the court by majority made permanent the injunctions that had been granted earlier and restrained the minister from taking to Malaysia two asylum seekers who arrived at Christmas Island, as part of a larger group, less than four weeks ago.”

The matter came before the nation’s superior court after an application made on behalf of a 16-year-old boy and a 24-year-old Afghan man who, their lawyer said, were petrified with fear about being sent to Malaysia. The High Court spent a day-and-a-half considering the issue before reserving its ruling until today. One issue raised by the legal team for the detainees on Christmas Island was the ability of Australia to guarantee the human rights of the 800 asylum seekers sent to Malaysia. Commonwealth Solicitor-General Steven Gagler told the court the agreement and declaration of Malaysia as a suitable destination was legal and met the obligations Australia has under the UN refugee convention. Liberal immigration spokesman Scott Morrison said before the ruling was handed down that a victory for the Government would not mean endorsement of the merits of the swap deal.

“If the Government is successful today in the High Court then that would basically just be an acknowledgment by the court that the minister has the power to make this decision,” Mr Morrison told ABC Radio.

“It won’t be any reflection of whether it’s a good policy or a bad policy or whether it’s a policy that provides protection to refugees. It will simply be a decision by the court about the minister’s powers under the act.”

Mr Morrison later called the ruling “a devastating blow for a grossly incompetent government’’.

“This is part of a continuing pattern of failure from a Government that just can’t get anything right,’’ Mr Morrison said.

Legal experts said the Government’s only option might be to change legislation, but it would be unlikely to get the backing of the Greens and Liberals to pass legal changes.

“It’s difficult to see how this situation could be rectified,’’ ANU law professor Penny Matthews told SkyNews.

“Malaysia would have to become party to relevant treaties in an awful hurry and they are not necessarily going to do that.

“So I think this means it’s the end of the Malaysian swap.’’

Prof Matthews said the Government might be able to continue with plans to set up a processing centre on Papua-New Guinea’s Manus Island if it can overcome the country’s approach to human rights.

“With Papua-New Guinea it is a party to the refugee convention although it does have significant reservations,’’ she said.

“When countries become party to a treaty they can say there are certain provisions they will not abide by.

“So Papua-New Guinea for example has significant reservations about the right to liberty in the refugee convention.’’

The Opposition denies the decision would also undermine its chief option of re-opening the detention centre in Nauru. The court was specific about that in their commentary in the judgement, and Nauru is set to sign the convention, Mr Morrison told news.com.au. Immigration Minister Chris Bowen this afternoon said people smugglers will capitalise on the court decision.

He said the High Court had applied “a new test to how protection should be demonstrated”.

“Clearly, that is something that had not been understood before,” he said, defending the Government’s legal advice. Mr Bowen declined to rule out sending people to Nauru but said urgent legal advice was needed with regard to other off-shore processing proposals. He added it “is a significant blow” to the Government’s efforts to stop people smugglers, who had been in retreat since the Malaysian plan was announced on May 7.

“You can expect people smugglers to be capitalising on this arrangement, and to say, You can come to Australia now because the Malaysia agreement has been ruled invalid by the High Court,” the minister told reporters. He said Cabinet would consider the fate of the 330 boat people who were to have been sent to Malaysia. Australia will take all the 4000 processed refugees to come from Malaysia, but might reduce the overall humanitarian intake to fit them in.

“I have a responsibility to see this job through,” said Mr Bowen.

“It’s a difficult job. It’s perhaps, it would be fair to say, the hardest job I’ve ever done.

“But it’s not a job I intend to run away from.”

Monday, 01 August 2011 12:10
Source: Madeleine Heffernan, Smart Company

The sharemarket has gathered strength after US politicians finally reached an agreement to increase the country’s debt ceiling, in return for $US2.5 trillion in spending cuts over the next decade, quashing fears of a default or a downgrade in its credit rating.
US President Barack Obama this morning said Republicans and Democrats had agreed $US1 trillion in spending cuts through to 2011, but expressed dissatisfaction with the outcome.

A further $US1.5 trillion in savings will need to be found by a special congressional committee by the year’s end.

Taxes will also remain on hold under the terms of the deal.

“Is this the deal I would have preferred? No,” Obama said.

The announcement pushed Australian shares higher, having neared an 11-month low last week as the August 2 debt default deadline loomed.

The S&P/ASX200 index was 1.8% higher at 4506.4 and the All Ordinaries index was 1.75% higher to 4579.3.

The Australian dollar lost some steam after reaching a record high last week as the August 2 debt default deadline loomed. At 11.30, one Australian dollar was buying $1.10 US cents.

Housing Industry Association chief economist Harley Dale welcomed the news, but says he is cautious until a deal is done and dusted.

“Personally I think something will be done, but in terms of the how the debacle is impacting on confidence and sentiment, I’d argue that will remain until we see the details.”

Dale says the prospect of an American default was one of many issues weighing on consumer sentiment, along with the carbon tax, where interest rates are going and debt problems in Europe.

“It’s certainly had a lot of coverage, and the longer the deliberations went on, the larger the impact on American citizens’ sentiment on their own politicians.”

Obama said there were still some “very important votes to be taken by members of Congress.”

“But I want to announce that the leaders of both parties in both chambers have reached an agreement that will reduce the deficit and avoid default – a default that would have had a devastating effect on our economy.”

“I want to urge members of both parties to do the right thing and support this deal with your votes over the next few days.”

Source: Stuart Washington, Sydney Morning Hearld July 25, 2011

When Shawn Richard sought character references as he faced a lengthy jail sentence, there were a few people from his past he felt he could ask.

Even the mention of Richard’s name would be bad news to investors in the Albury-based fund manager Trio Capital.

Investors had more than $400 million in funds frozen in December 2009 when Australia’s largest superannuation theft was first uncovered.

Advertisement: Story continues below So investors would not be among those likely to give the most glowing assessments of the Canadian-born investment manager.

Richard, 36, faced a sentencing hearing on Friday for his part in the disappearance of $180 million from two investment funds managed by Trio Capital: Astarra Strategic and ARP Growth.

The court heard how Richard, now remanded in custody, had received $1.3 million in personal payments for his part in the thefts.

His company, Astarra Asset Management, had received further millions to keep sucking in investors’ dollars.

Instead of investors, Richard turned to some old mates, some professional contacts and some financial planners for some kind words. Including his dentist.

Among those setting pen to paper were Peter Wood, Richard’s old flatmate in Manly and the one-time Trio Capital marketing manager.

Wood didn’t reminisce about some rather wild-looking parties he and Richard enjoyed, but spoke to the qualities of Richard he had observed.

Then there was a financial planner from the Wollongong financial planning business Dominion, Colin Warne, who was prepared to go on the record about Richard’s strenuous help since the fraud had been uncovered.

”I wish to confirm that Mr Richard has already assisted our clients, providing critical evidence which has assisted the process in recovering some investments,” Warne wrote.

This is the same Warne who was found by the NSW Supreme Court in 2004 to have breached the Corporations Act by operating an unregistered managed investment scheme.

The failed investment scheme involved raising $4.6 million to buy the Queen Victoria Hospital in the Blue Mountains and turn it into a retirement home.

The case resulted in Warne receiving a lifetime ban from managing an investment scheme.

Sadly for investors in Trio Capital, the ban did not stop Warne from operating as a financial planner.

So Warne met Richard through Trio Capital and promptly placed large amounts of investors’ money into Astarra Strategic.

Another who put pen to paper for Richard was a second Wollongong financial planner, Ronald Caines.

Caines was eloquent about the help Richard had given him.

”He has shown honesty and integrity and his ongoing compassion and financial assistance during an extremely difficult time for our family will forever be appreciated,” Caines wrote.

Caines said Richard ”continued to provide loan funds” and credited Richard with ”standing by and helping your mates during difficult times”. Stirring stuff. However, it is worth remembering some facts about the Trio Capital ”loan funds” – more than $500,000 – that Richard forwarded so generously to Caines.

Back in 2008, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission grilled Richard about the loans to Caines under its section 19 powers to compulsorily interview people.

ASIC went on to ban Caines from the financial planning industry for life, after he advised people to invest in Trio Capital without disclosing the loans.

In March, the Administrative Appeals Tribunal overturned the life ban, and replaced it with a three-year ban.

Showing that the gods of financial services have a wry sense of humour, Caines can start work as a financial planner again on August 12 – the same day Richard is due to be sentenced to jail.

Another referee sought out by Richard was Graham Kinder. Kinder made a brief appearance in the Trio saga last year when he became a director of financial planner Wright Global Investments, alongside Wood.

ASIC has told the Supreme Court that Wright Global Investments was one of the vehicles that was owned and controlled by the supposed mastermind of the Trio Capital fraud, the Hong Kong businessman Jack Flader. (There is no evidence Flader controlled the company at the time of Wood’s and Kinder’s involvement.)

Another referee was Ron Phipps-Ellis, an employee with auditing firm BCS whose character reference confirmed that the ”company’s employees had money invested in Astarra [Trio] and lost 10 per cent”.

Richard’s defence bundle, tendered in court on Friday, showed the sad truths facing a man destined for jail time.

It disclosed that Richard had sought a recent diagnosis from a neurologist. In a letter, his defence team articulated his symptoms as: ”Double vision, headaches, muscle weakness, neck aches, numbness or tingling, most often on the face, poor co-ordination, sudden unco-ordinated movements and vertigo”.

The diagnosis was inconclusive.

And an assessment by a forensic psychologist, W. John Taylor, spelled out the none-too-happy realities of the prison system that Richard faced.

He wrote: ”Because of threats that have been made against Mr Richard, it is likely that any custodial sentence given to him by the court will need to be served in protective custody. This is far more difficult and restrictive than serving a custodial sentence.”

The Australian Government has been advised by scientists that the world’s climate is changing and that there will be adverse effects on our nation if the trend of rising temperatures continues.

As a hot and dry continent, Australia has more to lose from climate change than all other developed countries. There are significant risks to our environment and our economy.

The clear scientific consensus is that human activity which releases carbon pollution into the atmosphere, mainly the use of fossil fuels, is risking dangerous climate change. This is why the Government has adopted a plan for a clean energy future for Australia.

The plan will cut pollution and drive investment helping to ensure Australia’s prosperity in the low pollution world of the future.

We will do this by introducing a carbon price into Australia’s economy. This will put a price tag on every tonne of carbon pollution released into the atmosphere by the country’s biggest polluters – around 500 businesses will be required to pay for their pollution under the carbon pricing mechanism.

The carbon price will create a financial incentive to reduce carbon pollution that will flow through our economy.

Households will be looked after with tax cuts, higher family payments and increases in pensions and benefits, to meet the costs passed through by some businesses.

The carbon price will change Australia’s electricity generation by encouraging investment in renewable energy like wind and solar power and the use of cleaner fuels like natural gas.

Treasury modelling shows the economy will continue to grow strongly with a carbon price. Extensive analysis by economists and independent institutions such as the Productivity Commission has demonstrated that market mechanisms like a carbon price or an emissions trading system are the cheapest ways of reducing pollution.

The Government is committed to supporting jobs as the economy is transformed. That is why we will support jobs throughout manufacturing, including in the steel and food processing industries, and in coal mining.

Australia has boundless renewable energy resources. We need to do more to take advantage of these resources.

The Government’s Renewable Energy Target, combined with the carbon price, will deliver around $20 billion of investment in renewable energy by 2020 in today’s dollars. It will mean that the equivalent of 20 per cent of Australia’s electricity will come from renewable sources by 2020.

Q: Why is the government introducing a carbon tax?
A: It says this is to put a price tag on pollution. At the moment business and industry can pollute for free. The Government says the amount of pollution needs to be cut, because it is contributing to climate change.

Q: When would the carbon tax start?
A: July 1, 2012.

Q: How much is the carbon tax?
A: It starts at $23 a tonne of carbon dioxide pollution.

Q: Will the tax go up?
A: Yes. It is designed to increase 2.5 per cent every year, for the next three years. It will rise to $24.15 on July 1, 2013 and then to $25.40 on July 1, 2014.

Q: Will the tax last forever?
A: Not in this form. From July 1, 2015, it will convert into an emissions trading scheme.

Q: What’s the difference?
A: A carbon tax is a fixed price scheme where about 500 companies that emit the most greenhouse gases are charged the tax – excluding businesses in the agriculture sector and in most of the transport sector. Under this scheme there is no limit on the amount of pollution. An emissions trading scheme is where the government sets a cap on the total amount of pollution that can be released each year. Businesses compete for permits and can trade permits, within that cap. The price can vary but the amount of pollution is fixed. Each year the Government could lower the cap – meaning Australia’s emisisons will fall.

Q: Who pays the carbon tax?
A: The government says only the 500 companies with the biggest carbon pollution emissions will pay. That’s companies such as Macquarie Generation Australia and Bluescope Steel.

Q: How much money will that raise?
A: About $24.5 billion over three years.

Q: Where does that money go?
A: About $15.3 billion will be given back to workers as tax cuts, household energy efficiency measures and welfare payments. The rest of the money will be used to support jobs and help industry transition, and on other green programs.

Q: When will I get my tax cut or pension rise?
A: Changes to the tax system begin on July 1, 2012. Payments to pensioners, people with family payments, or welfare recipients – called clean energy supplements – will be provided between May and June, 2012.

Q: Do I pay carbon tax at the supermarket check out?
A: Not directly. Unlike the GST which appears on the shopping docket and is paid by consumers, the carbon tax is paid only by the top 500 companies with the biggest carbon pollution emissions. But those big companies will pass the cost of the tax onto their customers.

Q: Will that cause a blow out in the cost of living?
A: Treasury estimates prices across the whole economy will only rise by 0.7 per cent, much less than under the GST. On average, households will pay $9.90 a week more.

Q: Won’t it make electricity more expensive?
A: Yes. Average household power bill go up by 10 per cent in 2012-13 and gas will go up 9 per cent. That will increase further in future years. But the government says nine out of 10 households will get compensation to soften the blow and 4 million people will actually be better off.

Q: If people are better off, what’s the point?
A: That’s what many critics say. The Government insists it doesn’t want to hurt low-income people and families but is trying to encourage big business to use more renewable and low-emission energy alternatives to the cheaper and dirtier energy sources such as coal. It says if households switch to green energy alternatives they can pocket the savings.

Q: Will this kill the coal industry?
A: Again, that what many critics fear, but the one thing the Greens and the coal industry seem to agree on is that the coal industry will continue to grow in the next decade. Coal miners say the carbon tax will restrict that growth, but the government has a $1.3 billion package to transition the coal industry to a ‘cleaner’ future.

Q: Will it cost more to drive to work?
A: Petrol is not included in the scheme. But domestic airfares will go up because domestic aviation fuel excise will be included.

Q: How much pollution will be cut by the carbon tax.
A: About 159 million tonnes of pollution will be cut from our atmosphere by 2020 – the equivalent of getting 45 million cars off the road.

Q: What effect will that have on stopping the predicted rise in temperatures?
A: With international action, this could help limit temperature increases at less than 2C above pre-industrial levels.

Q: Will Australia doing this make a difference?
A: The Government says Australia has the highest emissions per capita, even though it only represents 1.5 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. It says Australia has much to lose from global warming so it should start to cut emissions early.

If you would like formal legal advice in relation to the operation of the Carbon Tax please do not hesitate to contact us.

If you’re wealthy, an investor, an executive or operate in the cash economy, the taxman is watching you.

Using its vast data-matching abilities, the Australian Taxation Office is becoming increasingly sophisticated in targeting taxpayers, particularly those who are using non-lodgement or partial lodgement to circumvent their responsibilities.

And for the well-off, the Tax Office’s second commissioner (compliance), Bruce Quigley, says it is building a profile of the lifestyles of the rich, to see if it matches what is declared in their income tax returns. The Tax Office will conduct about 380 reviews of people worth more than $30 million for the 2011-12 financial year, resulting in 60 full tax audits for the ”highly wealthy”.
Advertisement: Story continues below

At the other end of the spectrum, the Tax Office’s data-matching technology will target dole cheats by cross-checking on a daily basis people with outstanding debts.

Mr Quigley told the Herald that these sophisticated systems can automatically cross-check millions of pieces of data to identify omissions or errors in what taxpayers have reported.

This includes data on employment, welfare and investment income, health insurance coverage, property and share ownership and disposal, employee share scheme information, significant cash transactions and other indicators of wealth, such as luxury cars, flash boats, big houses, trust and unit trust distributions.

The data is used to help the Tax Office identify taxpayers whose expenditure is more than their reported income, as well as businesses that are potentially skimming some or all of their cash takings.

In the past year it matched more than 500 million transactions received from third parties with information in tax returns.

Over the past four years, the Tax Office has reviewed the affairs of a high-risk group of more than 2000 highly paid people. During that time it corrected 60 per cent of tax returns. This year the focus will be on medical practices and football codes. It expects to raise more than $800 million in liabilities by the end of 2010-11.

The Tax Office will be cracking down on coffee shops, earth-mover operators, flight attendants, plasterers, real estate agents, churches, carpenters and joiners.

Mr Quigley said the Tax Office had identified cafes as a key area for possible ”evasion” of taxes. For those under suspicion, the search can be forensic: ”We look at till tapes, employee records, third-party data, credit transactions and EFTPOS transactions.”

It will pay particular attention to deductions for work-related expenses this year. ”We are concerned the difficult times may tempt more people to inflate their claims,” Mr Quigley said.

Deductions for work-related expenses have increased by about 16 per cent since 2007 and are one of the largest categories of claims made in tax returns.

Advisory letters are being sent to help people understand their tax obligations. This year the Tax Office will look at the tax expense claims made by real estate agents, carpenters and joiners and flight attendants.

But the Tax Office expects to get most bang for its buck targeting big business and cranking up the controversial Project Wickenby after collecting more than $1 billion from secret tax havens, tax fraud and money laundering since its introduction in 2006.

During its five years of operation, Project Wickenby has raised another $832 million from a sudden burst of voluntary offshore disclosures, and results from Australia’s financial intelligence unit, AUSTRAC, show a considerable decline in annual flows to havens, according to the Tax Office’s latest compliance program.

Government funding of the project dries up in 2013 and there has been much debate about how successful the nation’s most expensive tax probe has been. Music entrepreneur Glenn Wheatley was the first tax offender convicted under Project Wickenby in 2007.

Clayton Utz partner Niv Tadmore said there was no question there was more Tax Office pressure on large businesses. ”This is driven by sophisticated data acquisition, mining and mapping systems, and earlier, proactive and more demanding [Tax Office] scrutiny.”

“A SACKED executive at a firm that promotes its superior record in the employment of women in senior ranks has mounted a $9 million unlawful dismissal case over claims of bullying and discrimination.

Sally Berkeley, who ran Pacific Brands’ bra division Berlei before becoming the head of women’s underwear last year, alleges she was bullied by the underwear general manager, Ross Taylor, and that her redundancy in December was a sham.

Ms Berkeley is represented by the law firm Harmers Workplace, which made headlines last year when it ran a $37 million sexual harassment claim brought by a David Jones publicist, Kirsty Fraser-Kirk, against the retailer and its former chief executive Mark McInnes.

A Pacific Brands spokesman said the company was ”disappointed at baseless allegations” in Ms Berkeley’s claim and would ”vigorously defend” itself.

The spokesman for the company, one of only a handful of ASX 200 companies to have a majority of women on its board, said it was recognised as the ”leading company for the employment of women and for valuing and fostering the inclusiveness of its workforce”.

He said Ms Berkeley’s claims of bullying ”were fully investigated by the company” before she was sacked and found ”not to have any substance”.

In her application to the Federal Court, Ms Berkeley alleges she ”experienced and was subjected to bullying and unacceptable behaviour” from Mr Taylor from 2006 to 2007, including twice ”being verbally abused” for being late to a meeting.

From 2008 her work meant she had less contact with Mr Taylor.

But she alleges she again clashed with him last year, when they were working closely together as the company restructured the division.

Pacific Brands made Ms Berkeley redundant in early December and sacked her just before Christmas, alleging she had copied confidential documents from her laptop.

Ms Berkeley denies deliberately taking any confidential documents and alleges she was sacked for requesting a pay rise when she was promoted and for ”standing up to the bullying conduct of Mr Taylor”.

Ms Berkeley says that since being sacked she has needed medical treatment for stress and suffered panic attacks.

She has been told by recruitment consultants that she will be out of work for about 12 months ”and it will be extremely difficult for her to find a suitable position at the same level”.

Ms Berkeley is seeking $8.95 million, including more than $8.3 million for ”anticipated future economic loss” and $500,000 for ”dislocation of life, pain and suffering, stress, humiliation and loss of professional reputation”.

The case has been set down for a directions hearing in Melbourne on July 22.

Author: Ben Butley
Source: Sydney Mornining Hearald, 20 June 2011″