From: David Allen 29 October, 2016, Mathematician, IT-Security Expert and Inventor of Things
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
From: David Allen 29 October, 2016, Mathematician, IT-Security Expert and Inventor of Things To: Committee Secretary, Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters PO Box 6021, Parliament House, Canberra ACT 2600 Dear JSP, Thank you for inviting me to comment on this election which was run in pretty much the same way that has been used for several recent elections. The multi-trillion dollar size of our External Debt and Total Debt necessitate a detailed analysis of this election. Yours Sincerely David Allen Independent for Wentworth. A. Introduction Terms of Reference 1. All aspects of the 2016 Federal election and matters related thereto, and without limiting the scope of the committee's inquiry, with particular reference to: (a) The application of provisions requiring authorisation of electoral material to all forms of communication to voters; Response: Allen stood as an independent candidate for Wentworth, focusing on potential improvements to the Australian Constitution. The AEC did an excellent job in Wentworth, NSW and probably throughout Australia, although international lobbyists and IT-lobbyists complained that it took too long to count the votes. (b) The potential applicability of ‘truth in advertising' provisions to communication to voters including third-party carriage services; Response: It was difficult to discern very much ‘truth in advertising’ during this election and this mirrors the type of advertising that Australians have grown used to in recent decades. It appears that important sections of Justice Gleeson’s Rule of Law may have been negated and that numerous sections of the Australian Constitution may have been violated. It appears that ‘democratic’ elections are run by international advisers who may never have read the constitutions of the country they happen to be in for a particular election. This may at least partially explain why there appeared to be so many deviations from the Australian Constitution in this and in previous elections. The bulk of this document is devoted to evaluating various policies and outcomes against the standards set by the Australian and State Constitutions. Much of the information about issues such as the Economy (which is not the GDP), IT-Security, Energy Prices and same sex marriage appear to be at least partially incorrect. A sudden South Australian electricity price surge in July and the ensuing state wide blackout a few weeks later illustrate this point. Secondly the amount of internet traffic on Census night was almost certainly not sufficient to crash the system. IT-systems are now intrinsically unreliable as web-pages and email-addresses pop into and out of existence spontaneously and reports from newspapers may be blocked ‘for our security’. (c) The options available to Parliament to ensure consistent application of disclosure rules to and the regulation of all entities undertaking campaign activities; Response: Tools and techniques that are available to international fraudsters have become quite sophisticated in recent ‘transparent’ decades. As an example, Allen had destroyed the scientific case for a Thorium nuclear reactor during the 2007 Federal Election. Not to be deterred, the sponsors again put Thorium onto the agenda for the 2013 Federal election and he again destroyed it. While Thorium was mostly but not completely missing-in-action for the 2016 Federal election, other old chestnuts were recycled in the most ‘transparent’ manner. The bulk of this document is devoted to evaluating various policies and outcomes against the standards set by the Australian and State Constitutions and by Gleeson’s Rule of Law. and, (d) The potential application of new technology to voting, scrutiny and counting, with particular reference to its application to remote voting, ADF personnel on deployment and supporting vision-impaired voters. Response: Allen is a technology ‘expert’ from way back and has achieved numerous professional successes both at home and abroad in this area. Some voters had access to electronic voting in this election and the world did not come to an end. However recent outages by the Australian Bureau of Statistics and the Australian Stock Exchange show just how vulnerable Australian Information-technology is and he addresses this issue in the body of the document. If votes online are collected, counting them would be a breeze and scrutinizing them would be impossible as the computer-system itself is the only reference point. It is possible to devise a better online voting system but ‘experts’ may perhaps have advised us that this is not necessary and a secure system will never be implemented. 2. The extent of donations and contributions from foreign sources, persons, entities and foreign-owned subsidiaries to political parties, associated entities and other third parties and entities undertaking campaign activities, and the options available to Parliament to regulate these. Response: So much ‘hot’ money flows into Australia that it is impossible for either Parliament or the AFP to determine its destination and time-of-residence in Australia. In a sense, it does not matter who is elected as overseas-experts rather than Parliamentarians may determine the way in which Australian electioneering money is spent. Media reports may indicate that ‘hot’ money flows into organizations such as real-estate agents who may exert considerable influence in determining both pre-selection for and elected to LGA, State and Federal Parliaments. Some political advisers attempted to make State donations available to their Federal party during the 2016 election. This is one of the many areas that have received positive post-election suggestions for improvement, although such suggestions are notoriously difficult to implement. 3. The current donations, contributions, expenditure and disclosure regime, its application and timeliness and alternative approaches available to Parliament. Response: Donations come in different guises and providing ‘expert advice’ appears to be one of the more successful strategies. Any reasonably intelligent person associated with Australian Business or Government may promote themselves to the status of ‘expert’ after careful grooming by an international person with a reputation and a vested-interest in areas such as Computer Security, Energy Usage and Privatization, Finance, Fiscal Matters, Monetary Matters, Cloud Computing, Information Technology, Defense and a whole raft of other matters such as Water management and Agriculture. Confucius and Aristotle would not have been the first writers to describe how flattery can be successfully employed to seduce Business and Government officials with a lot of money at their disposal. Most people employed by or elected to Government would consider themselves to be IT-Security-experts, although all lack the years of detailed technical experience that are necessary to produce such complex skills. 4. The extent to which fundraising and expenditure by third parties is conducted in concert with registered political parties and the applicability and utilisation of tax deductibility by entities involved in campaign activities. Response: It is very difficult for a political party to know which third parties are acting on their behalf, especially when they donate funds to both parties. This technique may have been successful in aligning the ‘economic’ policies of the parties as they focus on emotive issues rather than on debt. Emotive issues include heated debates on Gender, Climate, Crime and Gambling as most Australians have an opinion about the weather, gender, redsunder- thebeds and terrorists. There was no need to worry Australians about the state of the economy, although the Budget-deficit was mentioned and this deficit is still growing in 2016. A disproportionate amount of time and money were spent on trying to get voters to accept an unConstitutional approach to same sex marriage and much of the material that was presented did not appear to be factually correct. Australians do not much care for the massive amount legislation that is inflicted upon them and almost all such legislation would not be accepted in a Referendum. It is almost two decades since Australians last supported a topic in a national Referendum and politicians avoid them like the plague. This document focuses on aspects of this election that may perhaps be unconstitutional, with same sex marriage perhaps being only one example. 5. Any matters related to the terms outlined above. Allen is writing to indicate that he believes the 2016 Federal Election is being conducted in a way that benefits neither the people of Australia nor the National Economy. Debt is the key issue that will affect succeeding generations. In the past 2 decades we have exported an enormous amount of irreplaceable minerals, generating extra debt that is twice the value of the exported materials. Australia never ever needed a GST from Keating, Hewson and Howard as our economy was strong. Since then, our economic standing has plummeted, showing that the GST does not work for Australia and for other countries. Making no effort to evaluate the GST’s effect, Australia implemented a convoluted scheme to raise GST percentages this election, showing yet again that we have a dysfunctional system of government. A recent ABC survey shows that about 42% of Australians believe we have an effective system of democracy. Allen also stood as Independent for Wentworth to highlight some of his unpaid successes for Australia, proposing a new way forward. This new way relies on the Magna Carta’s principles to limit both the power of Federal Government and the ability of Government to raise T-axes during times of peace. The new form of Government would rotate in a way that is similar to the European way. The PM has provided some support for two aspects of this plan and some Premiers were supportive of parts of it when it was discussed in COAG on the first of April 2016. T-axes rise during each election and this is followed by increased levels of spend and Debt, Debt, Debt. While Australia’s economy compares favourably with the economy of some countries that have practically no resources, we are a basket case when compared to countries that manage their resources prudently.