Toxic Latham pushes welfare eugenics

God save me, via Herald Sun:

One Nation’s Mark Latham has attempted to explain how his DNA testing of people who claim Aboriginal ancestry would work.

The One Nation NSW party leader appeared on Today this morning, telling host Deborah Knight “a single dollar of wasted welfare money is a problem”.

The state party leader said his idea would stop “welfare rorters” and stop “self-identification”, claiming the idea was already working well in the US with Native Americans.

“What I’m saying is if the technology exists for the DNA ancestry testing, let’s use it,” Mr Latham told the breakfast show.

“Let’s find out the heritage of the people applying for indigenous programs and obviously if they have got very little or have got none, they are trying to rort the system, that’s no good.

“We should be respecting genuine indigenous identity and getting the money to the people in need who have got the genuine Aboriginal background.”

With the immigration war on workers in full roar, this garbage is what Mark Latham settles on to run his NSW tilt.

You bloody idiot.

Comments

      • You guys need to spend some time in Townsville. This will play extremely well.

        To be clear: this is a disgusting policy but Townsville is the most marginal seat in the country and he just stole it with this policy

      • “To be clear: this is a disgusting policy but Townsville is the most marginal seat in the country and he just stole it with this policy”

        Isn’t Townsville in the wrong state?

      • Someone should probably explain to Mr Latham where the voters in the ‘NSW State Election’ typically reside.

      • Townsville is a metaphor but look past your nose and you will see, as he does, that the NSW campaign is one big media opportunity to warm people up for ON’s Federal run. He may be an idiot but he knows how to politik.

      • Wino ShinyfaceMEMBER

        yep, he’s going after Australians when half of western Sydney’s recently arrived are scamming the system, he may as well have done another UFC hand shake

    • Ronin8317MEMBER

      The problem is Mark Latham is running in NSW, not in QLD. The attack on ‘white’ Aborigines being welfare cheat doesn’t resonate in Sydney to the same degree as Townsville. Instead, he should be talking about crushing loading of trains and hospitals.

      • He has. No one is interested in reporting that.

        This is one of a dozen things Latham’s talking about. It’s obvious why MSM are running with this one, while not touching the others.

    • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

      Fk me dead!
      He’s over played his opposition to Identity politics and culture war card on this one, what a stupid “issue” to come out swinging on.
      The kind of people who agree with Him with on this idiocy were gunna vote for ON anyway.
      Ive been able to overlook a lot of his foot in mouth schtick due to wanting to see a genuine push back against Mass immigration and feral out of control Identity Politics and Political correctness, but Fk me dead Mark this just has you looking like a Stupid Cnt who will say anything to “win over the Bogans”,…Who is advising you!?

      • rentsailorMEMBER

        100%

        Wasted opportunity to platform on crushloading and migration.

        Could have had a platform – Importing migrants
        ( low/no skill, old and unhealthy) takes away dollars from indigenous services. Simple and clear. And.. the left can’t use the Rayciss card on that.

        But no. DNA testing. W t f

      • bolstroodMEMBER

        Dunno,
        he is standing in the upper house, so he can get votes from all over NSW
        This will play well in the regions, there is a lot of resentment based on illconceived ideas of Koori entitlement.
        Read further down the thread to see what I’m talking about.

    • SupernovaMEMBER

      Agree that there is more “legal-rorting” in this countries tax system that needs an overhaul than there are people trying to cheat Centrelink, irrespective of whether your Aboriginal. The minister of Indigenous Health, Ken Wyatt AO, himself of aboriginal origin (IMHO,a shining beacon) is also concerned about this issue and informed ABC’s Q&A that currently Australia spends $33.3 BILLION per year on Aboriginal support. I also have a friend working in Centrelink servicing very remote communities (of various skin colouring) in the Northern Territory between Pine Gap and Alice Spings (yes very remote), she is the only white person for hundreds of kilometers. She believes the main problem is isolation, drugs, alcohol, pornography…. but also dependence on government support. However whilst DNA testing may be an option, I believe we need to clean up the “legal-rorting” in our tax system before we begin penalising the most vulnerable people in our country. I do not condone Mark Latham for this suggestion.

      • bolstroodMEMBER

        How much of that $33.3 billion actually reaches the recipents ?
        Some years ago the NT Aborigional housing commission spent $44millon on new housing,
        How many houses were built ?
        None.
        It went on admin

  1. Looks smart to me. I expect One nation will receive an enormous vote in both the NSW and federal elections and take over from the greens as the largest alternative voice.

      • CaptainFeatherSwordsGhost-TheReturn

        As someone that has a family member working at centrelink this is pretty sound policy. Literally anyone can claim payments without even having aboriginal ancestry. You just have to get an aboriginal elder to sign off that your a member of their community and like magic – money rains down from the heavens.

        However sensible – it does seem to be a dumb idea to hang your policy differentiation hat on given it was always going to upset inner city latte sipping, toss pot virtue signallers

      • CaptainFeatherSword spot on. Wife survived 15 years at DHS. This rort is through the roof, up there with the Childcare centre rorting in the Lebo community. Something needs to be done, this is better than other proposals.

        But of course, it’s all ‘rac!stt’ to point this out to the fake left tribalists on this forum fetishizing over their pet minorities again.

      • Lost my vote. This is absolutely disgusting. I thought we were past denigrating indigenous Australians, if this is where we collectively are as a nation I say eff it I’m out

      • turncoatMEMBER

        Don’t be so sure of yourself. Remember native Americans are very upset by Elizabeth Warren’s claims to be a Cherokee. Latham can spin this as a defense of indigenous rights and heritage against those unfairly seeking to appropriate them in a subtle, but nonetheless neo-colonial, dispossession.

        Moreover it throws a spanner into the “fairness” and “identity” debates where One Nation believes they can successfully carve out a differentiated policy position with wide appeal.

        I stand by my observation that this is smart politics.

    • Not with this sort of rubbish they aren’t. I don’t know what voter group they are targeting but Im sure there are not enough of them to make a meaningful impact on the election.

  2. The only way you could see any merit in this is if you are Ignoring the severe inaccuracies of determining ancestry from a DNA sample and have a severe case of blind racism.

    I am ok with the idea we need to crack down on welfare cheats, but claiming welfare does not make you a cheat. Claiming your of an indigenous descent does not make you a cheat. As a percentage of cheaters they are a small bunch and with the efficiency of our government it would cost more than the entire indigenous welfare budget.

    My Ex told Centrelink we had split up 2 years before we actually did, Claimed full Family tax benefit plus a whole raft of other assistance that she was not legally entitled to and hid it in accounts I had no access to…. When I found out and I told her to stop it or I will report her. We fought and broke up. I have contacted them regarding it and She has still not been looked into.

    I have a friend who is one of the Debt collectors for DSS, She informed me they will get to her it will just take time. They are only up to 2009 at the moment and working their way forward…. They will get to her once She shows up on the list of debtors for that year…

    Why does karma have to take so long?

    • Exactly. This rort is actually going on along with the rest of the centrelink rorting. It’s really bad in Queensland.

      Don’t see how the comparisons to Engels and Godwins law draws parallel here.

      • Oh quit clutching your pearls. He’s still going to get elected and the Greens and Nationals are both finished. We’re going to see a similar situation in NSW Upper House as there was in Vic.

        One policy flaw out of many that are on point. Would still vote for him as much as I don’t like One Nation.

      • I am entitled to clutch pearls any time I like and on this occasion it’s a good idea. Kicking the vulnerable and race baiting is not my bag.

        Latham just lost me for good.

      • so no definition. why don’t we just add in that it is genocide while we’re at it? and racist? and all the things you call out when you argue that names shut down the immigration debate?

      • kannigetMEMBER

        Where are the figures showing welfare rorting across the demographics? I cant find any verifiable figures that indicate the level of rorting in any demographic area let alone indigenous welfare in QLD.

        Putting aside the entire idea that its assessed by a subjective evaluation of “pretty bad”.

        Why do you think it is bad? Did you think we had wiped them all out and that those left must just be faking it?

      • H&H the issue is that there are two tracks for welfare.
        One for Aboriginals and one for everyone else.
        The logical thing would be to join the tracks into one.

        But that’s… yeah…

        So we end up with hairbrained ideas like this to prove qualification.

        It’s functionally similar to “means testing.”

        Means testing = prove you qualify.
        This is same same but different.

      • Philly SlimMEMBER

        Hnh – not testing the DNA of aboriginals but of folks with less than 25% aboriginal ancestry. I don’t see what the fuss is, this is a thought bubble, ON won’t hold power but he is just putting some markers down.

        That said, I agree he should focus on immigration and the per capita recession.

    • Mostly Federal, but in some ways a State issue as well. I have heard anecdotally that Chinese students signing up for TAFE often check the “Indigenous” box by mistake (thus enabling them to attend TAFE for free). Unlike Centrelink, TAFE has no mechanism whatsoever for checking whether someone is really Indigenous. I support the idea that everyone should be able to attend TAFE for free; but, you shouldn’t have to lie about your ethnicity in order to do it.

  3. I don’t see how this is eugenics.

    Asking someone to prove their claim of indigenous status is fraught with danger, and this is probably the best method we have, albeit still not a good solution.

    How about we simply remove all indigenous specific welfare and just treat everyone the same. If people need help, we help them – no special treatment.

      • Didn’t we just have a clean out and a whole comments section policy uproar against terms like this? Not that I care either way but double standards much.

      • HadronCollision

        Remove the reference to Eugenics and these clowns focusing on that word are negated.

        I’m with you HnH, this is utterly f4cked. Lost my vote too.

      • haroldusMEMBER

        This latte sipping snowflake is also reconsidering…..

        Fvck me the one thing he chooses.

      • Wow. I didn’t swear or use any racist language. I didn’t even agree with the policy…
        Completely understand that you’re passionate in the topic, but surely you can refrain from profanities and racist slurs.

      • @stephen
        HnH is just frustrated that mark latham has been mark latham. Not sure why he expected anything else though.

      • Don’t know what you were expecting, now that Mark Latham has teamed up with Pauline? Maybe Clive and Jackie Lambie can join the party too. Awesome foursome.

        It’ll be GREAT!

    • If people need help, we help them

      Right. Voters – regardless of race – need an income and if they have no income due to the 457 visa rort, the voters should be given a UBI.

      Also, keep foreigners out of NSW like Quebec does.

  4. Genuine question – My grandmother is rumoured amongst the family to be part aboriginal. Does this mean I should have been checking the box that I am Aboriginal all my life? Maybe I could have got access to educational scholarships, Abstudy from centrelink, looked upon favouring in the hiring process re diversity and the like. What is the criteria for accessing these sorts of benefits?

    • no, we have welfare dysgenics if anything. welfare in australia as conceptualised is necessarily dysgenic.

      we would have welfare eugenics if only good looking, high iq, non-psychopathological etc people could only get the dole for example.

      how many good looking, high iq, non-psychopathological ppl do u see queued up outside your local centrelink?

  5. a social safety net period is arguably dysgenic, not eugenic. getting rid of the social safety net would have a eugenic effect. eugenics is the maximisation of a particular (favourably percieved) genotype within a population. people who use welfare are less likely to have those favourably perceived genotypes, so eliminating welfare for them would reduce their fitness and capacity to survive/breed, which would have a eugenic effect on society.

      • sin bin because he is right and you have misused the term eugenics and you can’t argue otherwise?

      • He is right, and you can’t ignore genetics unless you have a genetic engineering program in place.

        Genetic difference between humans – specifically for intelligence – is the ultimate taboo.

        The reality is that humans are not equal genetically, and statistically significant differences can be seen between sub-species.

        Europeans (and people from the Northern Latitudes generally) for example went through a harrowing tens of thousands of years of Cold Winters which reduced the population down to a few thousand. It was a population bottleneck – which selected for the smartest and most conscientious – which is why the European gene pool is actually much less diverse than Africa, but also why European achievement is the highest of any human sub-species.

        If we are keeping people functional artificially via Welfare, then the natural feedback mechanism which root out the unproductive are broken.

        The solution is for a flat tax on all living adults – say $20,000 per year – and no other taxes save for those on land (to ensure its correct allocation) and polluting externalities. The burden of the State is then spread equally over the whole population. Those unable to pay can elect to continue with access to Government services, on the proviso that they cannot vote and must make use of long-term contraception. The tax could be reduced for those assessed to be high-IQ who have multiple children.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        It was a population bottleneck – which selected for the smartest and most conscientious […]

        Why would this selection criteria optimise individual reproductive opportunity ?

        The solution is for a flat tax on all living adults – say $20,000 per year – and no other taxes save for those on land (to ensure its correct allocation) and polluting externalities. The burden of the State is then spread equally over the whole population.

        This might be a principle that carried a scrap of philosophical integrity if everyone had (or was artificially reset to) the same starting point at birth.

        Of course, outside of Libertarian Fantasy Land, systemic advantage and disadvantage is rife and what you propose is merely designed to create a class society and entrench a feedback loop of privilege with a circular definition of merit.

        But that’s pretty much the whole point of Libertarianism, so nobody should be surprised.

      • ErmingtonPlumbingMEMBER

        “Those unable to pay can elect to continue with access to Government services, on the proviso that they cannot vote and must make use of long-term contraception.”

        WOW

      • @DrSmithy

        Inequality is increasing because the less well-off, non-European population is broadly expanding around the world.

        Meanwhile Europeans have fewer than two children on average, concentrating wealth.

        The solution to equality is simple. The less well-off should have much fewer children, and the richest should have many, many more. Then the next generation will be the children of the rich and successful, armed with wealth, knowledge, good genes and connections. This is how society has operated for millenia.

        Moving all child benefits into the form of income tax reductions, instead of handouts, is the first reasonable step (for example simply increasing the base tax-free income threshold by $5,000 per year per child under 12, and allowing married couples to submit joint income tax files).

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        Inequality is increasing because the less well-off, non-European population is broadly expanding around the world.

        No it’s not.

        Meanwhile Europeans have fewer than two children on average, concentrating wealth.

        Nothing to do with it, and number of chilren typically correlates to socio-economic status, not race. Wealthy darkies typically don’t have many children, poor whities often have a lot.

        The solution to equality is simple. The less well-off should have much fewer children, and the richest should have many, many more. Then the next generation will be the children of the rich and successful, armed with wealth, knowledge, good genes and connections. This is how society has operated for millenia.

        Society has operated for millennia by the strong taking stuff from the weak.

        Contemporary wealth is built largely on historical wealth (not genetic). Historical wealth is built largely on conquest (again, usually not genetic).

        Moving all child benefits into the form of income tax reductions, instead of handouts, is the first reasonable step (for example simply increasing the base tax-free income threshold by $5,000 per year per child under 12, and allowing married couples to submit joint income tax files).

        Why don’t you just say “cull the poor” ? It would be both more honest, and a hell of a lot quicker. I know historically your type preferred to do this with warfare, but it’s not like anybody bothers keeping up even thin appearances of decency, these days.

        Again, if you bothered to put a bit of consistency into your class-sytem-masquerading-as-eugenics-masquerading-as-fairness ideas, it might at least have a whiff of integrity about it (though remain no less inhumane, oppressive and abhorrent). But like pretty much all examples of Libertarian mental masturbation, it doesn’t take long looking at how the world actually operates to see both the real outcomes and intent.

      • drsmithyMEMBER

        “Those unable to pay can elect to continue with access to Government services, on the proviso that they cannot vote and must make use of long-term contraception.”

        WOW

        You seem surprised, Ermo. This is pretty typical (and, obviously, hypocritical) Libertarian mindset, though typically you need to prod them a bit more before they admit to it. It’s not even that unusual for them to advocate that the police and military should be privately owned.

        This one is just more prepared to wear his beliefs on his sleeve.

        Libertarians pay lip service to “freedom” and “liberty”, but what they really mean is that the powerful should have the freedom and liberty to do pretty much whatever they want and everyone else can GAGF. In their hearts they are fundamentally anti-democratic, and believe society should be hierarchical, heriditary, authoritarian, exploitative and class-based – as nature intended.

        It is particularly hilarious to see one holding up “Northern Europeans” as their gold standard for humanity, when Norther European society is the antithesis of Libertarianism.

  6. kannigetMEMBER

    In the 3 years from 2006 to 2009 ( the only data published by the government I could find ) 6.8 million people year were entitled to some form of welfare, 12,000,000 reviews were conducted over this period resulting in 1,900,000 adjustments to payments ( not fraud but income reviews ) , 100,000 fraud related investigations with only 15,000 being referred to the DPP. Only 9,000 resulted in proceeding to prosecution. Total saved through this process was $380,000,000.

    So basically after reviewing 2/3 of the welfare recipients each year, only 15% were identified as needing review, 0.8% identified potential fraud and 0.12% referred to the DPP and 0.08% resulting in a prosecution.

    So after a fairly extensive review process fraud levels are around 0.1% and not even a barrier reefs worth of savings as a result.

    Hardly sounds like a crisis.

    • so are these same fraud reviews being used on migrant visas as well and would we be supposed to trust the inevitable “theres barely any visa fraud” result they’d inevitably produce yeah?

      • Wellp! – Staggsie me boy – ya’ better get ready to having vibrants competing in your recycling endeavours, matey!

      • kannigetMEMBER

        No Idea what method is used to assess visa fraud but its not DSS doing it so no.

        I was Just looking at published data and assessing it, not evaluating the methods used to evaluate fraud. I do know people working in the DSS Debt collection arena and trust their opinion as they live it on a daily basis, while the figures have changed somewhat over the last 10 years it potentially due to a different set of rules being applied and tightening of rules. The Current Gubmint has been obsessed with chasing the welfare cheats but have not been able to increase the “savings” by much despite spending lots of money paying consultants to identify the fraudsters.

        I prefer to look for Data and question it rather than pull anecdotes out of the air and use that as justification for my viewpoints.

        Also just because One department is obviously not able to find fraud does not mean another isnt.

    • What was the cost of recovering that $380m ? $100m maybe ?? Better that money saved goes to services than rorts.
      Also the deterent effect …… if they didn’t chase the rorts and people know it is looked at, what would they blow out to ?

      And it was love once ……..www.macrobusiness.com.au/2017/03/mark-latham-slams-immigration-fake-news/

      • kannigetMEMBER

        Yeah Sure, Better to spend $100m paying some “consultants” to chase $380m instead of paying them the same to chase tax fraud which by all measures is magnitudes higher.

        The whole deterrent game, I remember my history enough to know that doesn’t work. Putting people into prison hulks in the Thames was such a great deterrent to stop hungry people stealing a loaf of bread. Then when that did not work shipping them to a small island that separates the pacific and Indian oceans was tried and that wasn’t enough either….

        Being Harsh on the punishing of cheats is no deterrent, look at drugs in cycling, or inappropriate behaviour in the NRL. Despite having a lot to lose they still have not managed to deter the cheats and naughty boys from doing their thing. There will always be a small percentage of any population who feel they are entitled to something they are not. Maybe the ones they have caught so far are from that population and would not have been deterred no matter what.

        I know when I confronted my Ex about the fraud She was committing She told me its OK because She needed the money and that it would be my fault if she went to jail for it.

    • So after a fairly extensive review process fraud levels are around 0.1% and not even a barrier reefs worth of savings as a result.

      Conservatives don’t go endlessly chasing the rounding-error’s worth of systemic welfare cheats to save money, they do it to continually reinforce to all the other welfare recipients what subhuman scum they are.

  7. The current test (yes there is one) is that to receive any serious benefits / advantage by claiming aborigionality the local community has to sign off that you are a member not necessarily by DNA. So there is a test and it is a benefit to community members to ensure only genuine members are benefited. But unnecessary stupid politics.

  8. Can’t say I have a problem with this. Seems like a logical thing to do. If you claim sickness benefit you have to provide medical evidence. I don’t get to say I identify as sick.

  9. My issue with Aboriginal welfare payment is when will it end?…How many future generations have to keep paying for other people simply based on the colour of their skin. Being aboriginal should not be the only requirement to access welfare above and beyond what other citizens access if we are all about equality. In the modern world where it is always someone’s fault, and someone must be held accountable, then look no further than the British. It was the British and their institutes that caused the greatest harm, therefore they should pay not me. I never stole someone’s baby, I never forced aboriginal’s to drink copious amount of alcohol, I never murdered aborigines but I am forced to pay. I am punished via high taxes to compensate aboriginal for injustices I never committed. There has to be a cutoff point, aboriginals born now should be entitled to no more than non- aboriginals.

      • @bolstrood you can always tell a SJW by their first response, always insult people with different opinions and offer nothing in return…

      • bolstroodMEMBER

        @Jack
        You are not guilty of invading Koori land , massacrering Koori people,imprisoning them and stealing the survivors children, impoverishing and degrading them.
        But… You are a beneficiary, an inheritor of these crimes… we all are who are not kooris.
        Note , this map only goes to 1872, massacres were happening into the 1930’s. reference Ted Egan’s song “the Drovers Boy”.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ZV2eoULEqw
        https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/jul/05/map-of-massacres-of-indigenous-people-reveal-untold-history-of-australia-painted-in-blood#img-2
        https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/mar/04/the-killing-times-the-massacres-of-aboriginal-people-australia-must-confront
        To begrudge these survivors of our invasion the payment of a blood price , puts us against accepted human behaviour world wide. and throughout the ages.
        If you take the trouble to investigate you will find that whyte bueaurocrats suck up most of the money allocated by government to Koori welfare.

      • bolstrood

        How long does one have to pay for history and every nation on this planet has history.

        Latham is not saying to stop all welfare but he is saying that stop welfare to the rorters who claim to be aboriginal; like the Indian guy in QLD who was selling aboriginal artwork; get it ????

        Maybe all non native Australians should move back to where they came from ( mainly EU ) and claim land rights and welfare forever from their indigenous lands ??

        The Van Onselen boys will have to move back to Holland.

      • And the kooris took the land of the mega-marsupials, massacred and ate them.

        There is always someone lower on the food chain. It is what drives evolution.

        Without White settlement the Kooris would be living in basically Papua New Guinea. Under White Settlement they have *much* greater opportunities and quality of life. Providing preferential welfare payments makes no sense and just locks them into poverty.

        Its like the Blacks in the USA. Preferential treatment for them makes no sense, because modern African Americans have a much higher quality of life and income than modern Africans. Leaving Africa (even on a slave ship) to join a society run by Northern Europeans was the best thing in their ancestral history that ever happened to Black Americans.

      • Mining BoganMEMBER

        Poorleen does the same thing all the time. As soon as an important subject makes the airwaves she will make an outrageous statement to distract everyone for a week or so. She’s been doing it for twenty years.

  10. FiftiesFibroShack

    I don’t know why you’re surprised be this HnH.

    Latham is a narcissist and a reactionary that trades in grievance. He can’t help himself. Luckily he’s running for a party whose supporters are either too stupid to understand the broader consequences of government mandated DNA tests or they don’t care as long as the target is a group they hate.

    More white identity politics from Latham. It’s strange that so many who whinge about identity politics seem blind to their own use of it.

  11. Even StevenMEMBER

    Latham’s proposal preys on people’s resentment. Strictly speaking, it’s not an illogical policy. As someone else pointed out, it is the equivalent of ‘means testing’ on the dole.

    However, the policy smells like a piecemeal solution to a much larger problem.

    In an ideal world, welfare would be provided on the basis of need. Those who are more in need, receive more. The colour of your skin, your religion or your ancestry should have nothing to do with the individual ‘needs’ assessment.

    We could have a reasoned debate on this, but it misses HnH’s fundamental point (I think) that there are more important issues we should be tackling first than eliminating a (probably small in the scheme of things) number of people who are abusing the system.

    Fix immigration first.

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in now