The people in the machine called the 'Australian Government' run a web of deceit that is convoluted where even if you catch them out (according to 'their' laws), as you are a member of the herd population you are wrong.
The 'word' apparently from people in government is that they are all for transparency, but when it comes to the actual implementation of this so called word, the story is quite different.
Let's take a look at a scenario of people's salary who are in 'government' or in the 'public service'.
We'll make it as simple as possible so the simple folk hopefully grasp the situation.
You see, when you apply for a job in the 'public service' you are aware that you are working for the 'government', you know the 'Australian Government'.
In the good ol' days before the interwebs the positions were advertised in a gazette where the pleb knew the title of the position, salary, band etc.
Fast forward to the new era of internetting and we still do have gazettes, with the added bonus of those pesky public servant jobs being advertised somewhere called 'online'.
Let's take a look at a classic Aussie public service icon, our 'friend' called the ATO (Australian Taxation Office.
Let's not worry about running to the milk bar or newsagent to get a gazette, but rather let's go straight online:
Now some people should be aware that plenty can be written about the entity called the 'Australian Government', from the above illustration, and we can put that aside for the purposes of this article.
From the above screen capture of the ATO's website, you should be aware that the ATO is connected to the Australian Government, therefore if you are applying for a job there you can rest assured knowing that when you ring up people and hassle them for their taxes you're (allegedly) doing them a 'public service'.
Another component of the 'public service' is something called transparency.
The employment details for the position to be filled in are gazetted i.e. disclosed to the general public.
The following screen capture is for a position from 25 August 2015 of Taxation Officer at the ATO:
From the illustration one can see that there are no surprises, i.e. Job Title, Branch, Job Type and most importantly Salary figures are disclosed.
Now where were we?
The Australian people's postal delivery service is supposed to be a 'public service', right?
So the people should be aware that this postal delivery entity is called Australia Post.
Now let's have a closer look at what's been happening at 'Australia Post'.
The mainstream media reported that the salary of Australia Post's CEO Ahmed Fahour, was hidden from public view where Liberal Senator James Paterson released documents revealing Fahour's salary of $4,400,000 and a bonus of $1,200,000 in 2016.
So once again for the simple folk, Australia's postal service is supposed to be a 'public service' operation, you know part of this machine called the government.
Let's have a closer look at Australia's postal service website:
The website tells you that the business is called Australian Postal Corporation.
There is no link or reference to this entity called the 'Australian Government', so it's not a 'public service'.
Since it's been stated that Fahour is a CEO (of a corporation and not a 'public service') of Australian Post Corporation, does his salary have to be made 'public'?
So what did the government (lawfully) do with the Australian people's postal distribution 'public service'?
'Australia Post' is a business where a member of the public can buy into this franchise.
The Australian people deceived and defrauded by people in the 'Australian Government' but as always zero action from the herd population.
The people in the 'Australian Government' laughing all the way to their highly paid superannuation as the herd watches their 'footy'.
STILL not bleeding financially enough?
See article from 8 Feb 2017 by news.com.au of the title:
Australia Post CEO paid $5.6 million in 2016
The letters and parcel business had previously refused to disclose the salary of Mr Fahour, Australia’s highest paid public servant, saying there was “no public interest” in releasing the information.
In 2014, the last time his salary was included in Australia Post’s annual report, Mr Fahour took home a total package of $4.6 million, including a $2.6 million bonus. In 2015 he was believed to have been paid $2.1 million after turning down a $2.9 million bonus.
“The Oz Post CEO is effectively our highest paid public servant,” Mr Paterson tweeted. “That information should not be hidden from taxpayers.”
In its response to the Senate, Australia Post requested that the information not be released publicly, citing legislative reporting requirements, public interest immunity claims, and commercial confidentiality.
“The public disclosure of executive remuneration would involve the unreasonable disclosure of personal information,” Australia Post corporate secretary Erin Kelly wrote.
Ms Kelly argued the release of the information “would not promote or inform debate of issues of public importance”, “may be prejudicial against Australia Post and those individuals to which the information relates” who “may become targets for unwarranted media attention”.
She added that Australia Post was a “self-funded government business enterprise that does not rely on any government funding”, so public disclosure of executive remuneration “would in no way be of any relevance”.
In response, Mr Paterson wrote that the final statement was “of particular concern to the Committee”.
“Even if an organisation does not receive money through the appropriation bills, its operations may have significant implications for the expenditure of public funds,” he wrote.
“As a government business enterprise governed by Act of Parliament, Australia Post is accountable to the Parliament, and its committees, for the use of public resources with which it has been entrusted.
“The public disclosure of senior executive remuneration is a common feature of accountability within the public sector and for listed companies.
“While information about the salaries and bonuses paid to individual senior executives for major Australian companies and other postal services globally is freely available to senators and the Australian public, similar information is not available for Australia Post.”
Australia Post’s total revenues for the 2015-16 financial year were up 3 per cent to $6.6 billion on the back of a parcels boom, but its letters business is set to lose $1.5 billion over the coming five years.
Letters declined by a record 9.7 per cent in 2015-16, bringing losses of $138 million, but a potential extra $300 million in losses was avoided by overhauling the division in January. Prior to Mr Fahour’s reforms, the company had been on track to lose $5 billion on letters in that same period.
In a statement, an Australia Post spokeswoman said: “The remuneration of the executive team, including the Managing Director and Group CEO, is set by the Australia Post Board.
“Mr Fahour’s total remuneration package takes into account the size and complexity of the organisation, which has an annual turnover of more than $6 billion. It also reflects the large-scale transformation underway and that more than 73 per cent of its revenue comes from the non-regulated side of the business where it is competing with major global players such as DHL, FedEx and Toll.
“Mr Fahour’s remuneration in FY16 included a performance-based short-term bonus in line with Australia Post returning to profit. The previous year he did not receive a bonus.
“Total executive remuneration has not increased since 2014 when the executive last received their full eligible performance bonus. Since 2007 Australia Post has paid more than $6.3 billion in dividends and taxes to the Federal Government. Australia Post does not receive any taxpayer funding.”