Argument for doing a submission & relevant info (thread title change, June 9th)

the-ghostwhowalks

Patron with Honors
many thanks to human again ..

My submission is now ready to upload , I am so pleased that I have got the whole 18 pages ready to go - yippee !! - If you have trouble with yours - get some help , it will be well worth it ! :happydance:
 

Human Again

Silver Meritorious Patron
I SUBMITTED MINE!!! :yes: :)

Yay!!! Three cheers for another straw on this stinky camel's back... we got to 29 so far tonight and a little bird told me there is another one ready to go.

I hope to see at least a hundred submissions asking for a PBT before the 18th. Carmel, Feral, guys who know, do you think this will be sufficient to show support for the bill?
 

Kookaburra

Gold Meritorious Patron
I am not an ex, not an Aussie. I had a brush with scn about 30 yrs ago, for a few months (at most). I saw someone (I cared for) being punished for something I did (quite innocently, BTW), as a public (not really understanding or knowing the inside workings of co$). He was put into some kind of rpf thing, conditions, whatever. I was sent in to see him - for - hell, I don't know. I was told to 'help him' get back on post, or something like that.

I was appalled, by what I felt in that room, by what I saw, what I sensed.
The hair stood up on the back of my neck. Every fiber of my being was on alert - and I knew my life depended on how I handled the situation. I had to play it very carefully in order to 'get out'. I had to get out and away, and I wasn't sure I could . . . I just knew I had to - get away, escape, somehow. It was a gut reaction.

I did not understand it, I just knew it.

To this day, I ask myself, Why would they let me see that? What was the point?

Well, it saved me - decades.

It scared the living daylights out of me. Evil does that. I paid attention to that.

Everything else I know and think about scn comes from reading books of other people's experiences, all of which have reinforced my initial feelings when I witnessed the shaming and abuse of a person - who just took it, allowed it, succumbed to it, gave in to it. Huh?

My gut reaction was to run, to save my life. I didn't understand it - I just f'g did it. And then I spent years trying to understand what the hell happened there - and WHY?

That is why I am here (and American, BTW - ahem). That is WHY.

How do I explain that to an inquiry without sounding as whacky as the scn'ists beliefs? Gees, Sirs and Ladies, I had a gut reaction . . .

Offpoint, I happened to read an 'ex's' letter to someone, made public by the author's own snafu. It was a disgruntled ex, but a follower of tech, and it was bizarre. I could hardly make sense of it, talk of being a last lifer, and about humans, referring to them like they were insects, some sort of lower life form.

To me, just a regular human being/person, the author came off very 'alien' - non-human - and I don't mean that in a complimentary way. Ever see that TV movie series "V" (either one)? The lizard beings posing as human, in order to take over earth? Well, that is how this person came off to me, as a alien lizard being, in a human 'suit', intent on taking earth from the 'human' life forms living here. (Over my dead fucking body).

That any 'religion' or belief system could turn normal humans into 'that' - something reptilian - in their viewpoint on life - and on other humans - is pure evil to me. Their 'higher' self has been turned off, by scn, and the reptilian brain has taken dominence. Think about how reptiles live/survive, whether it be a snake, or a lizard - or a dinosaur - and there you have it. Survive, is the only rule. By any means. End justifies the means. In a reptile it is natural. In a human, it is sociopathic - It is Evil.

So how do I explain THAT to an Inquiry. I'd come off as a nutcase, and probably do more harm to your cause, than good. The Inquiry needs solid first hand information, stories - evidence- from exes, not opinions/feelings from outsiders.

Am I wrong in that, Carmel? If you think I am wrong, tell me - and tell me what I could give to the Inquiry that would not be a detriment.

But, I must say, I am SHOCKED, after all the stories I have read on this board, that more of you, with first hand knowledge and experience, who spent decades inside, were raised in scn, haven't done your Inquiry submission. I am SHOCKED.

I find it as unbelievable as Carmel. Is it fear? Tell us why you have not - while there is still time to deal with it, give support, and change minds.

Even mine . . .
Bueller, Ferris Bueller? Anyone?

I am being flippant, but this is not funny. This Inquiry is dead serious.
Search your conscience - Can you help, can your story help?

Lurker, this experience is quite powerful. You could include it.

But do you think that the CoS is a charitable organization? Yes/No
Why?

Should they be tax exempt just because they say they are a church? Yes/No
Why?

Is it a good idea for the government to assess if a group is an actual benefit to the public before it gets tax exemption. Yes/No
Why?

Would it be a good idea to look at the harm a group does weighed against it's good works before it gets tax exemption? Yes/No
Why?

Use examples as you see fit.

It is simple. They want to know what you think about the bill. Is it a good idea or not? Why?

Just tell them that. Your opinion is as important as anyone elses.
 

Magoo

Gold Meritorious Patron
Thanks to Carmel and all who have and are helping :yes:

I sent mine, and heard back from them.

I highly suggest EVERYONE who has experienced C of $s abuses
write up what you've experienced.

I don't give a damn if it's "Official" or not. IF they have access to enough
Abuses-----
(Which he said they could see mine, and I'm sure most others---it's just
not "officially" part of it)

People who ARE from Australia will be listened to, more.

This is the week-end to get it DONE, if you haven't already.
Also, is it on your FB page? Twitter? The more that post this link, the farther it will fly

Love to all.....
 

Sleepyhead

Patron
Okay guys, here’s the thing from my point of view.

From a certain libertarian perspective, I have some moral reluctance about being involved an issue like “tax exemption” as such.

Yes I will be making a submission, and might be risking my “confidentiality” by posting here. :eyeroll: :whatever::spacecraft:, etc.

Making a submission IS arguably in line with libertarian values in the following sense:

IF THERE IS ONE ORGANISATION ON THIS PLANET THAT MUST NOT TO ANY DEGREE OR IN ANY WAY BE GIVEN THE PRIVILEGES OF A STATE RELIGION IT IS THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION KNOWN AS “CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY.”

Actually Glen Beck’s program (Fox TV) put me on to this a aspect- only two days ago ironically enough. Refer the first amendment of the American Constitution if you happen to be in to this sort of thing...

I am also doing this to help others, and because others (including Magoo btw) have helped me get out of Scn.

Just thought I’d explain anyway.

Thanks.
 

Petey C

Silver Meritorious Patron
My two cents' worth. I've been writing my submission since the Inquiry was announced. Yes, I'm a bit slow; yes, my time in Scn was two decades ago; yes I believe it's relevant (as some of you have pointed out, it at least demonstrates that the same old same old is still being done); yes, I get confused about my arguments and faff about with different variations; yes I'm a procrastinator and delayer; yes I have sent it to other exes for comment just to see whether I've got my facts straight; and yes, I can't make up my mind how confidential I want it to be, etc. But bottom line, I think Carmel and co. have done an AMAZING job just getting us to this stage, and whipping us along. Like Outethicsofficer, I'm not going to waste an opportunity like this so have taken my time. The advantage of having been out for so long is I've had a lot of time to reflect, and my anger is good and cold. Carmel me old dear, the committee secretariat is sure to be overloaded and I'm sure there are a heap of submissions that have been received but are not up yet (unless you know to the contrary). I know from other official submissions I've made to other inquiries on other subjects that often they get up on the website slowly. And I absolutely agree we ALL have to make a submission, however basic. If anyone wants help (but not typing, Ghost!) PM me and I'll do what I can. I know it's hard; even though I do this professionally, I found it really difficult to get my thoughts all set out in order. Good luck everyone, I'm sure we can do this.

BTW I haven't seen a Scilon sub yet, unless it's one of the confid ones. I'm kinda keen to see what they're gonna say but I can bet their strategy will be last minute posting.

Petey
 

FinallyFree

Gold Meritorious Patron
between popping in and out of here and my other job duties - I just finished my first draft of my submission. I need to look it over and see if there is naything i need to add or change, but it is done.

It is amazing what can happen when you start writing. It poured out of me (well over the course of 6 1/2 hours and a couple of breaks).

I just couldn't forgive myself if I don't get this done.
 

freethinker

Sponsor
I submited an email to the senate email address concerning confidentiality.

I received this reply:



This inquiry examines the operation of the tax laws in Australia specific to the provisions outlined in the Bill. Upon undertaking this inquiry, the Committee determined that submissions containing subject matter not specifically addressing provisions of the proposed amendment would not be accepted. Furthermore, submissions that are accepted by the Committee attract Parliamentary Privilege. However privilege does not extend to jurisdictions outside of Australia.

If you would like to send a submission to the Inquiry you can do so through the online registration and upload system. You will have the option of submitting confidentially. No documents or personal details are made public without Committee AND submitter approval.

Kind regards,
Hana Jones
Executive Assistant
Senate Economics Committee
Ph: 02 6277 5786
Fax: 02 6277 5719


 

Human Again

Silver Meritorious Patron
If anyone is concerned about not being relevant

I have put together some thoughts about non-scientology reasons for this bill/ Please feel free to use any of these points, maybe they'll prompt some more of your own?

• By granting tax-exempt status to an organisation, the Australian Government is in fact endorsing and supporting this organisation financially, morally and publicly. Therefore, tax-exempt status needs to be given only to those organisations fully aligned to the values, priorities and benefit of Australia and its people.

• As Australia moves into the oncoming decades of an aging population, a heavier than ever before welfare bill, and a shrinking proportion of tax payers, we must take a tougher stand on entities attempting to escape their communal responsibilities, including those who seek tax exemption on the claim that they are already contributing all that they can to the community.

• When we do grant tax exemption we are stating that we trust that organisation to make choices about where the money they collect is spent. In fact we are saying that these organisations will make better choices than our elected government. And, while money spent by the government is tracked and can be reviewed and scrutinized, money spent by these tax exempt organisations not only can be used in ways that the Australian people would not condone, but there is no way for us to know about it.

• It is clear that some currently tax exempt organisations are an indispensable sector of our community. They directly and immediately disburse on-the-ground charity to house, feed, clothe and support the disadvantaged in a way that is efficient, laudable and a necessary compliment to our government welfare system. They provide affordable sports activities for children or inclusion activities for the disadvantaged that would not be able to be provided on a fee for service basis and rely on volunteers to administer them. But not all currently tax-exempt organisations fill a community need, not all are efficient or provide services that the majority of Australians would knowingly support. Blown out administration costs are merely one example of this that the Australian public is aware of and of which we do not approve or wish to support.

• In today’s financial climate we cannot afford to confer tax exempt status without confirming that the organisation is capable of and does provide a needed service with efficiency, compatibility and quality in a way that compliments our existing welfare system. For example I don’t want to grant tax exemption to an organisation that provides people with spiritual services while the country is struggling to find an extra $30 a week for our aged pensioners or to provide houses for people in need. Or even an organisation that provides food vouchers to the hungry and pays its executives’ overblown salaries.


• Self-assessment for tax exemption is a luxury we cannot afford and an open invitation to the unscrupulous to avoid paying for the roads, public services, and the community in which they live and make their income. A PBT will eliminate those who are unscrupulous and confirm those who are actually supporting the community in ways that we value and with standards that are appropriate.

• Thus far it has been sufficient for an organisation to claim it is a religion in order to gain tax exempt status. In alignment with not discriminating against anyone for matters of religious belief, it would be preferable if our government did not favor any groups because of their beliefs either. A Public Benefits Test needs to determine eligibility based on providing benefit we can see and assess, not on benefits at a spiritual level, after this life or according to a religious authority.
 

Lisa Ann Marie

Patron with Honors
I have put together some thoughts about non-scientology reasons for this bill/ Please feel free to use any of these points, maybe they'll prompt some more of your own?

• By granting tax-exempt status to an organisation, the Australian Government is in fact endorsing and supporting this organisation financially, morally and publicly. Therefore, tax-exempt status needs to be given only to those organisations fully aligned to the values, priorities and benefit of Australia and its people.

• As Australia moves into the oncoming decades of an aging population, a heavier than ever before welfare bill, and a shrinking proportion of tax payers, we must take a tougher stand on entities attempting to escape their communal responsibilities, including those who seek tax exemption on the claim that they are already contributing all that they can to the community.

• When we do grant tax exemption we are stating that we trust that organisation to make choices about where the money they collect is spent. In fact we are saying that these organisations will make better choices than our elected government. And, while money spent by the government is tracked and can be reviewed and scrutinized, money spent by these tax exempt organisations not only can be used in ways that the Australian people would not condone, but there is no way for us to know about it.

• It is clear that some currently tax exempt organisations are an indispensable sector of our community. They directly and immediately disburse on-the-ground charity to house, feed, clothe and support the disadvantaged in a way that is efficient, laudable and a necessary compliment to our government welfare system. They provide affordable sports activities for children or inclusion activities for the disadvantaged that would not be able to be provided on a fee for service basis and rely on volunteers to administer them. But not all currently tax-exempt organisations fill a community need, not all are efficient or provide services that the majority of Australians would knowingly support. Blown out administration costs are merely one example of this that the Australian public is aware of and of which we do not approve or wish to support.

• In today’s financial climate we cannot afford to confer tax exempt status without confirming that the organisation is capable of and does provide a needed service with efficiency, compatibility and quality in a way that compliments our existing welfare system. For example I don’t want to grant tax exemption to an organisation that provides people with spiritual services while the country is struggling to find an extra $30 a week for our aged pensioners or to provide houses for people in need. Or even an organisation that provides food vouchers to the hungry and pays its executives’ overblown salaries.


• Self-assessment for tax exemption is a luxury we cannot afford and an open invitation to the unscrupulous to avoid paying for the roads, public services, and the community in which they live and make their income. A PBT will eliminate those who are unscrupulous and confirm those who are actually supporting the community in ways that we value and with standards that are appropriate.

• Thus far it has been sufficient for an organisation to claim it is a religion in order to gain tax exempt status. In alignment with not discriminating against anyone for matters of religious belief, it would be preferable if our government did not favor any groups because of their beliefs either. A Public Benefits Test needs to determine eligibility based on providing benefit we can see and assess, not on benefits at a spiritual level, after this life or according to a religious authority.

it's organization
 
Hey All,

Recieved an email from the committee today advising that my submisssion has been made avaliable to the committee however it will not be accepted as an offical submission.

Should a rewrite??? They really didnt provide a reason other then stating that it did not directly reference the criteria...

I am happy to upload that submission now if that will help??
 
My rejection email;

THE SENATE

ECONOMICS LEGISLATION COMMITTEE


Inquiry into the Tax Laws Amendment (Public Benefit Test) Bill 2010

We write to thank you for your recent correspondence to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee's inquiry into the Tax Laws Amendment (Public Benefit Test) Bill 2010 which proposes the introduction of a 'public benefit test' for religious and charitable organisations seeking tax exempt status.

This inquiry examines the operation of the tax laws in Australia specific to the provisions outlined in the Bill. Upon undertaking this inquiry, the Committee determined that submissions containing subject matter not specifically addressing provisions of the proposed amendment would not be accepted. On this occasion, the Committee has declined your submission on the basis of relevance.

Your correspondence has been made available to the Committee members, but will not be included in the Committee's inquiry as a formal submission. Should you choose to alter your submission to examine the provisions of the amendment more closely you are able to do so.


Kind regards,

John Hawkins

Secretary

PO Box 6100, Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 Tel: (02) 6277 3540 Fax: (02) 6277 5719

Email: [email protected]
Internet: http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/commitee/economics_ctte/index.htm
 

Carmel

Crusader
My rejection email;

THE SENATE

ECONOMICS LEGISLATION COMMITTEE


Inquiry into the Tax Laws Amendment (Public Benefit Test) Bill 2010

We write to thank you for your recent correspondence to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee's inquiry into the Tax Laws Amendment (Public Benefit Test) Bill 2010 which proposes the introduction of a 'public benefit test' for religious and charitable organisations seeking tax exempt status.

This inquiry examines the operation of the tax laws in Australia specific to the provisions outlined in the Bill. Upon undertaking this inquiry, the Committee determined that submissions containing subject matter not specifically addressing provisions of the proposed amendment would not be accepted. On this occasion, the Committee has declined your submission on the basis of relevance.

Your correspondence has been made available to the Committee members, but will not be included in the Committee's inquiry as a formal submission. Should you choose to alter your submission to examine the provisions of the amendment more closely you are able to do so.


Kind regards,

John Hawkins

Secretary

PO Box 6100, Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 Tel: (02) 6277 3540 Fax: (02) 6277 5719

Email: [email protected]
Internet: http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/commitee/economics_ctte/index.htm
Hey notafraid, there's a difference between rejected email and "declined as a *formal* submission". (emphasis on "formal" is mine)

I'll get back to you if and when I get the scoop. In the meanwhile, don't be too concerned, as your correspondence has been made available to the committee members, but feel free to re-submit if you want to. (Maybe you could edit out some of the detail in your submission, and add it as an attachment - This is what I have done, but as yet, I haven't heard if mine has been accepted or declined, so who knows).
 
Top