IELTS already overinflated set to increase by 5%

The Australian IELTS fee charged to foreign students and alike in Australia is set to increase by 5% to $330.00 come August 2011. the same test costs $180 in the UK, USA, Ireland and Ukraine.

There is no justification for the rip-off with substantial profits being paid to off shore entities and Seek Learning who in partnership with Australian Universities own the IELTS testing regime in Australia.

The high costs is used to buy support and extra income for Australian Universities. Students visiting Australia deserve a better deal. They have to pay high rents, get no concession in travel or any benefits other than an Australian education and the limited possibility of securing Australian residency after they graduate.

Those students who need English testing should look into TOEFL which is now accepted as an alternative English language test assessment. But do not expect parity, TOEFL costs $200 but is still $40 more expensive to do in Australia and other counties.

TOEFL not much better: Charging Australia 25% more than other nations

Following on from our IELTS Ripp-Off testing espose (It has produced nearly as many hits than the Snedden 15 year old bikini model issue). We are pleased to announce that the Australian Labor Government has acted to recognise TEOFL (The American based English language testing system) as an alternative test in terms of foreign students visiting Australia or immigration. Although some assessing authorities such as CPA are slow to adopt competition.

The TOEFL test costs Australia $200 per test and is some $117 dollars cheaper the the IELTS, which currently ripps off Australia by charging $317. (The cost of the same IELTS test in other nations such as the US, UK or Thailand is much cheaper costing around $180).

TOEFL is not better in the comparison stakes.

Whilst overall cheaper then IELTS, TOEFL charges Australia 25% more than does in other countries. For example in the UK, Ireland, Thailand and the US the TOEFL test is around $160-$165.

Why is the cost of both tests so much more expensive in Australia than in other Countries?

The Answer is because there is no real competition and Australia has not questioned the costs charged overall. It costs more to leave Australia then it does to pay the overpriced and inflated test fees.

Why is it important you may ask?

Well Australia, Melbourne in particular, has become dependent to the Overseas student market.

The Sydney Morning Herald reported, back in February 2011, that "Student visa applications from outside Australia fell 32 per cent in the last six months of last year compared with those of the same period in 2009, which in turn had fallen 22 per cent compared with the same period in 2008. The drop is frightening for universities because they have become dependent on fee income from foreign students to subsidise domestic students as the real value of government funding has declined."

We have been milking the student migration system for a decade ripping off students. Its not small bikies either. With hundreds of thousands of people sitting English languate testing in Australia each year it is big business a 100 million a dollars a year industry. It not just the test ot is the support, pre-testing and training that adds to the profit margin. It is surprising the media have not picked up on the excessive dispartity charges, but then they also have a stake in the pie though sponsorships, endorsements and advertsing as do politicans, political parties and the like., Foreign students do not have a vote but they do vote with their feet and their wallets.

The English threshold level has been set much higher, making it that much harder for migrant applications to succeed.

With the slowdown in Immigration and the tightening up of the skill assessment, English testing has become a means of discriminating against foreign students wishing to migrate to Australia.

Students are very much aware of the price comparisons between Australia and overseas. They are foriegn students after all. The fact that it is more expensive to sit the same test in Australia then else where sends the wrong message about Australia. It leaves a sour taste and ever lasting impression on the foriegn student experiance of living in Australia a message that is being projected beyond our shores.

Clarke calls it quits as he takes on the design of greener pastures.

Melbourne City Councillor, Peter Clarke, has called it a day and has given notice of his intention to quit the Council having served just over one and a half terms. Peter Clarke has accepted a generous offer from his good friend and Premier of Victoria, Ted Baillieu, to head up the Urban Renewal Authority. A position that comes with twice his salary as a Councillor, his own office, secretary and plenty of opportunity for international travel. Why would you hang around a powerless and non influential City Council when you can enjoy the trappings and benefits of a plum position that has little accountability or oversight?

Clarke's pending resignation, which takes effect in three weeks time, will cause grief for the City Council and the Victorian Electoral Commission (VEC). The VEC must contact all candidates within 14 days of the vacancy occurring to ascertain who is willing and able to continue be elected in a count back of the 2008 City of Melbourne Council ballot. They then have a further 14 days in which to determine the winner and results of the election.

This sounds fine and in theory should be a straight forward exercise given that all the preference votes were transcribed and recorded electronically, but it is not as straight forward as some might think. It is unclear if in fact the VEC has designed, developed and tested its software to process the count back as required under Schedule 3A of the Local Government Act .

The method of calculating the results of a count back are messy in deed.

Analysis of the provision of Schedule 3A has highlighted a number of discrepancies in the way the Count back is to be counted. With votes being redistributed at an overall higher value then should be. Some votes will be counted twice in the process of determining who is elected.

The problem lies in the drafting of the rules and the formula used to determine the transfer value of ballot papers deemed to have contributed to the quota that elected Peter Clarke back in 2008. How ever drafted the rules should be sacked and never allowed to get near the legislative drafting computer again. The main problem being the interpretation of clause 12. Another problematic clause is clause 10 (3) and the definition of "necessary".

It will be interesting to see what changes the VEC will try and implement to facilitate an electronic count and if those changes are in fact necessary or just desirable. Of course if it can be established that the changes implemented were not necessary in order to conduct a computerised count then they cannot be adopted without causing a jurisdictional error - which could lead to possible challenges in the courts.

Preliminary Analysis indicates that there are two main contenders for the vacancy that will be created. First is Dr Jackie Watts, who was second on Peter Clarke ticket, the other possible contender is a second Green's candidate - Rohan Leppert.

We will wait with baited breath to see just how open and transparent the recount process is and if Candidates will have the same rights to appoint scrutineers to oversee the recount process. A scrutineer can only do their job if they are given access to the detailed information records and transfers of the votes. Thankfully copies of the preference data-files were published back in 2008 so it should be possible to independently verify the results of the count back election before hand.


HOW MUCH WILL IT COST

It depends on how much the Victorian Election Commission will charge the City of Melbourne for the recount. This is another issue that is worth watching more closely.

Given that the VEC is the only organisation that can conduct the count they can overcharge the City of Melbourne, as they did when the rate payers were slugged $200,000 to develop the counting software in the first place back in 2002.

Thanks to a poorly negotiated contract by Alison Lyons, the City of Melbourne retained no IP rights or value for its investment. It was just money transferred from the General Rate Revenue to the VEC developers pockets.

VEC Stonewalls Stonnington Residents. Rejecting Option B

The Victorian Electoral Commission Municipal reviews once again has demonstrated its complete incompetence when it comes to Municipal Representation reviews.

The VEC in releasing it's final report on Stonington representational model ignored the most popular option "Option B" which would have seen Stonnington divided into three Municipal Wars with each ward returning three members of Council. The notable difference of Option B is that the boundaries would be redrawn on a north south axis opposed to the current ward boundary configuration.

The North South boundaries would have better represented the community of Interest and aligned the Municipality ward with those of the former Municipality boundaries. Most notably the City of Prahran.

Community of Interest is one of the main considerations required to be taken into consideration in any Municipal review. The current boundaries do not provide a consistent or satisfactory community of interest profile. In a rather lame justification the VEC tied to argue that the existing boundaries were known within the community. Obviously they are out of touch with reality. Stonnington has been a mismatch of community interests with the existing boundaries working against common interests. The former City of Prahran has more in common with the City of Melbourne then it has with Malvern/Chadstone.

Residents of Prahran.,South Yarra and Windsor should not hold their breath thinking that former deputy Lord Mayor , now State Member for Prahran, Clem Newton-Brown will lobby for the recommendation to be rejected and for Option B to be the preferred option. Clem is a do nothing, no change sort of man. Clem does not like rocking the boat let alone representing the best interests of his electorate.


Option B boundaries would have allowed for a better alignment with State and Federal electoral boundaries.

The low participation rate in the municipal review is an indication of the poor quality of public consultation undertaken by the Victorian Electoral Commission.

All other options (excluding A and B) where a miss-matched patch work of inconsistencies not worth considering.

In a not to surprising move, excluded from the option list was nine single member wards. No explanation given as to why the VEC did not canvas or consider such an option. A nine member single-ward model would have been preferable to the other options presented.

Thankfully they did not get any serious consideration.

IELTS Ripping 0ff Australia

UPDATE:

IELTS has come under fire for corruption with test results being "fixed" for a price. WA criminal Justice Commission has found that IELTS Staff had excepted bribes to change the results to increase the scores allocated to various students. Not only are SEEK ripping off Australians by overcharging for the cost of the exam, the administration of the system is also seriously flawed.

The Government must now act to restore confidence in the system and dramaticly reduce the cost of the exams. IELTS licencing monopoly must be removed from SEEK IELTS Australia and the education department must develop its own testing regime independent from private sources. One that includes a section on basic Occupational Health and Safety language.

• Curtin University may decide IELTS is too risky
• Student in bribe scam 'tried to flee'
• Three plead guilty in uni bribe scandal

‎‎
Thousands of foreign Students studying in Australia are being ripped off.

One of the statutory requirements in seeking an education in Australia or recognition of English language skills is for students and applicants to sit a IELTS - English Language Exam.

IELTS is a British Council sponsored certification test. There are wide criticisms about the test and its application to Australia, even its assessment level. The test which is also used for Immigration covers no practical assessment of Occupational Health and Safety requirements or procedures.

The test cost $317.00 to sit in Australia.

If you travel to other countries the test is considerable less, nearly half of what is charge in Australia. In the United States the test costs $185. In the US TESOL is the standard English exam.

In Australia IELTS has a virtual/Legislative monopoly. Elsewhere in the world IELTS testing is undertaken by the British Council, again the cost of the exam is half that charged Australian students.

We wrote to International Development Program (IDP) trading as IELTS Australia Pty Ltd (a subsidiary of SEEK) seeking an explanation as to why Australian students are charged more than their US/UK counterparts

IDP replied

This email address is designed for general enquiries about how the IELTS test works and is used as an aid to help potential candidates with their questions.

We are not in a position to offer comment regarding the IELTS test fee in different countries around the world.
Regards,

IELTS Further Assist

The email address we contacted was the one provided on the IDP IELTS web site. The unnamed respondent did not consider it appropriate to forward the address of the relevant person who could explain why Australian students are being charged nearly twice as students in the USA and why the cost charged by IDP is twice the cost charged by The British Council in other counties.

In the absence of any information justifying why Australians are being over charged we have decided to forward our concerns to the Ministers for Immigration and Education, Trade Unions and the ACCC

Northern State Alarm Bells Ring Out

The ALP loss in NSW was expected but never the less sends a clear warning for Victoria and the future of the ALP Gillard Government.

Victoria managed to hold back the landslide and catastrophe that was waiting to happen in NSW. Victoria was spared in part because of Gillard. Had it not been for Gillard the Victorian ALP would have seen a blood bath last year as we are now witnessing in NSW.

John Brumby managed to hold back the tide. He should have won the November State Election and only fell short by one seat in what would have under different circumstances been a similar fate to what we have seen in NSW this weekend.

The reason Brumby failed to be re-elected was primarily due to the ALP 's State Office and the lack of solid leadership coming from the State Secretariat. As highlighted by George Droukas, ALP strategist, in his assessment review of the State election - former ALP secretary Nick Reece lost Brumby the election. Reece also contributed to the slide in Federal support in 2010.

The ALP is facing a long cold spell in Victoria and unless things improve we could see a repeat of events that occurred in NSW this weekend.

A 10% swing away from labour will see the ALP lose a number of Inner City seats including Melbourne Ports. A fact that has not escaped the attention of the ALP power brokers that be.

With the Greens on the eve of assuming control of the Senate in July and the smell of power within the grasp of the Liberal Party pressure will be on to force a double dissolution of the Federal Parliament later this year.

If there is to be a fresh Federal election then Gillard will be defeated, swamped by the tide of disaffected voters nationally. Julia Gillard like Kristine Keneally is highly capable and skilled at providing a leadership role. Keneally's short lived premiership was impressive. Like Brumby she was weighed down by a governemnt that had been in office for over three terms and was let down by her back bench and the lack of professional administrative support.

It is this lack of engagement with the party and the broader community that is depleting the ALPs support and seriously placing at risk the next Federal election. If the level of disengagement and lack of professionalism continues we will soon see Melbourne without any ALP representation.

The prospect of Australia facing a new Federal election in six months is real.

Unless the issues of professionalism and management are addressed the ALP will be left out in the cold for many years to come.

Matcham - A creative story teller

In memory of Matcham Skipper: Mentor, Artist, Jeweller Sculptor, Creative thinker and Story teller.

Stolen power - Bid to place power lines underground fallen by the wayside

Melbourne City Council has failed to enforce an agreement that was signed between the City Council and the State Power companies that required them to underground Melbourne's Power supply within 20 years. The agreement was signed at the time the City Power company was being acquired by the state to pave the way for Victoria's private power regime.

The City Council has conveniently forgotten the agreement and has taken no steps to seek its enforcement leaving power company City Power to benefit from the forgotten policy and the city wondering when if at all Melbourne's power will ever be underground. Similarly there was an agreement also struck with Optus to underground its cables that were allowed to be strung on the cities power polls adding to the visual blight that dominates Melbourne streetscape.

City Council Urban Planner Rob (Bamboo) Adams has bowed down to state power once again compromising his standing by not enforcing or monitoring Council policy and the agreement.

Lord Mayor 0.5 Piss up at ratepayers expense

Robert Doyle has been on the boozer racking up over $10,000 in plying his mates and associates with free alcohol (top shelf booze) to lubricate the discussions and Town hall deals. Any excuse for a party at no cost. of course Council CEO Kathy Alexander tries to justify the Free booze policy because a drunk Councillor is unlikely to pay detailed attention to what gos on behind the closed doors of Town Hall. after all if they all have their snouts in the tough they can not complain about others doing likewise. Doyle joins a host of ex-pollies that have suffered the "bit to much drink whilst on the job". Most notable being former disgraced Democrats Senate leader Andrew Bartlett who would turn up in the Senate chamber pissed as a newt abusing his fellow Senators.

Questions are being asked as to the Council's responsibility and right to supply alcohol to staff and guests. It certainly does not come under the umbrella of out of pocket expenses unless they mean "output of your pocket and into theirs" expenses.

The City Council is also liable for any accidents that might arise from staff who seek to over indulge in Christmas cheer sipping on free alcoholic drinks. Occupational Health and Safety might frown on such activities should a member of staff be injured or worst still injure someone else on the way home. Victoria Police are well advised to set up a booze bus near the Council car park exit

The free drinks LM booze bar should be closed down and if the Councillors and staff want a drink then they should visit a licensed bar outside of the Council and pay for their own drinks and not expect ratepayer's to pick up the tab.



The Sunday Herald Sun

LORD Mayor Robert Doyle has racked up a private bar bill of almost $10,000 in a single year.

Documents obtained through Freedom of Information reveal councillors and council staff spent $209,816 on food and alcohol in the 12 months to March this year.

The council's total alcohol bill was more than $44,245.

The cost of restocking the private bar in the Lord Mayor's office with beer, wine and spirits was $9652.66.

It included $1142 spent in March last year, $1163 last June and in October included six bottles of Bendigo shiraz at a cost of $144.

More ratepayer funds were used to buy a steady supply of chips and nuts for the office.

Councillors also have their own "refreshment room" where drinks are available free of charge.

Mr Doyle, who belted out a rousing rendition of Vanilla Ice rap track Ice Ice Baby at the council's Christmas party last week, defended the spending.

"The Lord Mayor's office hosts many civic functions for stakeholders, community groups, visitors and dignitaries as part of our official duties," he said.

"It is reasonable to provide food and beverage at these functions."

It seems Christmas cheer does not come cheap at the council either.

More than $20,000 was spent on a yuletide bash for staff last year.

Ratepayers also funded $625 for cocktails and $244.70 for drinks at an annual report "celebration".

More than $1300 was spent on food and drinks for a staff farewell.

And more than $2060 was spent on a dinner with Adelaide councillors.

Council chief Kathy Alexander recognised the council was funded by public money but also defended the food and alcohol spending spree.

"Councillors and administrative staff can incur reasonable expenses in the course of their work and are accountable for this spend within the annual budget," she said.

"The stock in the councillors' and directors' refreshment room is used for visiting dignitaries or meetings with relevant stakeholders.

"Councillors and senior administration staff regularly host meetings in their offices of both a formal and informal nature - and food and drink is sometimes served in these meetings."

Pocket Parks: Planning for a sustainable future

Home » Cases » Copenhagen - Pocket parks, a drop of urban green

Ravnsborggade visualisation, courtesy of the City of Copenhagen/Ekstrakt

Case

Copenhagen - Pocket parks, a drop of urban green

Green cities are on the rise. Copenhagen, the capital of Denmark, is one of the cities trying to improve the urban environment and deal with the daily green needs and desires of its inhabitants. One way of doing so is pocket parks: Open green spaces at a very small scale, often created on vacant building lots or on irregular pieces of land.

---

Copenhagen has a vision of becoming the capital city in the world with the best urban environment by 2015. The enhancement of urban green is one of the tools for reaching this vision. Within the next 7 years, the municipality will establish 14 pocket parks throughout the city and plant 3,000 trees to create green streets and connections. The goal is that 90 % of all Copenhageners by 2015 can walk to a park, a beach or a harbour bath in less than 15 minutes.

A pocket park is a small park accessible to the general public. It is only a few house lots in size and typically created on vacant building lots or small irregular pieces of land. Functions include spaces for relaxation, meeting friends, taking lunch breaks, reading a book, play areas for children etc. Often pocket parks are placed around a monument, a historic mark or in relation to an art project.

"Pocket parks are a unique opportunity to create drops of urban green close to where Copenhageners live."
Klaus Bondam, Mayor for Technical and Environmental Administration, City of Copenhagen

The City of Copenhagen highlights 5 elements key to the creation of pocket parks in Copenhagen:
• Size
• A visible green element
• Openness and a positive image
• Demarcation and protection
• Identity and local community

A pocket park is defined as less than 5,000 square meters - less than half the size of a soccer field. The green element is visible and a clear priority, preferably with a focus on long-term solutions, i.e. vegetation that becomes more green and attractive in time. The park has to be open and inviting to everybody and signs have to be positive and informative. Special consideration must be given to lighting so the park feels safe, also after dark.

A characteristic feature of a pocket park in Copenhagen is that it has to be situated between other elements in the city; Buildings, walls, maybe a green wall, or art installations. A clear demarcation must be visible on three sides so that it stands out as a “pocket.” Each park will have its own identity and has to be developed specifically to the site in question. Involvement of local residents in the development process is important to ensure that the park fits the needs and desires of the local community.

Besides serving the local community, the establishment of pocket parks throughout Copenhagen also has the potential to benefit the overall urban climate. Communities with parks that meet their needs within walking distance are less likely to drive out of the city for nature experiences, thereby reducing pollution and traffic. Furthermore, pocket parks can potentially relieve pressure on the larger parks, thus allowing flexibility to devote larger areas of the parks to habitat and ecological functions.

In a city strategy from May 2008, the establishment of pocket parks in Copenhagen will go hand in hand with the creation of green streets and connections. The vision is to create a green liveable city with quality and variation which will be a role model in featuring urban environmental responses to global warming.

Green connection along the harbour front, courtesy of the City of Copenhagen/Ekstrakt