⚠️ #TheIPAisNotOurFriend❗️ 🔴 IPA MANIFESTO #100 — 0 TO GO - 16 OCTOBER 2026 🔴 “Abolish the Four Pillars policy which prevents Australia’s major banks from merging.” IPA_manifesto_UPDATED_11_OCT_2026.html ♦️ WHAT IS THE FOUR PILLARS POLICY? It is a longstanding government policy that prevents mergers between Australia’s four major banks: 🔴 Commonwealth Bank 🔴 Westpac 🔴 NAB 🔴 ANZ The rationale has been to avoid even greater concentration in Australian banking and to preserve competition and financial-system stability. The RBA has noted that mergers between the major banks would increase concentration and could increase systemic risk. ♦️ WHAT WOULD #100 CHANGE? The IPA wanted that special policy barrier removed. That would not mean a major-bank merger happened automatically. Any significant merger would still have to pass the normal competition and regulatory framework. Since 1 January 2026, Australia has had a new mandatory merger-notification regime under which qualifying mergers cannot proceed without ACCC approval. ♦️ THE BIG QUESTIONS 🔴 Would allowing the biggest banks to merge create efficiencies? 🔴 Or would it reduce competition and consumer choice? 🔴 How concentrated should Australia’s banking system be? 🔴 Who benefits if already-dominant institutions are allowed to become even larger? And after working through all one hundred: 🔴 100 DOWN. MORE FREEDOM FOR WHOM? #ThemAndUs #TheIPAisNotOurFriend #IPAexposed #Auspol #FACTSMatter SOURCES rba.gov.au/publications/s… accc.gov.au/business/merge… ♦️ ipaatlasfiles.au T H E E N D

⚠️ #TheIPAisNotOurFriend❗️ I suspect GINA likes this one❗️ 🔴 IPA MANIFESTO #77 — 23 TO GO - 7 OCTOBER 2026 Checked against the original “25 more ideas for Tony Abbott” list. 🔴 #77 — “Allow ministers to be appointed from outside parliament.” ♦️ HOW DOES IT WORK NOW? Under section 64 of the Australian Constitution, a person can initially be appointed as a minister without already being an MP or senator — but they cannot remain a minister for longer than three months unless they become a member of the House of Representatives or the Senate. That requirement is part of Australia’s system of responsible government: ministers exercise executive power, but they also sit in Parliament and are subject to parliamentary scrutiny and accountability. ♦️ WHAT WOULD #77 CHANGE? The IPA proposal would allow ministers to remain outside Parliament. Potential advantages could include bringing specialist expertise directly into government without requiring the person to win a parliamentary seat. But it also raises an obvious accountability question: 🔴 How would ministers who do not sit in Parliament be questioned directly? 🔴 What mechanisms would replace the present link between executive office and parliamentary responsibility? 🔴 Would outside ministers make government more flexible — or make executive power less directly accountable to elected representatives? The one-line IPA proposal itself does not specify the constitutional mechanism or safeguards it envisaged. ♦️ THE BIG QUESTION Should someone exercising ministerial power also have to sit in the Parliament that scrutinises that power? 🔴 MORE FREEDOM FOR WHOM? #ThemAndUs #TheIPAisNotOurFriend #IPAexposed #Auspol #FACTSMatter SOURCES Australian Constitution — section 64 legislation.gov.au/C2004Q006… Parliament of Australia — Ministers in the Senate aph.gov.au/Senate/briefs/bri… ♦️ ipaatlasfiles.au

🔴IPA MANIFESTO #68 — 32 TO GO 3 OCTOBER 2026 ♦️This one deserves a careful read. 🔴In its 2012 75 Radical Ideas to Transform Australia, the Institute of Public Affairs proposed: “Allow people to opt out of superannuation in exchange for promising to forgo any government income support in retirement.” ♦️Not merely make super voluntary. The second half matters. ♦️A person choosing to opt out would, under the proposal as written, promise to give up government income support in retirement. ♦️But retirement may be decades away. What happens if life doesn’t go according to plan? ♦️Job loss. Disability. Caring responsibilities. Relationship breakdown. Poor investments. A longer life than expected. 🔴The IPA’s one-sentence proposal doesn’t explain how those circumstances would be dealt with. 🔴THE QUESTION IS: Should someone be able to make a decision during their working life that trades away access to a future retirement safety net? 🔴MORE FREEDOM FOR WHOM? #ThemAndUs #TheIPAisNotOurFriend #IPAexposed #Auspol #FACTSMatter SOURCES IPA — original 75 Radical Ideas, published 4 August 2012: ipa.org.au/ipa-review-articl… IPA Atlas Files — Superannuation: ipaatlasfiles.au/superannuat…