tidbits
Keating on the passing of John Button keating on the passing of john buttonJohn Button is a real loss to the country and the Labor Party alike. the clintons at home
comeback line
marx on clintonWhat went wrong? What went wrong? For the answer, one should turn (as always) to the teachings of Marx. “The secret of success in life is sincerity,” Groucho once famously observed. “If you can fake that, you’ve got it made.” This truth about the human condition applies with particular force to politics. Mrs Clinton tries hard to fake sincerity – so hard it is painful to watch. Sometimes, in fact, I suspect that she really is sincere and only looks as though she is faking. Barack Obama, on the other hand, may actually be sincere – and if he is not, he fakes it so well it makes no difference. Clive Crook, Financial Times senator natasha stott despojaBBI; Prior to the Federal election we contacted a number of our favourite politicians for some comment. We tried to pin Bruce Baird down to say something nasty about Howard but he was a gentleman of the old school. If you can`t say something nice, don`t say anything. He didn`t. Natasha didn`t reply to us, which had us a bit miffed, but today, March 3, we received a belated reply. Here is the full txt of our email and her reply. Sent: Tuesday, 2 October 2007 10:30 AM Senator, We will be sorry to see you depart next June. In the meantime with the Federal Election approaching, we would love some of your input. We feel that John Howard has taken our country down a precarious and ill-conceived path. Over the years we have admired your good sense and We are interested in anything you have to say about the coming elections and would love to post same on our website. Though not politically aligned we come from a left wing position and are interested in countering the conservative journalists who seem to prevail. We hope that you will find time to send us anything you wish to have on record. Regards, Ken Porter, Director Her Reply, received 3/3/08 Dear Ken, Thank you for your email, I am so sorry but it got caught up in my quarantine and I failed to reply. It's been a busy post election period and am also rather pregnant now. I am only sorry I didn't get something to you as requested before the election although I'm not sure if the result for the Democrats would have been much different unfortunately. At the moment, we are going through a period of serious reflection. We are coming to grips with the fact that we have no federal representation after July 1 and what this means in terms of profile, membership and resources for the future. I am greatly impressed by some of our new and our younger members, particularly those who ran as candidates in the recent federal election. They are already talking about ways to rebuild the party and I think if anyone can do it - they can. The policies on which we were founded are as relevant as ever and needed more than ever before. The fact that we were unable to convince the broader voting public of this fact is a concern. The lack of members and resources are key issues for us and unless we can recruit new members I strongly suggest you contact the Leader, Lyn Allison as she has been in discussions about how to revive the party in time for the next election, she might want to take advantage of your kind offer, assuming it is still open. My best wishes and again my apologies, Natasha We knew she was good, and kind and nice. When you think about that, its no wonder she resigned! eddy groves dilemma
big money for private schoolsThe Commonwealth system of funding as set up by John Howard, but now being ratified by Kevin Rudd`s government is a windfall to Private Schools. Trinity Grammar will receive an extra $19.1 million over the four years from 2009 to 2013 Other big winners are Kinross Wallaroi at Orange ($9.4 million), The King`s School ($9.2 million), Newington College ($8.4 million), PLC Croydon ($6.1 million), Meriden at Strathfield ($5 million), St Andrews Cathedral School ($4.3 million) and Scots ($4.1 million) Source: Green`s Press Release tom cruise, scientologistFrom Gawker. 16/1/08 You have to watch this video. It shows Tom Cruise, with all the wide-eyed fervor that he brings to the promotion of a movie, making the argument for Scientology, the bizarre 20th-century religion. Making the argument is an understatement. The Hollywood actor, star of movies such as Mission Impossible, is a complete fanatic. "When you're a Scientologist, and you drive by an accident, you know you have to do something about it, because you know you're the only one who can really help... We are the way to happiness. We can bring peace and unite cultures." There's much much more. Let me put it this way: if Tom Cruise jumping on Oprah's couch was an 8 on the scale of scary, this is a 10. This video's been passed around privately by reporters and writers investigating Cruise's ties with Scientology. Most reporters have been wary of taking on the Scientologists, because they have a history of both litigation, and the harassment of critics. The publication of Andrew Morton's biography of Tom Cruise, which claims he is the second most powerful person in the cult, has seems to have opened the floodgates. Several indoctrination videos were available on Google Video, on Sunday, and showcased on Gawker, before being removed by the person who had originally posted them. Yesterday, for a few hours, the clip of Tom Cruise discussing his beliefs as a Scientologist appeared on Youtube, and was republished by Radar and Defamer. That video is no longer available, most likely after the Church of Scientology sent in a copyright infringement notice. Gawker is now hosting a copy of the video; it's newsworthy; and we will not be removing it. And from Crikey.. Australian booksellers are cagey about stocking Andrew Morton's tell-all Tom Cruise biog. Crikey is not. While the book might not make it to our shores, US journalists have done the speed reading for us. Reviewers are saying there's nothing new here. Entertainment Weekly dismisses it as fluffy nonsense. [It's] the interrogation-repelling superstar meets the unstoppable dirt-digger: It's the celeb-bio edition of Alien vs. Predator. Alien wins. Tom Cruise begins, ''If truth be told, Tom Cruise Mapother IV has always been something of a ladies' man'' (should any biographer open with ''if truth be told''?) and ends with this thunderclap: ''Perhaps the most complex character he has ever played is Tom Cruise himself.'' Between those sentences resides a 323-page air sandwich. Some excerpts.. 'Page 65: Tom tried to impress Nancy by taking her to the Broadway musical La Cage aux Folles, but he "was unaware of the story line—about two gay men living together in St. Tropez." According to Nancy, "he couldn't handle it. We had to leave before the intermission. It really bothered him. He was definitely homophobic."' 'Page 290-291: Morton repeats the sketchy tabloid rumors that Tom "bought a fetus learning system that was strapped to Katie's stomach" and that he "fitted Katie's cell phone with a tracking device so that he would know where she was day and night."' 'Page 289: Without naming his sources, Morton spins the following yarn: "Some [Scientology] sect members sincerely believed that Katie Holmes was carrying the baby who would be the vessel for L. Ron Hubbard's spirit when he returned from his trip around the galaxy...Some Sea Org fanatics even wondered if the actress had been impregnated with Hubbard's frozen sperm."' 'Page 153-154: Tom and Nicole shared a "fantasy of running through a meadow of wildflowers together." Eager to please his recruit, [Scientology head honcho David] Miscavige "decided to make his dream come true. A team of twenty Sea Org disciples was set to work digging, hoeing, and planting wheat grass and wildflower seed near the Cruises' bungalow. Former Scientologist Maureen Bolstad recalled working until early in the morning in the mud and pouring rain." labor ministerial code of conductKevin Rudd speaking at a press conference 6/12/07 ....I would also be releasing today the Code of Ministerial Conduct. I’ll draw that to your attention, particularly in terms of some changes which have been made. First of all, lobbyists will be required to register their details publicly on a register of lobbyists to be established by the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet before seeking access to ministers or their offices. Secondly, ministers will be required to undertake that when they leave office, they will not seek to have business dealings with members of the Government, the public service of the Defence Force on any matters they have dealt with in an official capacity in the preceding 18 months, one and a half years. Thirdly, electoral fundraising at the official residences of the Lodge and Kirribilli House will be prohibited And fourthly, ministers will be required to divest themselves of all shareholdings other than through investment vehicles such as broadly diversified superannuation funds or publicly listed managed or trust arrangements. The code of conduct is there for your perusal.. We will be publishing the actual document as it comes to hand. from crikey
We stole this from Crikey. It was too good to resist. It does seem to sum up nicely the adventures of the Midnight Oil activist, who momentarily became a politician (pulp mill) but in the end, or so far at least, is deemed not political enough. He`s not the first person to be swallowed by the ALP though, eh Cheryl?
shadow ministry 6/12/07
new labor ministry
ministerial code of conduct- 1996 versionThis is the code of conduct issued by Prime Minister John Howard after the 1996 Federal election. It is vital that ministers and parliamentary secretaries do not by their conduct undermine public confidence in them or the government. Ministers must be honest in their public dealings and should not intentionally mislead the Parliament or the public. Any misconception caused inadvertently should be corrected at the earliest opportunity. Ministers should ensure that their conduct is defensible, and should consult the Prime Minister when in doubt about the propriety of any course of action. Along with the privilege of serving as a minister or parliamentary secretary there is some personal sacrifice in terms of the time and energy that must be devoted to official duties and some loss of privacy. Although their public lives encroach upon their private lives, it is important that ministers and parliamentary secretaries avoid giving any appearance of using public office for private purposes. The nature of their duties is such that they may need to have regard to the interests of members of their immediate families (to the extent that ministers know their interests) as well as their own when ensuring that no conflict or apparent conflict between interests and duties arises. Ministers (this and subsequent references to ministers should be read as including parliamentary secretaries) must not engage in any professional practice or in the daily work of any business. They must not accept retainers or income from personal exertion other than that laid down as their remuneration as ministers and parliamentarians. Notes on the meaning of 'personal exertion' are included in the explanatory notes which the Prime Minister sends out with statements of interests forms. Ministers are required to resign directorships in public companies and may retain directorships in private companies only if any such company operates, for example, a family farm, business or portfolio of investments, and if retention of the directorship is not likely to conflict with the minister's public duty (eg, a minister should question the retention of a directorship in a company in which share holdings extend beyond the minister's own family). Ministers are required to divest themselves of all shares and similar interests in any company or business involved in the area of their portfolio responsibilities. The transfer of interests to a family member or to a nominee or trust is not an acceptable form of divestment. Ministers are not precluded from making investments on the stock markets or other financial and trading markets, but they should not operate as traders and should exercise careful personal judgment in respect of transactions. Ministers are required to make statements of interests in accordance with arrangements determined by the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister writes to ministers outlining these arrangements. Ministers should perform their public duties uninfluenced by fear or favour - that is, by any expectation that they will benefit or suffer as a consequence. Ministers should not accept any benefit where acceptance might give an appearance that they may be subject to improper influence (eg because the giver has or seeks to have a contractual relationship with government or has any other special interest in government decisions). Ministers may accept benefits in the form of gifts, sponsored travel or hospitality only in accordance with the relevant guidelines (provided by the Prime Minister when he writes to ministers about their statements of interests). Ministers should not exercise the influence obtained from their public office, or use official information, to obtain any improper benefit for themselves or another. Particular attention needs to be paid to ensuring that the scope for adverse comment is minimised if it is proposed to appoint someone who is the close relative or associate of a minister. Subject to provisions in legislation or other formal documents relating to the establishment of government bodies or positions, government appointments are to be made on the basis of merit, taking into account the skills, qualifications, experience and any special qualities required of the person to be appointed. If the approving authority (which may be Cabinet or a minister) is satisfied that this condition is demonstrably met, then spouses, parents, children or other close relatives of ministers, parliamentarians, ministerial staff or heads of departments or agencies should not be discriminated against in selection processes on account of family relationships. There is a longstanding practice that ministers do not appoint close relatives to positions in their own offices. In addition, close relatives of a minister should not be appointed to any other minister's office irrespective of the level of the position, except with the specific approval of the Prime Minister. And a minister's close relative should not be appointed to any position in an agency in that minister's own portfolio if the appointment is subject to the agreement of the minister or Cabinet. Appointment proposals should identify the elements of merit, skills, qualifications, experience and special qualities on which they are based. Ministers are provided with facilities at public expense in order that public business may be conducted effectively. Their use of these facilities should be in accordance with this principle. It should not be wasteful or extravagant. As a general rule, official facilities should be used for official purposes. The distinction between official and personal conduct is not always clear (eg, in relation to the provision of hospitality/entertainment and use of car transport) but ministers should ensure that their actions are calculated to give the public value for its money and never abuse the privileges which, undoubtedly, are attached to ministerial office. BBI: Heaven help us! Does stacking the ABC and other boards come under this? This from Crikey: In the 95 years pre-Howard there were 17 ministers who were dismissed or resigned over what could broadly be described as ethical matters. Mr Howard, feeling he had to follow his new book of rules, lost seven ministers in less than a year!: Senator Jim Short Vic 14 Oct 1996 Ministerial impropriety in relation to conflict of interest concerning bank licences Senator Brian Gibson Tas 15 Oct 1996 Ministerial impropriety in relation to conflict of interest concerning bank licences Senator Bob Woods NSW 3 Feb 1997 Alleged improprieties in relation to expenses claims Geoff Prosser (Forrest), WA 11 Jul 1997 Ministerial impropriety in relation to conflict of interest David Jull (Fadden), Qld 24 Sept 1997 Ministerial impropriety in relation to Travel Rorts affair John Sharp (Hume), NSW 24 Sept 1997 Ministerial impropriety in relation to Travel Rorts affair Peter McGauran (Gippsland), Vic 26 Sept 1997 Ministerial impropriety in relation to Travel Rorts affair Enough was enough and the Ministerial Code of Conduct was soon treated as nothing more than a guidline to be used at the sole discretion of the Prime Minister. In the next decade only two ministers joined the list of dismissals for matters of propriety: Senator Ian Campbell WA 3 Mar 2007 Ministerial impropriety in relation to dealings with Brian Burke Senator Santo Santoro Qld 16 Mar 2007 Conflict of interest and ministerial impropriety in relation to private share dealings tax rates around the worldCostello and the Howard government made a lot of fuss about Australian Tax Rates. Here is a comparison with the rest of the world. There are many who pay higher rates, and almost all pay more GST. Perhaps Pete and Johnny would have been better to have put more money into infrastructure.
In countries in which VAT is charged at a number of different rates, the percentage in the table is the highest percentage.
things to say to howard loversFrom clubtroppo Future history books will note that John Howard was one of two Prime ministers (the other being Ben Chifley) whose governments were defeated as a consequence of abusing Senate power, one of two (the other being Stanley Bruce) to lose his own seat at the general election defeat and one of two (the other being Robert Menzies) to serve 10 years in the top job. Malcolm MacKerras June 2007 John Howard led us on a voyage driven by greed and fear, into parochialism and paranoia, selfishness and racism, bigotry and corruption, and other dark places in the Australian psyche where we never should have gone. It was a mean and ugly trip, and it will take us all a long time to recover. Mungo MacCallum The Liberal Party of John Howard, Philip Ruddock, Alexander Downer and Peter Costello is now a party of privilege and punishments. One that lacks that most basic of wellsprings: charity. The putrid Howard brand of politics. Paul Brent of Mumble The consequences of Howards reign over the Liberal Party are only now starting to be revealed as the protective shield of government has been stripped away, exposing a cancerous organisation bereft of direction, devoid of true leadership, and completely incapable of withstanding the rigours of opposition and political life without the levers of power to protect them. Possum Comitaus The man sucked his government and his party dry. He obviously had dedicated himself to keeping Peter Costello out of the prime ministership and ultimately he succeeded. During his leadership, the Liberals have managed to fall out of government in every state and territory. This is his legacy. Sean Carney In the Howard government, all decisions of any consequence were made by the leader. Ministers took the flak — Helen Coonan in communications, Kevin Andrews wherever he went, Ian Campbell and Malcolm Turnbull in the environment — but they were salesmen and advisers. The decisions were made by one man, and as he became surrounded by sycophants and mentally removed from real life Australia, the quality of government deteriorated. Tim Colebatch The [Howard] Government has been like someone who wins Tattslotto each and every day over a period of seven years and instead of investing for the future for themselves and their family, blows the lot on good times for themselves and their mates. Michael Costello The overwhelming mark of Howard’s government was the supremacy of pragmatism over principle, politics over morality. Tony Harris Howard has likely incinerated two generations of Liberal leadership on the bonfire of his own vanity. Glen Milne The big lie of Liberal supremacy was economic management. In fact, they knew how to generate income, but not how to spend it. We could have been building what Europe built in this past decade - superb hospitals, bullet trains, schools and training centres, low cost public transport of luxurious quality, magnificent public housing. We pissed it all away on tax giveaways and consumer goods. On bloated homes that we will not be able to cool or heat, or sell, and cars we won’t be able to afford to drive. A party based on self interest may evaporate along with our rivers and lakes, and have no role to play in a world where we co-operate or die. Steve Biddulph He thrives, as a rule, on death. Bob Ellis the liberals new johFrom Values Australia, great blog. Yes, we miss it, don’t we? The madness of Peanut Joh? Apart from forcing the resignation of Ray Whitrod and appointing Terry Lewis as police commissioner in 1976, Joh supported the cancer cure scam of Milan Brych and Stephen Horvath’s hydrogen-powered car. But don’t fret. Malcolm Turnbull has the answer: an equally mad Russian scheme to create water out of thin air. Derided and politely ridiculed by anyone who knows anything, the scheme claims to generate rain using electromagnetic waves. The Russians call it “rainfall enhancement”. We know what “enhancement” means. We receive tens of emails daily promising “penis enhancement” from equally credible Russians. And by the way, yes we know that Turnbull’s friend, Matt Handbury, a contributor to Turnbull’s election fundraising group, the Wentworth Forum, is also the chairman of the Australian Rain Corporation which is set to receive the $10 Million to “trial” the technology. To suggest that there is any connection in any way between Handbury’s support for Turnbull and his company receiving $10 Million in election bribes promises is scurrilous and, as Turnbull says, “an outrageous suggestion”. We think Turnbull has been talking to Downer. (We saw them together on TV today complaining that Rudd was a pompous, arrogant, egotistical fop.) Who else but Downer could have told Turnbull to say “outwageous”? pastor danny nalliah- catch the fire ministryHe had predicted that the Howard Government would be returned after talking to God. He also had audience with Howard and Costello, who he said would take over the Prime Minister`s position. We don`t know if God or Costello told him that. He is definitely from the Religious Right. This from his blog I do not know how long it will take for the Church in Australia to see God’s prophetic promises fulfilled for this Great South Land, but we must persist in united prayer and corporate repentance, rising up and fighting in the Spirit, as we continue to boldly proclaim the will and Word of God. Just for your information, the Labor Government refused to preference the Family First Party, and did all its preferences with the Greens. Now both Labor and the Greens are in bed together. DID YOU VOTE THEM IN???? still more jack the insiderThe Australian 22/11/07 Sorry, I haven’t got long to chat today. I’ve just popped on the fake beard, the kufi and a pair of sandals in readiness for a day on the hustings. I still think we can win Lindsay if we can pick up those crucial al-Qa’ida preferences. Sadly there’s not as much work for me as there used to be. And that’s because our political parties are bursting at the seams with their own home grown tricksters. Gary Clark, the husband of retiring Liberal MP for Lindsay, Jackie Kelly is an orthodontist; which is an excellent starting point for anyone who wants to get in on the dirty tricks caper. Anyone who can mete out pain and humiliation and charge three grand for the privilege is a walk up start, in my book. Gary’s a member of the Liberal party, or he was, and one day would like to be again. Once all this blows over. He’s devoted to the caper and spends a lot of time in his garage, roneoing satirical and hugely funny hate mail to an electorate desperate for a laugh in these cold, humourless times. The man reeks of printers ink, but it’s the price he’s prepared to pay to take his humour to the world. ... These days it seems like anyone with a dot matrix printer and a ream of paper can knock out a bit of satirical hate mail, go for a stroll around the neighbourhood and get a laugh. While there are dedicated and talented amateurs like Gary Clark running around, an experienced freelance dirty trickster like yours truly rarely gets a look in. Now when I go around local electorates letter-dropping amusing racist messages and humorous anti-Islamic hate mail, someone has already been there stuffing hilarious flyers in letterboxes, accusing one of the major parties of smuggling weapons-grade plutonium to North Korea or funding the Pontic Greek genocide. guy rundle in crikeyRudyard Winston Zimmerman's 119th dream And if you fall in a heap when losing power
bronwyn bishop`s letterWhat Planet is this woman from?
john winston howard, political extremistNorman Abjorensen in Crikey: Australia has had a few dodgy and iffy governments over the years, but apart from the latter days of the Bjelke-Petersen dictatorship in Queensland, political extremism has never really gained a significant toehold. That is, until the current term of the Howard government and its absolute authority over the parliament. The truth is that John Winston Howard – who masquerades not entirely convincingly as an ordinary bloke - is a political extremist. Pragmatic concerns over the years have served to keep that extremism in check – but it’s always been there. In the mid-1980s he was talking about total deregulation of the labour market, even before he lit the fuse venting his long held belief in white Australia. We have all been too taken in by his apparent ordinariness and his protestations that he was a conservative. He is not; he is a radical neoliberal, albeit with a pragmatic streak. Every institutional pillar has been under sustained assault on his watch – the High Court, the parliament, the public service, the military and security organisations, the Auditor-General, the ABC and so on. Some aspects of his radical neoliberalism he shares with the rabid neo-conservatives who have wreaked such havoc in the Bush White House with their pet project – the war in Iraq. Like the neocons, he pretends to revere the past but really despises it... Howard, of course, is not alone. Peter Costello is imbued with the fanaticism of the H. R. Nicholls Society, Tony Abbott is to the right of General Franco on all social and political issues, Nick Minchin never saw anything wrong in attending a breakfast with the LaRouchites, and Kevin Andrews appears to have created his very own political oxymoron – a unique Cromwellian Catholicism. And of course ever present is the sinister Eric Abetz who sees nothing wrong with using his staff to investigate witnesses at Senate committee hearings in order to try to discredit them. The virtual outlawing of strikes and the hounding of union leaders, the contempt for accountability, a dysfunctional Freedom of Information regime, a sustained diminution of human rights and civil liberties, and a massive build-up of internal security forces all serve to make this country a very different place from the one in which many of us grew up. David Hicks affidavit with adjutant general 10/12/04According to MOJOBLOG - I have been beaten before, after, and during interrogations…. As part of the plea bargain that will get David Hicks out of an Australian jail Hicks had to sign a gag order at Guantanamo in which, according to the Center for Constitutional Rights, which has represented Hicks in the past, Hicks agrees to not speak to the media for one year after his release and to state that he has never been mistreated while at Guantánamo. He also has to agree that his detention was lawful pursuant to law of armed conflict. Furthermore, he was forced to give up the right to sue over his treatment in the future, and will cooperate with investigators should the need arise. He is forbidden from profiting from his story by, for instance, publishing a book or selling movie rights. the fun begins on november 25Norman Abjorensen in Crikey writes. If, as the polls tell us, November 24 is a foregone conclusion, can we then look forward to the morning after? Costello's supporters - especially those hoping to be elevated under his leadership - will mutter about selfish old men putting ambition before party. The Howard camp will respond by saying (1) Costello weakened Howard by undermining him (2) he was as much to blame as Howard for the policies rejected by the electorate (3) if he had been leader the loss would have been even greater as he is unelectable, and (4) they will do all they can to block any bid by him for the leadership. Tony Abbott will find a way to blame the states, somehow bagging both the Labor governments for their propaganda and the state Liberal parties for not doing enough. Those on the far right will say Howard was not conservative enough; the dries will say Howard was too wet; and business will moan about the Coalition being insensitive to their needs. Malcolm Turnbull will lay the blame at Howard's feet for his refusal to sign Kyoto, and probably add a gratuitous spray about Howard's leadership. Alexander Downer will stamp his feet and predict rifts with our immediate neighbours under Labor, and opinionated academics will predict the end of the Liberal Party as we know it. pork barrelling- an exampleThis is an extract from a friend on the South Coast of NSW`s email, somewhere near Nowra, and is an example of how things are done in John Howard`s Australia. Yesterday I was talking to my neighbour Dr Trev, and he was telling me about the little pork barrelling that went on here this year. Apparently, being an area of high retirees, low income and unemployed people, there was a great need for an MRI (medical scanner) in the Shoalhaven as the nearest was Wollongong. Too far for many, too difficult for others due to lack of public transport and money for either petrol or a car to put it in. So our local Fed MP made a great “I’ll get the PM /Health Minister to fund one” blah blah. By the way, she is the Parliamentary Whip! Two years ago, amid much fanfare and Brendan Nelson announcing, we, through the University of Wollongong, of which we have a local campus, received funding for a Graduate School of Medicine and this year, School of Nursing. This is to apparently provide more doctors and nurses for regional and rural areas. The thought being, if they train in the country, they stay in the country. So what they are hoping to achieve is that someone who has a degree in something other than medicine, can go to the uni, do some extra stuff and become a doctor. (Or at least I think that is the general idea, mind you I could be wrong). Anyway, the funding for the MRI arrived and was given to the local PRIVATE PRACTIONER of radiology services, who is a staunch Liberal supporter, not the teaching facility at the Uni. Can you believe that? So, instead of providing a valuable teaching resource, providing free, or at least greatly reduced cost, to the people, we now have to go the Dr Whistlers rooms and pay through the nose. It’s on the nose don’t you think? Dr Trev is very angry. I told him to raise the issue with the papers, but he has to be careful here in Liberal land. But he has written to the Herald and been published before. Ah, it’s all crap and I’m over it. There you have Tony Abbott admitting that we have lost lots of rights with Work Choices today. It makes you wonder if he is the full quid or whether he’s just out to fail and bail, getting his lovely entitlements. John Howard claiming he “hasn’t seen the report” and therefore can’t comment. Politics – it’s all cyclic and crap follows all the bastards. Anyone with ethics either loses them or gets beaten down. an argument against compulsory votingPeter Saunders from the Centre of Independent Studies writes.. Compulsory voting has many negative consequences. It makes political parties complacent, for they can rely on the law to get their vote out rather than going door-knocking. It also disguises voter disenchantment (the 100% turnout next week will cover up the disillusionment many voters may be feeling). But the biggest draw-back is that it puts the fate of the country in the hands of those who know and care least about it. If voting were voluntary, probably one-third of Australians wouldn’t bother. These are the people who don’t understand the issues and are not interested. But to avoid a fine, they’ll traipse off to the polling station on the 24th and they will vote for ... whom? Probably, they’ll vote for whichever party has managed to penetrate their indifference and incomprehension with its blatant spending bribes. The cruder and more brazen the bribe, the more likely it is they will be aware of it. That’s why Howard and Rudd will continue waving dollar bills in our faces. They know they can’t buy your vote or mine, but they think they can buy the support of those who don’t give a stuff. What’s really depressing is, they are probably right.
more jack the insiderIn the Australian Jack has a look at the minor parties. The ongoing battle between the Kruddster and Honest has transfixed the nation. We have taken our eyes off what Natasha Stott-Despoja called the “try-hards” and “also-rans” of our democracy. So let me take you for a trip down into the grass roots. And it doesn’t get more rooted than the Liberty and Democracy Party. The Liberty and Democracy Party (LDP) has a raft of candidates running for the Senate. According to the LDP web site, they’re for lower taxes, smaller government and individual responsibility. One candidate is Lisa Milat, sister-in-law of mass murderer, Ivan. Lisa believes in easing the squeeze on gun owners. Fair enough. Can’t do any harm now, can it? And then there’s the LDP’s Senate Candidate for the Apple Isle, Bede Ireland. Last week Bede issued a statement calling for the decriminalisation of incest between consenting adults. Well, he is a Tasmanian. I deeply admire a man who supports the retention of time-honoured traditions. To add to the fun, the LDP has done a preference deal with Steve Fielding’s lot, giving new meaning to the term, family first. andrew bartlett democrat press release 11/11/07Queensland Democrat Senator Andrew Bartlett has accused Family First of not telling the truth about their preference deals and their record in the Senate. Senator Bartlett said “Family First has again tried to deny their preference deals with extremists like Pauline Hanson, but the simple fact is that they have given their Senate preferences to Pauline Hanson after the Coalition, but ahead of every other serious Senate contender in Queensland, and they are receiving Pauline Hanson’s preferences in return.” “Their preference deals have significantly increased the chances of Ms Hanson being elected, particularly if the Coalition vote crashes as is predicted and Pauline Hanson grabs some of those votes.” “Family First likes to label everyone else as extreme, but they’ve done a deal with an extreme candidate promoting racial and religious discrimination.” “And despite all their attacks on the Greens as extreme, they have actually put me and the Democrats last on their preferences - below the Greens, below the ALP, even below the Socialists – showing they see the Democrats as a real threat in Queensland, despite their dishonest advertising pretending we’ve disappeared.” “Not content with their public attacks on gays and lesbians and their families, they are happy to align themselves with and receive preferences from parties which discriminate against Muslim and migrant families.” “Family First uses misleading Senate statistics to claim to be balanced, but their preference deals show they are locked in with John Howard and his Coalition, as does their Senate voting record of supporting the Coalition every time they have been in a genuine balance of power situation.” “No amount of Family First fibs can cover up the fact that they failed the few times when the balance of power pressure has been on them in the Senate - on media ownership and keeping student services under VSU. “Family First have done a deal to support the Coalition with their preferences, and the Greens have done the same with Labor. It is a reminder that only the Democrats are truly independent of both major parties, an essential quality for anyone seeking to hold balance of power in the Senate,” Senator Bartlett concluded. more reasons to not vote howardPosted by Noel Gardner 11/11/07 These are the ten reasons to not vote for the coalition of the willing liberals. |
