So I know the Libs are preparing to sell off Medibank Private, but what's the status on HECs? Anyone heard anything?
If they sabotage our education system to get the budget back in surplus...
Nope, they're going after the aged pension instead.
So I know the Libs are preparing to sell off Medibank Private, but what's the status on HECs? Anyone heard anything?
If they sabotage our education system to get the budget back in surplus...
So I know the Libs are preparing to sell off Medibank Private, but what's the status on HECs? Anyone heard anything?
If they sabotage our education system to get the budget back in surplus...
Greens - So you're cleaning up in WA. Awesome. Good for you, but big fucking deal. You need to drop the head wobble and start getting serious. One half of the public at large think you're eco terrorists and the other half think of you as a protest vote. That is not what is going to turn you into a credible force in Aussie politics. Take some pointers from your more braver left wing counterparts in the minor parties and get serious about more progressive issues then just saving the Whales, and maybe then your balls might decide to drop.
Greens are pro-environment of course but they have been an excellent progressive voice on workers rights, anti-surveillance, pro NBN, all kinds of things. They're not just a party of hippies and I HATE that this is the image they have even amongst left leaning people.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...s-off-g20-agenda/story-e6frg6xf-1226873127864European Union officials say Australia has become completely disengaged on climate change since Tony Abbott was elected in September last year.
They are disappointed with the Prime Ministers approach, saying Australia was considered an important climate change player under Labor.
One well-placed EU official has likened the change to losing an ally.
Unfortunately, they're still called the Greens
The LNP voters that comment on news sites saying that Labor made us an international laughing stock confuse me. 6-months into Labor's first term they were getting along with everyone pretty well... now...
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...s-off-g20-agenda/story-e6frg6xf-1226873127864
Greens are pro-environment of course but they have been an excellent progressive voice on workers rights, anti-surveillance, pro NBN, all kinds of things. They're not just a party of hippies and I HATE that this is the image they have even amongst left leaning people.
What are their views on drug reform? What are their views on Euthanasia? There is plenty more that they could stand for and yet they don't.
Considering how loudly they're crowing about democratic this and undemocratic that I'd expect them to at least make an effortYou expect LNP supporters on Murdoch sites to be rational?
There is no case, none, to limit debate about the performance of national leaders. The more powerful people are, the more important the presumption must be that less powerful people should be able to say exactly what they think of them.
What are their views on drug reform? What are their views on Euthanasia? There is plenty more that they could stand for and yet they don't.
Um, they are pro both? And have been for ages?
![]()
As Markot points out, their views on those issues are generally well-known, if you don't know them by now that's on you. Political parties' responsibility to disseminate their policy positions only goes to a certain point. At some point you have to put on your own underwear and chew your food yourself.
I also don't understand the call for the Greens to become something they're not. They are always going to be a pro-environment party first and foremost. The fact they are generally left-wing and progressive on many other issues is a bonus and they have become a significant player in regards to a fair amount of them which are unrelated to the environment. It's perfectly fine to bemoan the lack of progressive alternatives to the big parties that are also not micromicro parties, but expecting the Greens to betray their base is a bit silly.
what were they thinking
You guys might wanna look up Scott Ludlam's recent comments about drug reform at least.
I had the grim job of visiting a mum and dad at the Brisbane immigration detention centre. We had to tell them that we had lost an application for an urgent high court injunction to stop the federal government from forcibly removing them and their three children including their six-month old baby, Ferouz to Darwin the next morning.
Naturally, they were distraught. Theyve already spent most of their lives on the move, first escaping terror in their villages in Burma, then to Malaysia, then Indonesia, before seeking protection in Australia. In the last seven months alone, theyve been on Christmas Island, Nauru, Brisbane and now Darwin.
They fled their homes for a reason. The mums family home was confiscated by the Burmese military regime, and she lost contact with her father after he was conscripted into forced labour. The dads own father had been killed by the military when he was seven and he had been attacked by them as well.
In November 2013, Ferouzs mum was brought from Nauru to Brisbane to give birth to him, due to pregnancy complications. Shortly after his birth, his mum was returned to detention and separated from him, while he remained in special care with respiratory problems. They were then told they would be returned to Nauru at any time.
But the worst part is that Ferouz should not be in detention at all. He was born in Brisbanes Mater Hospital, the very place where I, and my own children were born. He holds a Queensland birth certificate. Until Saturday, he had never left Brisbane.
Despite this, the federal government argues, relying on a section of the Migration Act 1958, that Ferouz came to Australia by boat. They recently refused to consider his application for a protection visa, arguing that he is, in the Orwellian language of that Act, an unauthorised maritime arrival. Thats right, according to our government, a boy born in Brisbane in fact came here by boat.
You guys might wanna look up Scott Ludlam's recent comments about drug reform at least.
Abbott's green army is here to stay
Abbott's green army are on their way
And I would rather be anywhere else
But here today
I'd like to think it's only a powerful minority that make those kind of judgement calls. I really would.Why is an Australian baby locked up in detention?
I don't understand how anyone, anyone, could ethically work in the immigration department at this point.
The federal government has issued the company building the $41 billion national broadband network with new instructions to use a variety of technologies to save money and time, without waiting for the results of key reviews.
The statement of expectations from Communications Minister Malcolm Turnbull and Finance Minister Mathias Cormann was issued on Tuesday to the board of NBN Co.
It locks NBN Co into an “optimised multi-technology mix” that allows the company to use fibre-to-the-node technology, which relies on Telstra’s copper network and delivers slower broadband at a lower cost. The company’s upcoming 2014-17 corporate plan will be designed with the system in mind.
But the move comes before a large number of key reviews is completed. The Vertigan Committee report into the regulations of the NBN will not be delivered until the middle of the year and a strategic review into the fixed wireless and satellite parts of the NBN is still under consideration by the NBN Co board.
We know why. Not enough Albo. Solution? More Albo.Funnily enough I'm actually getting hooked up to the NBN in the near future
Why and how the Labor party needs to be reformed
Heard Brandis on the radio, saying that in response to the Snowden leaks our intelligence response will be to do exactly what we were doing only more so. Nice. He also called Snowden's act treasonous. Apparently the correct response to things you know the public won't approve of is to make sure they never find out and if they do yell "terrorism" as loud as possible.
How can they say it's at a "lower cost" before that report is done?
Weeping for our country right now :/
But... but... the adults are in charge... I know because they told me they wereThis government is like an infinite spiral of bad, contemptible, hypocritical decisions. AND THE FUCKING NEW YES-MAN SENATE'S NOT EVEN IN YET.
WHAT THE FUUUUUUUUUUUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
This government is like an infinite spiral of bad, contemptible, hypocritical decisions. AND THE FUCKING NEW YES-MAN SENATE'S NOT EVEN IN YET.
WHAT THE FUUUUUUUUUUUCKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
I really don't see how someones race is in any way comparable to someone's views on climate change.
But what about the fair comment exceptions?
Fair call on the chilling effect portion. But if you look at the history of cases that have actually been prosecuted under the RDA, it seems to be a) rare and b) almost entirely made up of stuff that would immediately trigger the smell test in some capacity. The Bolt Case is actually probably the only one I thought would have been a good test had it actually been good journalism, which it is not.
Of course you get into the question of what the smell test actually is, but from my perspective given that legislative law has to go through an interpretative step before application anyway it doesn't seem to be as onerous as you make it out to be.
It's hard for me to entirely disagree with you re: criminalising mere offence, but let me take another tack. The currently proposed amendments restrict prohibited conduct to 'inciting violence' and that kind of thing. What's the difference between insult and psychological damage or expression that may lead - not to incitement of violence, but perhaps merely to contempt? Isn't that worthy of stopping as well?
(Let me just quietly put aside my "Why the fuck is our shithead government talking about freedom of speech with one hand and censoring the shit out of government employees with the other" pile...)
I suppose the real problem I have is that there tends to be an unstated assumption that should people be say to blather whatever they wish, then the people or the public or whatever will turn their backs on 'non-worthwhile' expression, i.e. expression that is nothing more than undirected vitriol or hate with no grounding in facts or a grounding in lies, etc, but - judging by the state of discourse - that tends not actually to be the case. And that worries me. Look at the discourse on Asylum Seekers before we've repealed the RDA; it's already fucking vile. Imagine what it'll be like after those protections are gone.