• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

AusPoliGAF |OT| Boats? What Boats?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Arksy

Member
Apparently Andrew Bolt is foaming at the mouth because Penny Wong didn't leap across the table and slap him with a charge under 18c

Of course she didn't, she's a politician. Being a politician charging someone under 18c is a free speech campaigners dream come true because it makes the best case for its (un)constitutionality.

Plus there's precedent which basically says that politicians are so fair game it's not even funny. (Politicians as representatives form a class of people less protected by statutes such as defamation etc (Lange v ABC)).

The ABC called Lange (former NZ PM) corrupt. He brought a defamation case against the ABC. Lange lost due to freedom of political communication as it forms a defence to defamation.
 

Quasar

Member
In a statement, Tasmanian Palmer United Party Senator Jacqui Lambie has defended her leader.

"If anybody thinks that we should have a national security and defence policy which ignores the threat of a Chinese Communist invasion - you're delusional and [you've] got rocks in your head," Senator Lambie said.

Hilarious. Jacqui needs to be given a mic more often.
 

Rubixcuba

Banned
Palmer is a useful tool to reevaluate your own opinions. If you agree with him you have an opportunity to critically analyse your own thoughts and fix them.

Palmer talked of the budget and on how unfair it is. Agree completely. Palmer also discussed means of 'restoring the budget' without resorting to destroying social services across the nation, cue more agreeing.

Calling out China on its human rights abuses, is commendable. Calling them bastards and ranting on how they will buy all out land? Not so much. Palmer Party is only digging hole deeper by Jacqui Lambie's comments today.
 

Yagharek

Member
Also yes, I realise I'm being flippant, but I genuinely think Palmer is entirely disingenuous every time he opens his mouth. I don't believe we have ever seen an authentic, honestly held opinion from him on any issue at all.
 
Q&A last night was golden. Until Clive Palmer went all Grandpa Simpson (not to be confused with Warren Truss' 90% slogans, "we've got a plan" and "I wouldn't put it that ways"ses).

John Falzon responding to that schoolgirls question with quoting and poetry was an eye-opening moment.
 
A

A More Normal Bird

Unconfirmed Member
Bit of a niche story but I feel it's kind of illustrative:

Victorian government and opposition set to fight it out over state ban on caged-MMA
Street violence in Victoria is directly impacted by mixed martial arts fighters competing in a cage.

That’s the sentiment that the Napthine government will take into the state election on November 29, while the opposition is promising to overturn a ban on caged MMA combat and open the door to a potential $50m windfall for the “sporting capital of the world.”
...
Current legislation permits mixed martial arts (MMA) competition in Victoria. The state ban on the sport only applies to the arena in which MMA bouts can take place. Fighters can participate in the sport, but only in a traditional boxing ring, not a purpose built cage.
...
"The Coalition Government has been very clear on its position and has no plans to reverse any decision on cage bans that was instituted by the Labor Government in 2008 due to its stylised street violence. Since 2008 public concern over street violence has only grown.

The efforts made to combat street violence on both of sides of politics have been very important over the last seven years, and is something the Victorian Coalition Government will continue," the statement read.
...
The key argument for those who support a move to have Victoria’s cage-ban lifted is fighter safety.

Unlike boxing and kickboxing, MMA fighters engage in wrestling, grappling and ground fighting (Jiu Jitsu) in almost every bout. When these skills are put to work inside a roped ring, rather than a fenced-in enclosure, fighters can be subjected to injuries sustained outside the enclosed sporting arena.

“If you are to allow cage fighting, it is best done in a cage. The traditional boxing ring was not designed for mixed martial arts competition,” the Chairman of Australasia’s Ringside Medicine Association Dr Peter Lewis told MMA Kanvas.

“The potential for (fighters) going over the top rope is very large. One of the few times where a (MMA) fighter has had to go to hospital by ambulance was when the fighter went over the top rope and landed on his neck and head,” Dr Lewis recalls from his 25 years in the profession.

Working across boxing, kickboxing and MMA, Australia’s most experienced medical official has presided over some 20,000 fights in 31 capital cities around the world. He believes that the government’s current ban, forcing MMA fights to take place in a boxing ring, rather than a cage is both “bizarre” and “almost a suspension of logic.”
...
Interestingly, the cage ban was brought in by the Brumby Government (Labor) in 2008. This fact is not lost on the current Liberal government, who intend on upholding the current legislation should they serve a second term in power.

"The cage was banned by the previous Labor Government, the then Sports Minister and now deputy leader of the Opposition James Merlino said, 'I believe the spectacle of two competitors in cage combat-style competition does not meet the community's standards of what is acceptable for professional combat sports in Victoria.' . Community concerns on street violence have heightened since that time," the statement read.

Now serving as the opposition, Labor have changed their policy and will overturn the cage ban should they come into power in November. The Shadow Minister revealed that the policy shift is one that the opposition will look to implement should they be successful in the end of year, state election.

“A lot more MMA events are being held now, and obviously it’s the fastest growing sport in all of the world. From time to time, governments need to fine-tune their policy and certainly in the last few months and in the time that I’ve been the Shadow Minister for Sport I’ve had a very close look at this.. this is a commitment that we’ve made, we’ve actually changed policy," he said.
The party of small government.
 
Also yes, I realise I'm being flippant, but I genuinely think Palmer is entirely disingenuous every time he opens his mouth. I don't believe we have ever seen an authentic, honestly held opinion from him on any issue at all.

It seems to me more like he's generally fairly sincere, at the moment he speaks, its just that his first priority is always his personal interests (be it his companies, or spiting Campbell Newman), and his other opinions change swiftly in light of that. If it was planned and studied disingenuity , then many of his statements don't make sense given his voting base, like his comments about the non-existence of the debt crisis or the lack of need for inhumane treatment of asylum seekers.
 

Danoss

Member
I haven't been able to find much else on this, but it's certainly not good. It's only a short article, and the whole of it is:

New laws to give police power to seize unexplained assets

Police could soon be able to seize all the assets of a person suspected of a serious crime, if new legislation by the Victorian government is passed.

Suspected criminals would have to prove to the courts the assets were purchased with lawfully obtained money to recover them.

Victorian Premier Denis Napthine says if the person is unable to prove the assets or funds were obtained lawfully, they will be forfeited.

“Current seizure laws require a direct link between a particular asset and the proceeds of crime. Under these reforms no direct link is needed between the particular assets and crime,” he says.

Attorney-General Robert Clark said the laws would help police tackle low-level drug trafficking and other crimes.

Horror stories from the US and the way police departments seem to operate using these laws sets a example that is unwise to follow. There was mention of this in an article on the militarisation of police I'd read earlier today:

Cops or soldiers? America’s police have become too militarised

Because of a legal quirk, SWAT raids can be profitable. Rules on civil asset-forfeiture allow the police to seize anything which they can plausibly claim was the proceeds of a crime. Crucially, the property-owner need not be convicted of that crime. If the police find drugs in his house, they can take his cash and possibly the house, too. He must sue to get them back.

Many police departments now depend on forfeiture for a fat chunk of their budgets. In 1986, its first year of operation, the federal Asset Forfeiture Fund held $93.7m. By 2012, that and the related Seized Asset Deposit Fund held nearly $6 billion.

Mr Balko contends that these forfeiture laws are “unfair on a very basic level”. They “disproportionately affect low-income people” and provide a perverse incentive for police to focus on drug-related crimes, which “come with a potential kickback to the police department”, rather than rape and murder investigations, which do not. They also provide an incentive to arrest suspected drug-dealers inside their houses, which can be seized, and to bust stash houses after most of their drugs have been sold, when police can seize the cash.

It's worrying, to say the least.
 

Dryk

Member
It's so saddening watching renewable energy investment fall off a fucking cliff at the mere election of the LNP

I haven't been able to find much else on this, but it's certainly not good. It's only a short article, and the whole of it is:
That's how it works in this country though isn't it? Cops complain that due process makes their jobs too hard and people immediately legislate to try to get rid of it.
 

Yagharek

Member
It seems to me more like he's generally fairly sincere, at the moment he speaks, its just that his first priority is always his personal interests (be it his companies, or spiting Campbell Newman), and his other opinions change swiftly in light of that. If it was planned and studied disingenuity , then many of his statements don't make sense given his voting base, like his comments about the non-existence of the debt crisis or the lack of need for inhumane treatment of asylum seekers.

His unpredictability and shifting stances though makes it impossible to discern between a sincerely held and expressed opinion; and a convenient at the time one.

I would say his approach is Machiavellian, except that would imply there is a degree of cleverness.
 

senahorse

Member
lambo_zpsbfaf3bc0.png~original
 
Bit of a niche story but I feel it's kind of illustrative:

The party of small government.

It's an important issue to me since as a Victorian that trains in MMA/BJJ/Muay Thai with people who compete in the AFC, I'd like to not see them succumb to injury from falling out of a boxing ring.

The cage laws are draconian as hell in the first place. Not to mention a local economy boost from a Melbourne hosted UFC event would never be a bad thing. Culturally, it won't impact any more negatively than hosting thousands of drunk Irish backpackers during the 2013 Rugby Lions tour.
 
It's so saddening watching renewable energy investment fall off a fucking cliff at the mere election of the LNP

Speaking of which, I posted on Facebook about joining Powershop because it's actually one of the energy companies that uses renewable energy sources.

jbhFZm3aXxemqb.jpg


An acquaintance that's a draft person for AGL had this to say:

"Nevermind that the 35 odd billion dollars needed to meet the target will likely be wasted as small scale renewables keep spreading and battery storage comes into play, turning traditional large scale generation redundant. .. thats a hell of alot of money to piss away. Annnnd that the target was set on forcasts that have turned out to be manifestly inaccurate. The landscape has changed dramatically and we'd be naive not to adjust to actuality. Stupid political uncertainty also means even if the scheme is kept in its current form investors wont go into such large and long term projects. Why would you with the amount of backflips from both parties?"

Is this true? It seems to me that just because the RET is no longer reachable we shouldn't try supporting any way to reach it however we as consumers can.
 
As far as I can tell it's partially true.

The RET is supposed to be a percentage but it was precalculated on demand at the time. Because demand has dropped because of price rises* the precalculated figure is actually a much greater percentage.

As for lack of certainty, it's true that doing nothing would achieve nothing, you'd basically need an explicit commitment to a fully defined level agreed upon by Labor and the LNP to get confidence back. And that's not going to happen because the LNP (as a group) has no interest in doing ((for various ideological and economic reasons) so at a level that Labor would find even remotely agreeable . That's why the uncertainty exists in the first place.

*which companies caused themselves by expanding their infrastructure to handle far more capacity than was needed, because that allows them to justify price rises to their regulators as infrastructure investments.
 
As far as I can tell it's partially true.

The RET is supposed to be a percentage but it was precalculated on demand at the time. Because demand has dropped because of price rises* the precalculated figure is actually a much greater percentage.

As for lack of certainty, it's true that doing nothing would achieve nothing, you'd basically need an explicit commitment to a fully defined level agreed upon by Labor and the LNP to get confidence back. And that's not going to happen because the LNP (as a group) has no interest in doing ((for various ideological and economic reasons) so at a level that Labor would find even remotely agreeable . That's why the uncertainty exists in the first place.

*which companies caused themselves by expanding their infrastructure to handle far more capacity than was needed, because that allows them to justify price rises to their regulators as infrastructure investments.

Makes sense. Especially where infrastructure investment is concerned...

Federal Treasury estimates that 51 per cent of an average household bill is spent on network costs. Most of that is going towards paying off the $45 billion network companies have spent on updating our poles and wires over the last five years.
Source

Eugh.
 

hidys

Member
So did anybody go to the higher ed. rally today? My mate gave me some shit for missing it (and he was correct in doing so). Damn you important class and missing previous week due to laziness.
 

SmartBase

Member
So did anybody go to the higher ed. rally today? My mate gave me some shit for missing it (and he was correct in doing so). Damn you important class and missing previous week due to laziness.

Students protesting on the streets doesn't really affect anything besides downtown traffic. A few thousand postgrads leaving their HECS debt behind and emigrating? Now that might get some attention.

But what the hell, I probably would've gone if there was one here.
 
Has there been any time in recent history that student protests have ever achieved their goals?

Has there been a time in history when a single protest by any group has achieved their goals ? As I understand it , the goal is to draw public attention to the wrongness via protest, rather than to have the protest cause a direct effect (which is highly unlikely unless you're protest happens to involve a coup d'etat). If you need to stage a protest, then you're not generally speaking part of a group that has easy influence roads in the halls of power in the first place.
 
Wow, Shorten finally not talking about those allegations that everyone knew about but didn't talk about.

Police investigation over and he's not talking about it, even though that's the only questions he's getting. Never knew there were that many ways to say you're not talking about it
 

Rubixcuba

Banned
Wow, Shorten finally not talking about those allegations that everyone knew about but didn't talk about.

Police investigation over and he's not talking about it, even though that's the only questions he's getting. Never knew there were that many ways to say you're not talking about it

Seems pretty dead and buried, police have said there was no basis for claims bought against Shorten. I can see News Limited having a field day however.
 

Quasar

Member
Has there been a time in history when a single protest by any group has achieved their goals ? As I understand it , the goal is to draw public attention to the wrongness via protest, rather than to have the protest cause a direct effect (which is highly unlikely unless you're protest happens to involve a coup d'etat). If you need to stage a protest, then you're not generally speaking part of a group that has easy influence roads in the halls of power in the first place.

Probably more a coalition, such as with the Franklin River dam.
 

lexi

Banned
Seems pretty dead and buried, police have said there was no basis for claims bought against Shorten. I can see News Limited having a field day however.

A friend of mine texted me saying 'Wow Bill Shorten raped someone!' after claiming they'd seen news on TV ala Princess Diana's death or 9/11

lol media
 

hidys

Member
Seems pretty dead and buried, police have said there was no basis for claims bought against Shorten. I can see News Limited having a field day however.

Shorten only did a press conference because News will almost certainly run a full pages spread tomorrow and he has already been told that.
 
A friend of mine texted me saying 'Wow Bill Shorten raped someone!' after claiming they'd seen news on TV ala Princess Diana's death or 9/11

lol media

And that's the problem with not saying anything. I imagine A Current Affair/60 Minutes, the Channel 7 one that's on at the same time, News Limited are all desparate to get the woman who accused Shorten on Camera or in print or at least an angry right-wing blogger, Michael Smith anyone?. The longer Shorten doesn't address it, the longer the story will go on.

A some point Shorten will have to go on camera, probably next to his wife, maybe they'll both cry, say how it's affected their family life, say he thought of quitting but his wife/someone else stopped him etc... It's the only way the story will move on, it's sad but that's how the media and public work.
 

Dryk

Member
10641297_10152369763499141_698142801204503555_n.jpg


My Physics PhD friends are apparently being babysat by three guys at all times. What a stupid waste of money for a Tony Abbott speech of all things.
 
A

A More Normal Bird

Unconfirmed Member
Abbott said:
From negotiating free trade agreements to Operation Sovereign Borders, to Operation Bring Them Home and indeed to Operation Budget Repair, there has been clarity of purpose to all this government has been trying to achieve.
Oh for f...

"Hey guys I think making everything we do sound like a military operation that's vital to Australia's continued existence is really working, is there some way we can get ASIO to investigate dole bludgers?"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom