• 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.
A

Arksy

Member
Abbott called a press conference for 4:30....presumably about the Speaker. The expenses claims in poor judgment just keep piling on.
 
H

hidys

Member
c5ccda289dc88dbcb8c5b72a13da568b.gif
 
B

bobnowhere

Member
As soon as News Limited turned and lampooned her and the PM on the front cover, it was over. There was never any way back from there.

I wonder if she will pay the cash back for all her travel or does the PM saying "don't hate the playa, hate the game" absolve her of all financial responsibility?
 
V

viciouskillersquirrel

Member
It baffles me that people get up in arms over the abuse of privileges like this that may amount in a few millions in money spent on luxuries, but remain silent when the government announces short-sighted policies that will end up costing billions or blatantly violates human rights. I'd gladly allow a few high ranking politicians to dine on caviar in private jets if it meant getting a fully functional NBN or an asylum seeker policy that didn't involve gulags in dangerous foreign places.

Still, the way they doubled down and insisted that no mistake or abuse had taken place in spite of growing pressure makes today's announcement a delectable feast of schadenfreude.
 
J

JC Sera

Member
viciouskillersquirrel said:
It baffles me that people get up in arms over the abuse of privileges like this that may amount in a few millions in money spent on luxuries, but remain silent when the government announces short-sighted policies that will end up costing billions or blatantly violates human rights. I'd gladly allow a few high ranking politicians to dine on caviar in private jets if it meant getting a fully functional NBN or an asylum seeker policy that didn't involve gulags in dangerous foreign places.

Still, the way they doubled down and insisted that no mistake or abuse had taken place in spite of growing pressure makes today's announcement a delectable feast of schadenfreude.
Click to expand...
because xenophobic racism that has cultivated and hyped up for the last 10 years
 
Y

Yagharek

Member
viciouskillersquirrel said:
It baffles me that people get up in arms over the abuse of privileges like this that may amount in a few millions in money spent on luxuries, but remain silent when the government announces short-sighted policies that will end up costing billions or blatantly violates human rights. I'd gladly allow a few high ranking politicians to dine on caviar in private jets if it meant getting a fully functional NBN or an asylum seeker policy that didn't involve gulags in dangerous foreign places.

Still, the way they doubled down and insisted that no mistake or abuse had taken place in spite of growing pressure makes today's announcement a delectable feast of schadenfreude.
Click to expand...

This country is comfortable in racism and token appeals to humanitarian causes.

When both labor and liberal parties are happy to support silence wrt child abuse in detention centres and covering up rape, what do you expect.
 
H

hirokazu

Member
bobnowhere said:
I wonder if she will pay the cash back for all her travel or does the PM saying "don't hate the playa, hate the game" absolve her of all financial responsibility?
Click to expand...

Well now that she's out of the limelight, she'll probably continue to rack up unjustified expenses on the backbench and nobody's gonna care to check.
 
A

Arksy

Member
hirokazu said:
Well now that she's out of the limelight, she'll probably continue to rack up unjustified expenses on the backbench and nobody's gonna care to check.
Click to expand...

She'll do a hell of a lot less though, she won't have to travel as much. So I doubt that, plus she'll probably be a bit cautious from now on, the investigation is still ongoing remember...
 
H

hidys

Member
JC Sera said:
because xenophobic racism that has cultivated and hyped up for the last 10 years
Click to expand...

I think the asylum seeker issue is far more complicated than that.

Of course xenophobia plays a big part in a lot of peoples perception of the boats but the more I've looked at the issue and the more I've talked to people it makes me think in the minds of most people it is predominantly an issue of security rather than one of race.

This is the fundamental issue which many refugee advocates fail to grasp and why we will never get fair treatment for asylum seekers. Ultimately asylum seeker advocates have to realize that they are the minority and actually have to work to convince the majority that asylum seekers and boats are not a security threat and perhaps that our current approach is.

Hell it's pretty clear from Abbott's policy that he has framed it in those terms. Treating boats as a threat to national security has allowed him to treat asylum seekers with such disdain.

Framing this as about race and human rights won't win anybody over who isn't already won over and simply expecting politicians to do the right thing because it is will never work.
 
Y

Yagharek

Member
hidys said:
Of course xenophobia plays a big part in a lot of peoples perception of the boats but the more I've looked at the issue and the more I've talked to people it makes me think in the minds of most people it is predominantly an issue of security rather than one of race.
Click to expand...

In terms of security, true.

Who knows, someone could one day come by boat, get elected prime minister and refuse to do anything regarding climate change.

That's a major potential security issue. After all, imagine the consequences to the environment if we did nothing!
 
H

hidys

Member
Yagharek said:
In terms of security, true.

Who knows, someone could one day come by boat, get elected prime minister and refuse to do anything regarding climate change.

That's a major potential security issue. After all, imagine the consequences to the environment if we did nothing!
Click to expand...

I have absolutely no idea what your point is.
 
H

hidys

Member
So who will be the next speaker?

And I like Bernard Keane's eulogy for Bishop

As for Bishop, good riddance. The one-time senator who used Senate estimates to demonise public servants for merely doing their jobs, the ambitious woman convinced she was a Liberal Party messiah who lost votes when she transferred to the lower house, the minister John Howard dumped after the kero baths scandal and never let near ministerial office again, the Speaker so blatantly partisan she made Leo McLeay look balanced — her departure takes nothing away from public life. The only positive thing she could achieve for her party and the Parliament now is to leave politics and allow her safe seat to be taken by a Liberal of genuine talent.
Click to expand...

http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/08/02/bishop-gone-abbott-finally-bows-to-the-inevitable/
 
S

Shaneus

Member
viciouskillersquirrel said:
It baffles me that people get up in arms over the abuse of privileges like this that may amount in a few millions in money spent on luxuries, but remain silent when the government announces short-sighted policies that will end up costing billions or blatantly violates human rights. I'd gladly allow a few high ranking politicians to dine on caviar in private jets if it meant getting a fully functional NBN or an asylum seeker policy that didn't involve gulags in dangerous foreign places.

Still, the way they doubled down and insisted that no mistake or abuse had taken place in spite of growing pressure makes today's announcement a delectable feast of schadenfreude.
Click to expand...
Yes, but they had their caviar and yet they still neglect all the things you mention. Hence why we have to jump on shit like this. I think the theory is that if they can be discredited on bullshit like this, they can be discredited for the more heinous stuff.

hidys said:
So who will be the next speaker?

And I like Bernard Keane's eulogy for Bishop

http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/08/02/bishop-gone-abbott-finally-bows-to-the-inevitable/
Click to expand...
Bernard Keane is generally pretty great, though.

to this day she has insisted all her claims were within entitlements, something that may yet be tested in court
Click to expand...
Oh god, I hope this goes ahead. Should be glorious.
 
E

Elaugaufein

Member
hidys said:
I think the asylum seeker issue is far more complicated than that.

Of course xenophobia plays a big part in a lot of peoples perception of the boats but the more I've looked at the issue and the more I've talked to people it makes me think in the minds of most people it is predominantly an issue of security rather than one of race.

This is the fundamental issue which many refugee advocates fail to grasp and why we will never get fair treatment for asylum seekers. Ultimately asylum seeker advocates have to realize that they are the minority and actually have to work to convince the majority that asylum seekers and boats are not a security threat and perhaps that our current approach is.

Hell it's pretty clear from Abbott's policy that he has framed it in those terms. Treating boats as a threat to national security has allowed him to treat asylum seekers with such disdain.

Framing this as about race and human rights won't win anybody over who isn't already won over and simply expecting politicians to do the right thing because it is will never work.
Click to expand...

Its kind of hard to make an argument against asylum seekers as a security issue because its
a) manifestly moronic; and
b) internally inconsistent with other parts of the pro-horrible conditions argument.

Its really hard to make an argument against a bunch of really shoddy boats with people kept in poor conditions for weeks as a security issue. Because that position is on its face stupid. What are they going to do, starve themselves at our military capability ?

If the issue is that these boats getting through means other boats can get through, then very few of our measures would be effective against boats that provide a real threat.

If its that single people on these boats could potentially be serious terrorists then you'd be far better off investing that paranoia into legitimate means of entry which people with resources are more likely to subvert.

Its also incoherent with the argument that we have to be horrible to asylum seekers to prevent people drowning at sea. If them drowning at sea is such a serious risk it justifies the treatment we're applying, there's no way they can be a serious security threat. Attacks with such a high probability of suicidal failure can't be a threat.
 
H

hidys

Member
Elaugaufein said:
Its kind of hard to make an argument against asylum seekers as a security issue because its
a) manifestly moronic; and
b) internally inconsistent with other parts of the pro-horrible conditions argument.

Its really hard to make an argument against a bunch of really shoddy boats with people kept in poor conditions for weeks as a security issue. Because that position is on its face stupid. What are they going to do, starve themselves at our military capability ?

If the issue is that these boats getting through means other boats can get through, then very few of our measures would be effective against boats that provide a real threat.

If its that single people on these boats could potentially be serious terrorists then you'd be far better off investing that paranoia into legitimate means of entry which people with resources are more likely to subvert.

Its also incoherent with the argument that we have to be horrible to asylum seekers to prevent people drowning at sea. If them drowning at sea is such a serious risk it justifies the treatment we're applying, there's no way they can be a serious security threat. Attacks with such a high probability of suicidal failure can't be a threat.
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about consistency or what is right.

I'm talking about marketing and most people do perceive this issue as a security one.

It's also true that arguing this issue on human rights grounds isn't going to win anybody over who doesn't already care.
 
E

Elaugaufein

Member
hidys said:
I'm not talking about consistency or what is right.

I'm talking about marketing and most people do perceive this issue as a security one.

It's also true that arguing this issue on human rights grounds isn't going to win anybody over who doesn't already care.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm willing to accept that people believe obviously stupid things. What I'm asking is how do you propose to campaign / counter-market against this ? You can't attack it logically because it has no internal logic to attack.
 
F

Fredescu

Member
Y

Yagharek

Member
Elaugaufein said:
How the hell do you get expenses of $10,000 a day in Europe ? I spent a week in Ireland at a 4 Star Hotel, charged lunch and dinner to the room (Breakfast was complementary) and the entire thing came to $2500. Did he fly everywhere ? Keep a limo on retainer ? Eat only food that had to be specially imported from Australia ?
Click to expand...

They're all on it.

Barnaby Joyce said "Good people on both sides of the political fence will soon be without a job and I don't think that is a good thing,"

I say it is.

Time for a cleanout at the pig farm.
 
Y

Yagharek

Member
Were the expenses including accommodation for staff and others there supporting the official business, or was it just for one man?
 
F

Fredescu

Member
Andrew Bolt slams Chris Mitchell as "weak and contemptible". This is actually kind of a big deal I think. Chris is close to Murdoch and doesn't take prisoners. Is Bolts "star power" enough for him to throw away his Newscorp gig?

Further reading on Chris Mitchell: https://www.themonthly.com.au/power-murdoch-man-chris-mitchell-sally-neighbour-3589

I hope someone reads that, I blew one of my three free articles getting the link!

Edit: Crikey has a bit on it:

Crikey said:
Bolt v Mitchell. Convicted racial discriminator and News Corp columnist Andrew Bolt has continued his war with The Australian this morning. He's furious that for the second day in a row, The Australian's Cut and Paste column has criticised his statements on the Adam Goodes saga. Bolt, a close reader of the Oz, said yesterday that the paper risked alienating its readership, which was at "serious odds" with the masthead over whether it was racist to boo Adam Goodes. "This is not the first time that I’ve wondered whether The Australian has lost its head and its direction," Bolt wrote yesterday on his blog.

Today's subsequent brush-up in the Oz has prompted Bolt to wax furiously on The Australian's direction. His post began by criticising the paper once again for its John Lyons exclusive alleging Tony Abbott had unilaterally considered sending troops to Iraq.

"As I said yesterday, The Australian’s behaviour is weak and contemptible, and I wonder once again whether its leadership has run off course," Bolt wrote. "That story, never corrected or apologised for, was pushed by editor in chief Chris Mitchell. I know how it started and the terrible toll it took on the story’s alleged 'source'."

"Then came the paper’s repeated blustering and bullying -- even a suggestion my editors silence me for my 'poison' - when I pointed out the dangers and plainly confused logic in its misguided support for race- based changes to the constitution. That cause is promoted fervently by editor in chief Chris Mitchell. Yesterday more of the same -- The Australian doctored quotes from Miranda Devine and me to make it falsely appear we had contradicted ourselves over Adam Goodes. Weak and contemptible, and an apparent attempt to settle scores by joining in a media pack attack against its News Corp colleagues.

"Today The Australian responds to my exposure of its tactics in a way many people (not least Robert Manne) will say is typical of the paper under Mitchell -- not by confessing error but by going in even harder."

We hope The Australian continues to bait Bolt, if only to see whether the columnist comes out and properly calls for Mitchell to be sacked. He's so close to suggesting that already. -- Myriam Robn
Click to expand...
 
F

Fredescu

Member
I think Rupert has been thinking about extremism while watching and publicly bemoaning the Trump presidential candidacy and it's potential to damage the Republican party as a whole. In light of that, I wonder what he thinks when he watches people like Bolt, Devine, and Panahi write things that run counter to public sentiment on his dime. Probably not much, but eh.
 
Y

Yagharek

Member
Fredescu said:
I think Rupert has been thinking about extremism while watching and publicly bemoaning the Trump presidential candidacy and it's potential to damage the Republican party as a whole. In light of that, I wonder what he thinks when he watches people like Bolt, Devine, and Panahi write things that run counter to public sentiment on his dime. Probably not much, but eh.
Click to expand...

Whatever makes money, News Ltd/Corp will do. That's their only guiding principle.
 
F

Fredescu

Member
Yagharek said:
Whatever makes money, News Ltd/Corp will do. That's their only guiding principle.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure. The Australian has made a loss for years and years. Pretty sure Murdoch uses it for a political platform in a lot of ways. Trying to "frame the debate" and so forth. What you've said applies to the tabloids though I think.
 
D

Dryk

Member
I wouldn't be able to spend that much money if I tried. I went to Japan for a week with $5000 and came back with more than $4000 <.<

Random aside: I always do a double-take when I see Myriam's byline. She hung out with some of the same people as me for a few years at uni because she was dating and subsequently married a guy I went to school with.
 
S

senahorse

Member
Fredescu said:
Andrew Bolt slams Chris Mitchell as "weak and contemptible". This is actually kind of a big deal I think. Chris is close to Murdoch and doesn't take prisoners. Is Bolts "star power" enough for him to throw away his Newscorp gig?

Further reading on Chris Mitchell: https://www.themonthly.com.au/power-murdoch-man-chris-mitchell-sally-neighbour-3589

I hope someone reads that, I blew one of my three free articles getting the link!

Edit: Crikey has a bit on it:
Click to expand...

Nothing surprising, but fascinating at the same time, thanks for the link.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Graven |OT| A heretic priest killing hexed creatures
4
968
mansoor1980 replied
What actually happened to Warren Ellis?
14
2K
CGNoire replied
NEOGAF - A Data-Driven View Pt. 3: Communities Section
Social Community
10
2K
Komatsu replied
  • Locked
How The Last of Us became 'the greatest story' ever told in video games
Opinion Analysis 2 3 4 5
203
22K
Elysium44 replied
Forza Horizon 5 |OT| Are you a Mexican, or a Mexican't?
|OT| 42 43 44 45 46
2K
210K
MagnetoWasRight replied
Top Bottom