Support NeoGAF

[Fredescu]

I wouldn't really read anything on a Federal level into the NSW bi-election result. It's just the inevitable swing back to the NSW ALP after their catastrophic defeat at the last election.

Just a lazy 26% swing, that's all.

 

[roosters93]

"and firefighters were at every booth asking people to put the Liberal Party last."

why?

 

[Jintor]

"and firefighters were at every booth asking people to put the Liberal Party last."

why?

I assume due to o'farrell funding cuts to emergency services over the last few years?

 

[wonzo]

Just a lazy 26% swing, that's all.

It's what happens when an incredibly popular former local candidate returns. Every single NSW State poll has had the Liberal party with a huge majority.

 

[Arksy]

I hope Barry can claim the next election, he's my favourite politician in Australia at the moment.

By a very, very wide margin.

 

[Fredescu]

It's what happens when an incredibly popular former local candidate returns. Every single NSW State poll has had the Liberal party with a huge majority.

Which is exactly what I said I thought the main issue was, but such a large swing has to have multiple factors and I'll bet at least some of it is to do with a change of government federally, which often has a slight effect in the other direction on state results regardless of who it is.

"and firefighters were at every booth asking people to put the Liberal Party last."

why?

Specifically FBEU members, ie a fairly militant union.

I hope Barry can claim the next election, he's my favourite politician in Australia at the moment.

He will. It will be a reduced majority, but he's not going to lose.

 

[Arksy]

Which is exactly what I said I thought the main issue was, but such a large swing has to have multiple factors and I'll bet at least some of it is to do with a change of government federally, which often has a slight effect in the other direction on state results regardless of who it is.

Yep. Australian's are seemingly inherently reactionary and they tend to hate the government of the day, whatever that government is...

 

[Omikron]

Gotta love Scott Morrison.

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...at-people-called-illegals-20131019-2vtl0.html

Little battler he is.

 

[lexi]

A film is being made set on 'Titanic 2'.

He said the plot will have "some love in it", adding that he expected it to eclipse James Cameron's Titanic.

"It should be a lot better movie than that," he said.

 

[hidys]

A film is being made set on 'Titanic 2'.

I really hope Clive Palmer is actually in the movie.

 

[A More Normal Bird]

Anyone watching Q&A? Barnaby Joyce and Amanda Vanstone are coming across as... less than bright. OTOH I don't recall being massively impressed with any of Tony Burke's media appearances when he was in government but that view is changing what with the whole last minute salvation of asylum seeker children thing, plus his appearance as the only sane manpolitician on the panel tonight.

 

[markot]

..... when were Vanstone and Joyce ever considered as anything other then 'less than bright'?

 

[PhantomZone]

A film is being made set on 'Titanic 2'.

Tell him he's dreaming

 

[A More Normal Bird]

..... when were Vanstone and Joyce ever considered as anything other then 'less than bright'?

Well to some, maybe never. But tonight was an onslaught of nonsense. Towards the end, Joyce attempted to rebut Burke's assertion that the lack of women in the Coalition cabinet showed that positions weren't given on merit by pointing out that both Shorten and Albanese are men. I think he tried to make a point out of Tony Burke also being a male but he may have just been verbalising his immediate environment like a child would do with a picture book. I'm sure he meant something but it certainly eludes me.

 

[bobnowhere]

..... when were Vanstone and Joyce ever considered as anything other then 'less than bright'?

Barnaby is a clown but Vandstone us usually much better. Sadly she was in full on card carrying Liberal member mode tonight. She's much better when she can see through the blinkers.

Strangely enough she was responsible for my dad taking a redundancy package in 1996. When the Libs came into power it was his job to fly to Adelaide to meet with her and brief her on Foreign Affairs as she was the Shadow Attorney General before the election, nudge, nudge, wink, wink intelligence stuff, though she didn't become the full Attorney General after the election. On the plane ride back to Canberra she was bouncing up and down the plane celebrating the win and the next day my dad put in the papers!

 

[Mondy]

 

[wonzo]

directaction.jpg

 

[Jintor]

massive bushfires are too soon for adam bandt to talk smack about climate politics but just soon enough for tony to wear a rural fire service uniform and get some nice photo ops, and then campaign to repeal the carbon tax

 

[Jintor]

Sounds like the ACT have passed the marriage equality bill

 

[reptilescorpio]

Woo! Gay marriage!

 

[Omikron]

How long before the Feds try and smack it down?

 

[Jintor]

HC could potentially push out an injunction before they hear the Fed's case if they wanted.

also lol

 

[Dryk]

I'd say it gets immediately smacked down. Gotta get "Blocked gay marriage" and "Blocked sister's marriage"to go with "Ignored climate change" etc. Conservative trading cards and all that.

EDIT: Removed the rest since I noticed it doubled up on the post above. Also Marquels put it better than I could.

 

[hidys]

Tony's sister got engaged this week, that's probably not a coincidence.

I'm sure Tony will be there as long as he can claim expenses.

 

[Arksy]

Well Feds have to basically get an injunction before these laws take effect.

Otherwise it's pretty much game over. Once people are married, that is a form of property under the constitution which cannot be acquired other than on just terms. (Weird I know, but property under Australian eminent domain jurisprudence is incredibly broad, I suppose that's tempered by the fact that acquisition is very narrow, and a mere extinguishment may not constitute an acquisition).

So even if the Federal Government wins and the laws have been deemed unconstitutional, there's still the property issue at play. If the Federal Government loses, they won't be able to steamroll over the territory laws for the same reason...you'd have another High Court challenge.

Plus if the ACT wins it, all the other states will fall in line like domino and legislate for it. Hell I think SA will do it just to say fuck you to Canberra.

(Too tired for references to cases and sections, can dig them up if pressed)

 

[A More Normal Bird]

Well Feds have to basically get an injunction before these laws take effect.

Otherwise it's pretty much game over. Once people are married, that is a form of property under the constitution which cannot be acquired other than on just terms. (Weird I know, but property under Australian eminent domain jurisprudence is incredibly broad, I suppose that's tempered by the fact that acquisition is very narrow, and a mere extinguishment may not constitute an acquisition).

So even if the Federal Government wins and the laws have been deemed unconstitutional, there's still the property issue at play. If the Federal Government loses, they won't be able to steamroll over the territory laws for the same reason...you'd have another High Court challenge.

Plus if the ACT wins it, all the other states will fall in line like domino and legislate for it. Hell I think SA will do it just to say fuck you to Canberra.

(Too tired for references to cases and sections, can dig them up if pressed)

Cheers for the insight. The bolded made me think that this situation of the government going to court against the ACT but the government being called Canberra half the time is ripe for something like "Who's on first?".

 

[Fredescu]

Plus if the ACT wins it, all the other states will fall in line like domino and legislate for it. Hell I think SA will do it just to say fuck you to Canberra.

NSW are about to introduce a bill for it and are sounding fairly confident: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...ame-sex-marriage/story-fni0xqi4-1226745008513

 

[Dryk]

Plus if the ACT wins it, all the other states will fall in line like domino and legislate for it. Hell I think SA will do it just to say fuck you to Canberra.

I'm mad we didn't do it first. We lost our equality combo.

 

[Arksy]

I'm mad we didn't do it first. We lost our equality combo.

Pfft. Yesterday Australia was the only English speaking anglosphere country that didn't have a place where same sex couples could marry.

 

[Dryk]

Apparently I'm missing out on a crucial part of the Australian experience. I've never lost my home in a bushfire.

 

[Roulette]

How long before the Feds try and smack it down?

Not long: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-...lenge-over-act-same-sex-marriage-laws/5037674

Apparently I'm missing out on a crucial part of the Australian experience. I've never lost my home in a bushfire.

Eh?

 

[bomma_man]

IT BEGINS

The prime minister is attempting to prepare the ground for cuts and changes to the delivery of government services flowing from his proposed commission of audit, saying the government has to become more efficient and the deficit must be wound back.

Tony Abbott used an interview on the Melbourne radio station 3AW to confirm the government would move to privatise the health insurer Medibank Private once it had completed a scoping study. He did not rule out further privatisations down the track but insisted the government would act in accordance with its election mandate.

Abbott also defended the government's decision to raise the debt ceiling by $200bn despite attacking Labor consistently throughout the past parliament, and through the election campaign, for raising more debt.

The prime minister reasoned that the government wanted to increase the debt ceiling to $500bn to avoid the spectre of an ongoing partisan stoush like the recent government shutdown crisis in the US – although it appears unlikely that either Labor or the Greens will oppose the increase.

Of the changes ahead, Abbott played down the prospect that the commission of audit would propose tax increases. That, he said, was "almost inconceivable".

But he said the new government had to get the budget back on a sustainable footing and the transition would not be universally popular.

"If we are going to get debt under control, if we are going to get the budget under control – back into the black – yes, inevitably, things will have to change," Abbott said on Wednesday morning.

"There will be some things the public don't like but I think the public understands the government has been living beyond its means.

"We can't continue. And that's why, amongst other things, we are having this commission of audit."

Yet again, "penny wise, pound foolish" comes to mind.

Also, I didn't even realise we had a debt ceiling. Get rid of that shit.

 

[A More Normal Bird]

Apparently I'm missing out on a crucial part of the Australian experience. I've never lost my home in a bushfire.

Assuming this is referring to what I think it's referring to, I've thought for a while now that Abbott's habit of downplaying and even insulting independent experts who don't agree with him is one of the more dangerous elements of his politics.

 

[Jintor]

I'm sure the UN recognised expert on climate change and its effect on magnifying devastating otherwise natural events is only talking out of their hat. Which they're only wearing of course because they're such a namby-pamby wimp they can't take a little sunlight.

 

[bomma_man]

Oh boy

Mr Hunt said he ''looked up what Wikipedia'' said about bushfires and it was clear they were frequent events that had occurred during hotter months in Australia since before European settlement.
An unknown person has since updated the Minister’s Wikipedia page to note that he "was quoted as saying he uses Wikipedia for important policy research". On Thursday, Wikipedia posted a message saying that editing of Mr Hunt's page had been disabled for new or unregistered users due to vandalism.
Addressing Ms Figueres' intitial comments on Wednesday, Mr Abbott said ''fire is a part of the Australian experience''.
''Climate change is real and we should take strong action against it,'' he continued. ''But these fires are certainly not a function of climate change - they're just a function of life in Australia,'' he told Fairfax Radio.


Mr Hunt became angry during his appearance on the BBC World Service after the interviewer pressed him on whether the Coalition accepted the science around climate change - referring to reports that Mr Abbott referred to the science as ''absolute crap'' in 2009.
''In Parliament our Prime Minister has expressed clear support for the science,'' Mr Hunt replied, before the interview pressed him again.
''So [Mr Abbott] no longer thinks its absolute crap?''
''Look, with great respect, you can swear on international radio, you can invite me from Australia to do this, you can be profoundly rude, I'm happy to answer but I'm not going to be sworn at.''
''Mr Hunt, I'm merely quoting your Prime Minister,'' the interviewer protested.
The Environment Minister replied that she was taking a private conversation out of context. He later added that the Coalition had taken ''science off the table'' when it came to climate change.
''We're not debating it,'' he said.
Since reports of Mr Abbott's use of the term ''crap'', Mr Abbott has said that it was not his considered position on the subject.
While Mr Hunt was emphatic that the Coalition accepted there was a need for action on climate change, he was less definite when asked if he accepted that there was a potential ''causal'' relationship between rising temperatures and bushfires.
''By definition, bushfires happen in hot weather,'' he said.
''I think we've all got to be very careful, in talking with the senior people at the Bureau of Meteorology, for example, they always emphasise, never trying to link any particular event to climate change.''

It's gonna be a long few years.

 

[wonzo]

you can almost see the spittle on his chin. what a baby

 

[DrSlek]

 

[A More Normal Bird]

Oh boy

It's gonna be a long few years.

Wait. I heard the an excerpt of this on the radio and what the host said was bleeped. She actually just quoted Abbott and said crap? LOL absolutely pathetic.

 

[Arksy]

I'm absolutely loving this.

 

[Jintor]

I'm absolutely loving this.

Oh, shush ;__;

 

[Arksy]

Oh, shush ;__;

Haha. I'm sorry. Showing up both the BBC and the UN all in one week..amazing.

 

[Jintor]

I think your interpretation of what has occured might differ from my interpretation of what has occured. (Or I don't recall what precisely 'showing up' in this context means)

 

[Arksy]

I think your interpretation of what has occured might differ from my interpretation of what has occured. (Or I don't recall what precisely 'showing up' in this context means)

I meant in the sense of telling them to go @!#% themselves.

 

[Dead Man]

Haha. I'm sorry. Showing up both the BBC and the UN all in one week..amazing.

Insulting people and being wrong isn't showing up anyone.

 

[markot]

If you think the coalition won anything in this affair.... well.

 

[Arksy]

Insulting people and being wrong isn't showing up anyone.

They're not wrong though, the UN is an organisation that's meant to be the arbiter of peace between nations, it's not designed to be a political organisation meddling in the internal politics of member states.

The UN was shown up for being what it truly is, a meddlesome organisation bent on trying to create global governance.

 

[Dead Man]

They're not wrong though, the UN is an organisation that's meant to be the arbiter of peace between nations, it's not designed to be a political organisation meddling in the internal politics of member states.

The UN was shown up for being what it truly is, a meddlesome organisation bent on trying to create global governance.

No, it wasn't shown up for that. If you think that you are in a distinct minority, locally and globally. What was shown is how stupid the current government is when it tries to score points with non compliant media and international organisations. Utter buffoons.

 

[Arksy]

No, it wasn't shown up for that. If you think that you are in a distinct minority, locally and globally. What was shown is how stupid the current government is when it tries to score points with non compliant media and international organisations. Utter buffoons.

Minority on here, yes. I don't think a majority of Australians enjoy being told what to do by an unelected unaccountable foreign bureaucracy with a political agenda.

 

[Dead Man]

Minority on here, yes. I don't think a majority of Australians enjoy being told what to do by an unelected unaccountable foreign bureaucracy with a political agenda.

I don't think the majority of Australians care one way or the other about the UN Climate change board, and if they do, they have already made up their mind long before Abbot's little brain fart.

And oh no, a body the country belongs to has a political agenda! Dear god, NO!! Just call for Australia to leave the UN if you don't like it. And UN bodies are accountable to the UN, which is comprised of many countries. No individual or group will ever be accountable to Australia alone. Which is pretty normal stuff for an international body.

As for unelected, of course not. It is a job. Unless you mean to suggest that every advisory board in Australia should be based on elections?

 

[Arksy]

I don't think the majority of Australians care one way or the other about the UN Climate change board, and if they do, they have already made up their mind long before Abbot's little brain fart.

And oh no, a body the country belongs to has a political agenda! Dear god, NO!! Just call for Australia to leave the UN if you don't like it. And UN bodies are accountable to the UN, which is comprised of many countries. No individual or group will ever be accountable to Australia alone. Which is pretty normal stuff for an international body.

As for unelected, of course not. It is a job. Unless you mean to suggest that every advisory board in Australia should be based on elections?

Well yeah, I'd love to quit the UN, and I'd love for advisory board positions to be elected, but neither of those positions are really feasible. I do believe them to be the most moral courses of action, though. Boards have to be appointed by someone, why not make it someone who has the confidence of the public?