The Australian politics thread

[Mr Casson]

Originally Posted by FaaipDeOiad

And trust me, I see it as a huge black mark against the "opposition" that there was bi-partisan support for those laws.

Hooray for political centrism!

Labor, Liberal, Liberal, Labour: It's like picking a party hat. The only difference is the colour.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by Mr Casson

Hooray for political centrism!

Labor, Liberal, Liberal, Labour: It's like picking a party hat. The only difference is the colour.

An important aspect to Dr Haneef's case, imo.

[Mr Casson]

Originally Posted by Burgey

An important aspect to Dr Haneef's case, imo.

Wrong - that's picking on a colour.

[Burgey]

Quite right. A small but significant distinction.

[Jono]

Originally Posted by Mr Casson

Wrong - that's picking on a colour.

Lol!

Edit: Haha wow, almost as Jack predicted, I ended up using up my 13,000th post with a "lol" or haha".

Oh well, guess this means Richmond won't beat Geelong now hey Jack?

[Johnners]

Originally Posted by Clapo

****ing Peter Beattie & the QLD Government. The man is nothing less than a power mad dictator, and it's quite ironic that today, when the Local Govt. Minister addressed all the local govt. representatives from around QLD, was also Hitlers birthday. His forced amalgamation of local councils is absolute bull****, and he's continuing to ruin Queensland. Many small country towns are going to suffer no end because of it if they're merged with a larger council.

I can almost guarantee that the Council i'm in, Pittsworth Shire Council, is going to be amalgamated with Toowoomba City Council, and it's an absolute ****ing joke. It'll be the worst thing possible for the Pittsworth town (also where i work), and it will suffer immensely from it. The Local Council provides numerous jobs, and so many services for the community that will no longer happen in a larger "Toowoomba Shire Council".

****

My worst fears were unfortunately realised last Friday when the most dictatorial, un-democratic, smug, arrogant, and ****y premier Beattie released the recommendations to him from the 'Local Government Authority". You'll struggle to find a QLD resident outside of Brisbane, Toowoomba & the Gold Coast who's happy about it. Gone are the days of Local Government in QLD, as 86 Local Councils were swallowed up, and 72 regional shires emerged.

As i expected, Pittsworth Shire was merged with Toowoomba, but what i didn't expect, was that 6 other shires would go with it. It's the most ****ed up move, as 8 shires (Toowomba, Pittsworth, Crows Nest, Jondaryan, Millmerran, Cambooya, Clifton & Rosalie) became 1, one that is made up of a huge rural area, and a major town (Toowoomba), that have so little in common. Of the 95,000 voters in the shire, 66,000 of them reside in Toowoomba, and only 30,000 in the rural areas, meaning that unless Divisions are made (50/50 chance at this stage) the rural areas are going to be lucky to have more than 2 of 10 councillors.

On Tuesday the councillors from all the above named shires met (for what i'm led to beleive , will be the one and only time) at first just amongst themselves to discuss the amalgamation, and then with the arrogant **** of a Local Government minister Andrew Fraser. Fraser was only interested in being there so long as he was telling the councillors how it would be, and after the admin type questions had passed, he simply got up and left, like the arrogant mongrel he is. Furthermore, to rub the salt into the wounds of the rural shires, they've been told that unless there is a unanimous vote on the shire name, it will be named "Toowoomba Regional Shire" which is bull****. There was a 7-1 vote for the shire to be named "Darling Downs Regional Shire" as it covers the vast majority of the Downs, however, because this has been such a democratic process and all, it will be named Toowoomba Regional Shire because it wasn't unanimous (toowoomba was the 1).

To further make a mockery of the no-longer democratic state we live in, Beattie and Fraser earlier threatened to sack any mayors or councillors should they make to many waves against the suggested amalgamations. A north wester QLD council (who's name slips my mind) was further threatened just yesterday when they decided that they would run a referendum to see if they wanted amalgamtion or not.

Goodbye democratic Queensland, welcome to dictatorship that we might as well now call Beattieland. Also, to my understanding, when such a huge change is made as the amalgamations, a social impact study is supposed to be conducted, a process which the government completely overlooked. Whilst the social impact won't be felt in the first 2/3 years, i fear for what it will be like 5 years down the track, when the damage will be irreversible.

**** you Peter Beattie. Whale Poo >>>> A Bathful of Scissors >>>>>> Peter Beattie/Andrew Fraser

[howardj]

Newspoll out tomorrow apparently shows little improvement for the Government.

I wouldn't imagine things would tighten until the campaign proper.

[howardj]

Originally Posted by Burgey

It's a crap threshold mate, especially in the hands of that dolt. And frankly, even on that threshold, this was at best a questionable decision based on what we know. The threshold provides him with a very broad discretion, but the reasonableness test ought still apply, and will be challenged, I suppose in the FC.

Still waiting for the answer to the balance of the things raised in my post though. You seem to be suggesting that all of these things add up to an appropriate exercise of the discretion, yet there's nothing to suggest from either your good self or from the minister that he took each of these mitigating factors into account.

It stinks, frankly. I find it hard to beleive, mate, that you believe this is anything other than a stunt, and when it all went tits up they got him out of the country asap. I mean, given the seriousness of this alleged info, why the hell did they let him go?

With the greatest respect, the Immigration Minister refuses or revokes about six or seven visas per week - it's not a new development to fail the character test. As I say, it's do you reasonably suspect that the applicant/holder has an association with someone involved in terrorism. Given that test, and given the available evidence, I actually find it hard to believe that you think that the discretion was not exercised properly. Did it also dovetail with the Government's political ends? Certainly. But that doesn't detract from the correctness of the decision.

This article, written by one of Australia's fairest journalists, sets things out nicely.

I think this quote sort of sums things up from an intellectual perspective:

The idea that the court case was flawed yet the executive action by Andrews was justified seems an impossible concept for much of the media and the legal profession. It is, however, the irresistible conclusion from the saga

[howardj]

Originally Posted by FaaipDeOiad

I never claimed the actions were illegal, they were just fundamentally opposed to the values one generally expects of a liberal democracy, as Dasa said. Frankly, if your only standard of goverment behaviour is the letter of the law, anything is justifiable if you manage to get it through Parliament, which is clearly an absurd notion. It's fundamentally unjust to imprison someone without detailing their crime, to impede access to counsel, to imprison them before evidence is gathered, to withhold details of crime and evidence to the accused and the public after the fact, and so on. It doesn't matter if you pass "emergency legislation" which makes those actions legal or not. They're still shameful, as is the legislation which justifies them.

And trust me, I see it as a huge black mark against the "opposition" that there was bi-partisan support for those laws.

Personally, I think it's an undergraduate argument to infer that people's rights are absolute. Clearly, there is always a balancing act. It's not realistic to pretend otherwise. In my view, intellectually, the right to detain someone without finding them guilty has existed for many years - i.e refusing someone bail. The continued detention of Haneef was overseen by the judiciary. For instance, the Police wanted another five days to detain and question him, but that was overruled by the judiciary.

These are not unfettered, draconian powers - they are the power to detain based on a reasonable amount of evidence, with the continued detention overseen by the judiciary. Moreover, this guy was not plucked off the street randomly. He was arrested on the basis of information provided by Scotland Yard that his SIM card was found in the vehicle that was driven into the airport and other as yet unreleased information. That the SIM card evidence was found to be incorrect, doesn't detract from its worth at that time, in terms of his initial arrest.

The legislature is trying to achieve a balance between the rights of the individual and safety of the broader community. They've looked to achieve that balance by allowing the authorities to detain someone (not based upon no evidence) for a limited period, where the continued detention is overseen by the judiciary. The balance may not be perfect, but I just don't see how it is draconian. Either you have faith in the judiciary to oversee the thing, or you do not.

[Matt79]

In shock news today, Australians apparently view Howard as a sneaky old codger... Stay tuned - next we find out about how people think the kids on Australian Idol suck!

[pasag]

Howard's taking a beating every day in the media, it's pretty sad tbh. Rudd to win by so much it's not funny. The only chance the coalition have of even coming close is if Howard steps down and Abbott takes control.

[sideshowtim]

My major quarrel is people voting for Rudd just because it's "cool" to not like Howard. I mean what the hell? I go to University, and I do an Arts degree, so obviously I'm surrounded by radical left-wing morons (who vote for Labor, kinda doesn't make sense given that Rudd is a conservative, but proves their ignorance). They won't even give Howard the time of day, which is quite ridiculous because if he weren't in power they wouldn't be seeing a cent of their current Aus-Study money among other things.

I'll be voting for Howard, and hoping the voters of this country inform themselves enough to be able to make a judgement based on the facts, rather than what is lambasted in popular media outlets these days.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by howardj

With the greatest respect, the Immigration Minister refuses or revokes about six or seven visas per week - it's not a new development to fail the character test. As I say, it's do you reasonably suspect that the applicant/holder has an association with someone involved in terrorism. Given that test, and given the available evidence, I actually find it hard to believe that you think that the discretion was not exercised properly. Did it also dovetail with the Government's political ends? Certainly. But that doesn't detract from the correctness of the decision.

This article, written by one of Australia's fairest journalists, sets things out nicely.

I think this quote sort of sums things up from an intellectual perspective:

The idea that the court case was flawed yet the executive action by Andrews was justified seems an impossible concept for much of the media and the legal profession. It is, however, the irresistible conclusion from the saga

But he revokes them without making a song and dance about it for base politial purposes.

Anyway, Newspoll confirms, frankly, that people have seen through it. Although they approve of his handling of it, there's been no bounce.

As for not expecting an improvement until the election is called, why not? We've been hearing this all year from coalition supporters - there'll be a budget bounce, the NT intervention will help, Haneef will help, the Climate Change policy will help, the Education slush fund will help, the Tassie hospital grab will help, attacking the states will help. It hardly seems that the government is keeping its eggs for the campaign, but so far nothing's helping.

You can't on the one hand announce all these things in the hope that they'll help, then turn around and say, "Oh well we're waiting for the election to be called before there's an improvement". That's about as inconsistent as saying in 2004 that you'll keep rates low, then when they go up blaming the states. Either you have hte power to keep them low or you don't. You can't make the capital out of it in 04 then not accept the consequences when it turns in 06-07.

Seriously though, is this the longest pre-election election campaign in history? It's just got to the point where I wish they'd call the damn poll so we can all get on with the real vitriol and pork barrelling - from both sides

[JBMAC]

Anybody checked out www.kevin07.com ?
Is this the future for political campaigning?

[FaaipDeOiad]

Originally Posted by sideshowtim

They won't even give Howard the time of day, which is quite ridiculous because if he weren't in power they wouldn't be seeing a cent of their current Aus-Study money among other things.

You've got to be smoking crack, surely. Do you realise how much tuition fees have gone up under Howard's watch? And that equivalent programs to Aus-Study existed well before Howard's time in power? Suggesting that University students have it easier now than under Labor governments is nothing short of insane, and that's taking into account the fact that Keating was tougher on student issues than any ALP PM before him. All of Howard's reforms to social security and related programs have made it more difficult to recieve payments that already existed (whether or not you think that's a good idea), he didn't invent the concept behind Aus-Study at all. Frankly, it's not even a debatable issue, it's just a matter of fact.

And Rudd is a conservative in terms of his affiliation within the ALP, he's not a conservative by way of comparison with the Coalition alternatives. The term itself isn't any sort of ultimate authority, and it hardly suggests ignorance to choose the closer of two major options to ones own beliefs. I'd vote for Pauline Hanson before I'd vote for Hitler, but that wouldn't make me a fan of hers.