Page 391 of 808 FirstFirst ... 291341381390391392401441491 ... LastLast
Results 13,651 to 13,685 of 28262

Thread: Oz Politics.

  1. #13651
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    73,749

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by WX View Post
    Trump strikes.
    TPP: out the door.
    CO2 emission reduction: out the door.
    Increased coal, shale oil etc is in.

    If you think the ABC is biased towards him pay close attention to how his behaviour is being reported on shows like The Project.
    Who's saying the ABC is pro Trump?
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  2. #13652
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Mainland, NZ
    Posts
    24,193

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Gina likes Donald? There's a shock.
    We don't know how lucky we are....

  3. #13653
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    62,414

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSibley View Post
    Ignore someone trying to help you ? You are being offered good advice from someone who cares.
    Oh I think he knows very well what he does, it's very deliberate. Its just that we don't 'cooperate' in our reactions. Well most of us don't anyhow, some who did have paid the penalty as intended.

  4. #13654
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Port Stephens
    Posts
    22,926

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Meanwhile, Baird gets rid of a functioning ICAC to protect Sinodinos while Labor does SFA because of all the mud that remains all over them. And we regard PNG's government as corrupt!

    Rick

  5. #13655
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Port Stephens
    Posts
    22,926

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mitziel View Post
    Well, I think it's clear Labor is opposing the move - quote below - but in politics power resides with the numbers.


    'The opposition leader, Luke Foley, described the legislation as a blatant attempt to sack Latham for overseeing an investigation into the Liberal party donations scandal that resulted in 11 MPs being sidelined.

    “This is the lowest point in several decades when it comes to the fight against corruption,” Foley said on Wednesday.

    “It just makes it clear that no commissioner or commissioners will ever have the guts to inquire into any corruption inside the governing party of the state, whether it’s a Labor or Liberal government, because Commissioner Latham was terminated for doing so.”'

    https://www.theguardian.com/australi...latham-resigns

    Publicly opposed - shouting their opposition in a whisper. If they were really committed to its preservation, there would be all kinds of roaring and deal making - not this virtual acquiescence.

    Rick

  6. #13656
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Port Stephens
    Posts
    22,926

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    I guess I'm not the only one who knows the country's being run by lunatics:

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-2...ration/8049926

    Rick

  7. #13657
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    73,749

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by RFNK View Post
    Meanwhile, Baird gets rid of a functioning ICAC to protect Sinodinos while Labor does SFA because of all the mud that remains all over them. And we regard PNG's government as corrupt!

    Rick
    This is NSW we are talking about, the Libs and Labor are about equal.
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  8. #13658
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    62,414

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Both majors are being run by groups of self serving faction involved power brokers. There are no doubt some who are still not corrupted by these internecine brawls but they are not the ones who call the shots. Can't see this changing much despite some pannicky Trump victory inspired rhetoric.
    The membership numbers are so shallow they are ignored. Lately the voters as well are being treated like mushrooms. Pauline is not the answer, but all it needs is another demagog. If Tony hadn't shot himself in the foot with his inability to swap from opposition to government and his first budget he may all have been our 'Trump'.

  9. #13659
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    62,414

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSibley View Post
    This is NSW we are talking about, the Libs and Labor are about equal.
    The pot and kettle come to mind..........

    If we 'get the politicians we deserve' then the country has badly transgressed somewhere.

  10. #13660
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    62,414

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Hah,hah ha! O'Dwyer wants industry super funds "held to the same standard as the banks". Produced derisive laughter at the conference and in parliament.
    O'Dwyer and the banks want the competition gone.

  11. #13661
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    73,749

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by skuthorp View Post
    The pot and kettle come to mind..........

    If we 'get the politicians we deserve' then the country has badly transgressed somewhere.
    Karma ?
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  12. #13662
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Port Stephens
    Posts
    22,926

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    More like soma.

    Rick

  13. #13663
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    32,030

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    I hear Turnbuckle's top advisor is on $600,000 a year, that's a $100,000 more than the PM.
    Last edited by WX; 11-23-2016 at 04:47 AM. Reason: The wrong hear.
    ​"Life is under no obligation to give us what we expect." Irrfan Khan. RIP

  14. #13664
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    32,030

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    ​"Life is under no obligation to give us what we expect." Irrfan Khan. RIP

  15. #13665
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    victoria, australia. (1 address now)
    Posts
    62,414

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Not worth it judging by Mal's performance. Neither of them.

  16. #13666
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    73,749

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by skuthorp View Post
    Not worth it judging by Mal's performance. Neither of them.
    A disappointment .
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  17. #13667
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in the Golden Triangle
    Posts
    24,137

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Looks like it's back to yabber yabber among the Trots.

    I found something that pretty much sums up the position of those looking to fix up that 18C mess. The Greens originally held this position too, when 18C was being foisted upon us by other Trots


  18. #13668
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    73,749

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Inquiry opens way for changing Section 18C and the Human Rights Commission too



    November 8, 2016 6.33pm AEDT

    Author


    1. Michelle GrattanProfessorial Fellow, University of Canberra




    University of Canberra provides funding as a member of The Conversation AU.
    View current jobs from University of Canberra


    Malcolm Turnbull, who just recently had “no plans” to change section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act (RDA), has now launched an inquiry that will lead to changing both it and the Human Rights Commission.
    A combination of unrelenting pressure from conservatives in his ranks, two controversial high-profile cases, mishandling by the Human Rights Commission, and a blitzkrieg by News Corp has forced Turnbull to accommodate the noisy critics.

    The announcement of a parliamentary inquiry is the first step towards change. But this is a risky path for Turnbull to go down.
    It carries the danger of rerunning what in Tony Abbott’s days was a very damaging debate, involving a big backlash against the government from ethnic communities.

    It’s all very well for Turnbull to talk in high falutin terms about maintaining “balance” in the debate, warning that Labor will accuse the government of trying to licence hate speech.
    Unless a lot has changed, the ethnic communities don’t require too much encouragement to be worried about a rewriting of the law. Not that Labor won’t be using the opportunity to stir the issue and strengthen its support among these groups.

    18C makes it unlawful to “offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate” a person or group on the basis of race, colour or national or ethnic origin. Coalition conservatives at the least want “offend” and “insult” taken out.
    It is notable that the Coalition’s original assault on 18C – which survived untouched throughout the Howard years – was triggered by right wing columnist Andrew Bolt losing a court case revolving around his comments about some fair skinned Aborigines.
    Now the parliamentary inquiry follows the intense debate around a complaint against Bill Leak’s cartoon in The Australian, featuring an Aboriginal father who didn’t know his son’s name. Predictably this has produced a ferocious campaign from that newspaper, which had already long pushed for change. The Leak matter remains unfinished.

    The Human Rights Commission must take some responsibility for what’s happened.
    It appeared to be deliberately encouraging a complaint against Leak, although there was little chance of such a complaint succeeding, because of the public interest protection in 18D.
    Its handling of the case involving students and a staffer at the Queensland University of Technology, where a complaint was lodged after the students were excluded from an Indigenous-only area, dragged on far too long and, it appears, was marked by poor process.
    The parliamentary inquiry will be done by the Joint Committee on Human Rights; the committee’s chairman, Ian Goodenough, has said he personally favours removing the words “insult” and “offend”.

    The terms of reference are broad. Reporting by the end of February, the inquiry will examine whether the relevant part of the RDA imposes “unreasonable restrictions upon freedom of speech” and, if so, how 18C and 18D should be reformed.
    It will also look at whether the Commission’s handling of complaints should be reformed, including in relation to the appropriate treatment of trivial or vexatious complaints and those that have no reasonable prospect of success, and ensuring matters are dealt with in timely manner.

    It will probe “whether the practice of soliciting complaints to the Commission (whether by officers of the Commission or by third parties) has had an adverse impact upon freedom of speech or constituted an abuse of the powers and functions of the Commission, and whether any such practices should be prohibited or limited”.
    Apart from the specifics, there is a broad catch-all term of reference: “whether the operation of the Commission should be otherwise reformed in order better to protect freedom of speech and, if so, what those reforms should be”.
    There can be little argument with the need to reform the processes for handling the 18C complaints; last week Liberal backbencher Julian Leeser put forward suggestions for doing this. The Commission itself has called for some amendments.
    But this inquiry could pave the way for an extensive overhaul and, potentially, a significant weakening of the Commission, which is deeply disliked by many Coalition MPs.

    Current president Gillian Triggs, constantly under attack from some in the Coalition, ends her term next year, so the government will get the opportunity to install its own person as well as make changes to the body. What sort of clout the Commission will be left with remains to be seen.


    https://theconversation.com/inquiry-...sion-too-68438
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  19. #13669
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Port Stephens
    Posts
    22,926

  20. #13670
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    73,749

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Dutton making a frantic appeal to the refugee hating Hansonites.

    ''It is as if the assessment processes in the 1970s, thorough as they were, could possibly have anticipated the likely roles of future generations to be born of those immigrants, long before anyone contemplated September 11, wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria, the advent of Islamic State, and so on.The attempt to “blame” Fraser is both farcical and grossly irresponsible – simply a cheap political shot.
    Surely, subsequent governments ran a similar, indeterminate risk – as is the Turnbull government, even despite the thoroughness of its due diligence. The only logical conclusion of Dutton’s position is that he wishes to close our borders completely.''
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  21. #13671
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    32,030

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-11-24/nasa-director-schools-malcolm-roberts-in-climate-change-letter/8052132
    Mr Schmidt urged Senator Roberts if he had any remaining questions, to perform his own analyses.
    "Finally, might I suggest that you avail yourself to the resources provided by the Bureau of Meteorology or CSIRO in Australia for further details on this topic," the letter concluded.
    This out-of-the-ordinary step taken by the NASA director was not the first time Senator Roberts has come up against a scientist over climate change.

    ​"Life is under no obligation to give us what we expect." Irrfan Khan. RIP

  22. #13672
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    73,749

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Senator Roberts reminds me of a few here on the forum. Shudder. Ignorance and distrust of learning in a position of power.
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  23. #13673
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    32,030

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSibley View Post
    Senator Roberts reminds me of a few here on the forum. Shudder. Ignorance and distrust of learning in a position of power.
    I guess he's trying to emulate the pre Renaissance church.
    ​"Life is under no obligation to give us what we expect." Irrfan Khan. RIP

  24. #13674
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in the Golden Triangle
    Posts
    24,137

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSibley View Post
    Senator Roberts reminds me of a few here on the forum. Shudder. Ignorance and distrust of learning in a position of power.
    tch tch... nothing but attacks on people. Hammer his policies, not the individual, eh?

  25. #13675
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Uki, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    32,030

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Bigfella View Post
    tch tch... nothing but attacks on people. Hammer his policies, not the individual, eh?
    Those are his personal beliefs, he personally believes AGW is a NASA conspiracy.
    ​"Life is under no obligation to give us what we expect." Irrfan Khan. RIP

  26. #13676
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    73,749

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Bigfella View Post
    tch tch... nothing but attacks on people. Hammer his policies, not the individual, eh?
    The individual is there because of his policies and the opinions he espouses, you can't have one without the other.
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  27. #13677
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    73,749

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  28. #13678
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in the Golden Triangle
    Posts
    24,137

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSibley View Post
    The individual is there because of his policies and the opinions he espouses, you can't have one without the other.
    Oh, you mean representing an electorate?

  29. #13679
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    73,749

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Yep and some of those electors aren't very well versed in basic science.
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  30. #13680
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in the Golden Triangle
    Posts
    24,137

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSibley View Post
    Yep and some of those electors aren't very well versed in basic science.
    In the same way that not many voters on the left aren't very well versed in basic economics.

  31. #13681
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    73,749

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Economics is arguable , science is not.

    Ask 1000 economists a question and you will get 900 different answers. Ask climate scientists if AGW is happening and you will get a consensus of YES!
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  32. #13682
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in the Golden Triangle
    Posts
    24,137

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Provided for the sake of getting some facts among the rants:

    Immigration Minister Peter Dutton has copped considerable criticism for his comment on Sky News’ The Bolt Report last Monday that one-time Coalition prime minister “Malcolm Fraser did make mistakes” in bringing some refugees into Australia in the 1970s. Yet the authority for this claim is none other than Fraser himself. Here is the story.

    Soon after becoming prime minister in November 1975, Fraser was approached by some of the leaders of the Maronite (Christian) Lebanese community in Australia. They were concerned at the plight of fellow Maronites in the Lebanon civil war.

    Fraser agreed to the proposal that Australia should accept those Lebanese fleeing the civil war. They were not refugees in the strict definition of the term, since they were not fleeing persecution. Rather, they were caught up in an armed conflict. And so was established what was termed “the Lebanon concession”, meaning that a concession to Australia’s existing policy of refugee intake would be implemented to take account of the special circumstances applying in Lebanon.

    In the event, it turned out that few Maronites wanted to take advantage of the Lebanon concession. However, many Muslims did — particularly Sunnis from the rural north and Shi’ites from the rural south. This despite the fact the civil war was taking place primarily around the Lebanese capital, Beirut.

    Under the relaxed selection criteria to enter Australia under the Lebanon concession, a person only had to state that they were fleeing the civil war and that they had a relative living in Australia.

    Few, if any, applicants were rejected.

    Immigration Department staff sent to the region to administer the program had no way of checking whether the applicants had a relative in Australia. Moreover, many Lebanese had a definition of “family” that even extended to village members whom they had not met in years.

    It turned out that 90 per cent of Lebanese who entered Australia under the Lebanon concession were Muslim. During 1976-77, there was a net migration of 12,000 Lebanese to Australia. Historian James Jupp pointed out in The Australian People that between 1971 and 1981 the proportion of Muslims among the Lebanese population doubled from 14 per cent to 31 per cent.

    I first wrote about this matter in late 2006 — that is, before the release of the cabinet papers for 1976. Because I had no way of checking my facts, I phoned Fraser and asked him about the Lebanese concession. He replied along the following lines: “Gerard, I have no memory of any of this but it’s the kind of thing I would have done.” In Malcolm Fraser: The Political Memoirs, the former prime minister admitted to having a “notoriously fallible” memory.

    The cabinet papers in the National Archives of Australia reveal that the Lebanon concession was an unmitigated disaster. In September 1976 cabinet considered a report that concluded that Immigration Department officials were “completely overstretched” and had lost control of the program.

    The report expressed concern about “the possibility that the conflicts, tensions and divisions within Lebanon will be transferred to Australia”.

    By November 1976 the situation had deteriorated further. Immigration minister Michael MacKellar told cabinet that a high percentage of applicants under the Lebanon concession were illiterate and were being admitted to Australia without “any regard to their economic viability, personal qualities or capacity for successful settlement”.

    On November 30, 1976, the Fraser government abandoned the Lebanon concession. It was replaced by the normal criteria for Lebanese immigration applicants that applied previously; namely, “economic viability, personal quality and ability to integrate”, which applied equally to Muslims and Christians.

    As Dutton made clear in parliament on Tuesday, his reference to the fact two-thirds of those charged with terrorism-related offences in Australia are “from second and third-generation Lebanese Muslim backgrounds” was related to Muslim Lebanese-Australians whose parents and grandparents entered Australia under the Lebanon concession, or as a beneficiary of family reunion schemes for Lebanon concession “refugees”.

    When Australia is taking refugees from civil war zones, Dutton’s comment is timely and responsible. After all, the person who first realised the Lebanon concession was a mistake was Fraser himself — four decades ago.

  33. #13683
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in the Golden Triangle
    Posts
    24,137

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterSibley View Post
    Economics is arguable , science is not.

    Ask 1000 economists a question and you will get 900 different answers. Ask climate scientists if AGW is happening and you will get a consensus of YES!

    What a load of poppycock.

    Scientific research is a process that entails observation, formulating and arguing proposals in exactly the same way it occurs in economics.

    Here... some free research for you... a web-sourced definition of the word 'science' - the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.

    Please tell me how exactly how it is that science isn't arguable.

    Some more free research for you.... a web-sourced definition of the word 'economics' - Economics is a broad term referring to the scientific study of human action, particularly as it relates to human choice and the utilization of scarce resources. Economic analysis often progresses through deductive processes, much like mathematical logic, where the implications of specific human activities are considered in a "means-ends" framework.

    Note the similarity?

  34. #13684
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Northern NSW Australia
    Posts
    73,749

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Bigfella View Post
    What a load of poppycock.

    Scientific research is a process that entails observation, formulating and arguing proposals in exactly the same way it occurs in economics.

    Here... some free research for you... a web-sourced definition of the word 'science' - the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.

    Please tell me how exactly how it is that science isn't arguable.

    There is no argument because to argue a scientific case against human induced AGW data is needed and it isn't there. However the data in support is massive. You can argue to your heart's content but without supporting data it's just hot air. Because the data to disprove the hypothesis isn't there .

    Simple enough for you?


    Some more free research for you.... a web-sourced definition of the word 'economics' - Economics is a broad term referring to the scientific study of human action, particularly as it relates to human choice and the utilization of scarce resources. Economic analysis often progresses through deductive processes, much like mathematical logic, where the implications of specific human activities are considered in a "means-ends" framework.



    Note the similarity?
    ask the 1000 economists why they don't agree then? All the ones from the same school do but the next lot don't.
    '' You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know. ''
    Grateful Dead

  35. #13685
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Livin' in the Golden Triangle
    Posts
    24,137

    Default Re: Oz Politics.

    What on earth are you on about, Mr Sibley?

    I refuted your point about 'science' not being arguable and you waffle on about AGW?

    Science is the process that IS arguable. That's how facts get discovered, established if you like.

    The exact same thing happens with Economics.

    Yet another example of how a little (some may say, very little) knowledge is dangerous.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •