Kevin R Beck interacts with people from many walks of life,
across the nation, in many electorates, providing
services
and free to use technology resources.
Tell me
about your members of local government and parliaments,
gripes and concerns of your workplace, community and tell me about the behaviour of political and public officials.
Your local campaigns gossip, interests, activism, your job, schools, hospitals, in fact anything in your community.
"If the consent of the governed is extorted through the manipulation of mass fears, or is
embezzled with claims of divine guidance, democracy is impoverished. If the suspension of reason causes a significant proportion of the citizenry to lose confidence in the integrity of the
process, democracy can be bankrupted." (Al Gore, "The Assault On Reason", Blommbsbury, 2007)
|
Rating Australia's Governance
quality, performance, integrity and public service.
Information sources
POLITICAL TACTICS MASKING HYPOCRISY AND THE DOMINATION OF POLITICAL INTERESTS IN
GOVERNMENT OR A REAL CRISIS?
What is important to the nation in the long term? The quality of
Australia's governance, the perfromance of governments and parliaments and the system of representation
or dealing with the myriad of crises facing Australian society that require strong government intervention and action against individuals?
Watch the activity in the daily press and the micro management of the media by governments.
The complex issues receive short shift in the media, and in the debate, from the public or loud cries without actually
being able to articulate their reasons. Most responses rely upon anecdotes and stories from the media or the pub. Complex matters and problems
(emission trading scheme, national electricity competition model,
privatisation, taxation, aboriginal, child abuse, quality of governments, economy - interest rates and inflation, how political candidates are appointed etc.)
require awareness, understanding and complex reasoning and education. The debates are cut off, controlled and managed. They are not wide and access and participaton is managed.
Knowing, or perceiving to know about drinking, drugs, crime and bike sheds is something everyone of reasonable age and thinking capacity/intellect possesses.
The Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has an extensive list of "problems" that require immediate response from the "nanny states" under labor
s governance in Australia. There is homelessness, whihc has been a blight on our society for decades. Why do we assume that the Prime Minister can move his labor colleagues to action when a chorus of others could not? Over the holiday period folowing his election he demande that
local federal parliamentary members go and visit a homeless shelter or two. Similarly they had to visit a school. All good PR stuff. But where is the matching policy and action?
Then we have the screaming epidemic of binge drinking by Australians particularly the young.
The statistics and argument for this crisis are manufactured to suit. Examine the
World Health Organisation statistics
and we see that the most comprehensive data is in fact some five years old.
The statistics seem to state that our alocohol consumption is pretty much the same. What about the relat9oonship between drinking and anti social behaviour? Is it the same or are we being manipulated to a perception?
When police and state premiers and ministers help create a crisis (which suits the media editors creating the headlineas)
and we have exclusion zones nominated and lock outs then
the whole thing gathers momentum.
"John Ferguson, August 04, 2008 12:00am
POLICE will have the power to ban drunks and criminals from nightclub districts for up to a year under new tough-on-crime laws.
The Brumby Government will impose the tight new restrictions on revellers in five entertainment flashpoints from this Friday.
Designed to aid the fight against alcohol-related crime, the measures will focus on hot spots in trendy Fitzroy and St Kilda.
And large areas of the sometimes violent regional centres of Geelong, Ballarat and Warrnambool will be covered by the crackdown." (Herald Sun newspaper Melbourne, August 4, 2008)
The Honourable Sandra Kanck MLC (Leader Australian Democrats in the South Australian Parliament) points to Australia's statistics indicating how zealots pursuing personal issues help to give anecdotal evidence or incomplete
statistics greater weight. Emotive and positives are used by politicians and people like Ms Kanck - "the facts are" and references are cobbled together out of context as supporting evidence.
"Information from SA’s “Designer Drug Early Warning System” that a third
of emergency beds at the Royal Adelaide Hospital on a Saturday night are
occupied because of alcohol consumption must surely be a wakeup call to
the state government about its drug policies, say the Australian Democrats. Sandra Kanck, says these figures show that alcohol is the source of the real drug epidemic in our society - “So where is the government’s tough-on-drugs stance when the drug is
alcohol?
“The fact is that the donations from the hotel lobby and the alcohol
industry are keeping the major parties quiet on this issue – they prefer
to tackle the tip of the iceberg, in the form of illicit drugs, rather
than tackle the huge underside.
“Figures released in a study in The Lancet in March show that alcohol is
more dangerous than ketamine, amphetamines, cannabis and ecstasy.
“ABS figures last year revealed that more than one in ten adult
Australians are drinking at risky to high levels.
“Now this study – funded by the state government - is staring the
government in the face, and it requires decisive action.
“The Democrats again call on the government, as a first step, to act to
stop happy hours with their reduced alcohol prices.
“Today, the World Health Organisation will be debating a resolution to
reduce global alcohol harm.
“What will the South Australian government be doing in response to the
mounting evidence of our number one drug epidemic – alcohol?” (Source Sandra Kanck - Press Releases:
Statistics show ALCOHOL source of our drug epidemic, on Monday, May 14, 2007 - 08:42 AM)
Therea re very compelling stories and references: "At the public hospital 30 to 35% of the work is alcohol-related and in the Emergency
Department between 30 to 40% of presentations are alcohol-related. Amongst the homeless, alcohol compounds the endemic mental illnesses
and social alienation. The police estimate that up to 70% of their work is to do with alcohol. None of this should come as a surprise to
anyone when we know that alcohol is so strongly related to motor vehicle deaths (30%) and assaults (40%) (almost doubled at night).
The riots at Cronulla and Macquarie Fields in Sydney and outbreaks at other locations in our suburbs are fuelled by
intoxication. In some way we are all unsafe. "Today's youth" get the blame for the mayhem but alcohol escapes.
For many young people binge drinking is expected and teenage girls are drinking more than boys; a phenomenon we have not seen
before in Australia. Alcohol is directly linked to the major health problems of young people - depression, suicide, road and personal injuries,
sexual assaults and other mental disorders. And research has shown the persisting effects of binge drinking on the developing brains of young people.
Add to these direct effects the negative impacts that alcohol has on education, skill development and employment of young people.
Those who suffer a continuing mental illness have lives shortened by as much as twenty years; 23% is due to alcohol. Alcohol is a major factor in 30%
of suicides, it is involved in up to 60% of suicide attempts presenting to Emergency Departments and 30-50% of people who suicide have had a
previous
history of alcohol use disorder. Being dependent on alcohol doubles or triples the risk of depression, substance abuse and increases vulnerability
to other mental disorders and physical disease and suicide is the commonest cause of death in these people.
There is evidence enough to demand greater preventive action by governments and the community.....
There is the 2005-2009 National Alcohol Strategy waiting to be implemented. It aims to tackle intoxication, public safety and amenity, health
problems and the culture of alcohol use." Source:
AER Foundation - Changing the Way We Drink,
AER Chair, Ian W Webster
We have known for
decades that alcohol can be a health hazard as we have known that smoking and gambling are also bad for many of us. Yet governments legalise all three
and collect very large imposts from the consumers. There is a large element of hypocrisy in all of this sudden bellowing and gestapo style responses.
The police love a good law and order campaign. These are all state based issues that
the crusading Prime Minister has added to his impressive pile of do good things. They draw media attention and are easier for journalists to grasp than the analysis required for all of the other
things they avoid. They fit into 500 word articles and screaming headlines.
So what about addressing the quality of parliamentary debates, question times and the general constituency of the parliaments of the nation so that they actually represent the votes cast?
What about addressing the manipulation by labor of the political scene and the corruption and corrosion of our democracy? What about addresing the crude processes between political party machines and the representatives foisted upon voters?
No. It is far easier to talk up a crisis that everyone can relate to and get involved in. We are entering an unprecedented era of the anny state. A bunch of people in power have decided what is good for all of us and they are the
"benders and the shapers" of daily lives.
|
ACT INDIVIDUALLY AND COLLECTIVELY NOW! TO SAVE AUSTRALIA FROM ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL RUIN
If Kevin Rudd and the labor party in Australia's federal government go ahead with their planned carbon reduction scheme scheduled for
2010 they will wreck Australia's economy and leave a mark more indelible than the recession Australia had to have under Paul Keating. Energy that underpins our economy will treble and quadruple in price and go higher.
gaming will be introduced via a manipulation of the existing competition bidding, National Electricity Management Model, and the proposed carbon emission permits.
Brendan Nelson, may be a bumbling liberal leader but essentially he is right in trying to preach caution and block labor's moves.
Rudd's team are the sheep, following the latest fad, at the front of a complicit baying pack who will
blindly run over the cliff taking the gullible voters with them. Kevin Rudd has given oxygen to every proponent of renewable energy (regardless of its technological capabilities) and every crack pot theory.
He has already demonstrated a perplexing propensity, maybe a naivety and some might say, stupidity in giving Toyota millions of dollars of taxpyer funds
to produce a car that they would have anyway without the money and which will be old technology, depreciated as it rolls out the gate. There is a rising level of arrogance in the
operational style of the Prime Minister and a number of Ministers. The labor party premiers are on board, with the Prime Minister, for now and the most vocal and supportive by action is John Brumby. He refuses to dam a flooding river (Mitchell) losing billions of litres of water.
Instead he is going to build an environmentally damaging and costly desalination plant. This type of public policy action is very worrying.
It is now imperative, as never before, that those with the capacity
to resist, and block,
engage
Kevin Rudd and the labor government, the Greens
and the
greenies, and ideologs, in a war of attrition like no other ever seen in the nation before.
This is not about politics and simple resistance or activism. This is about survival economically and socially, defying the efforts, and actions, of people who colllectively have never created anything. They are theorists and academics.
politicians of zeal and ideology whose beliefs, and passions, are extremely dangerous. Out to save a world that does not need saving.
They are not experts, in any shape or form, and they have never accurately
predicted anything.
They have at their disposal a public service, detached from reality, commissioned to serve. This public service is imbued with the
code of serving the government of the day without question. They serve Ministers whose backgrounds, experiences and credentials, are not diverzse and congisant of the peril to whihc they are takin g us.
We must draw on our own
experiences
and resources to resist, block and if necessary destroy their resolve and strategies. If the Rudd labor government spends a million or more on
advertising their view points about the ETS (carbon reduction) then they should also fund counter opinions in the interest of the nation.
|
INFORMATION TO ASSIST YOUR UNDERSTANDING AND DELIBERATIONS
MAJOR SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC ISSUES FOCUS
ARTICLES ON CLIMATE CHANGE, CLEAN COAL, NUCLEAR, WEATHER AND MORE
KEVINRBECK MOSAIC NETWORK: INFORMATION ON CLIMATE CHANGE
AUSTRALIA - CARBON POLLUTION REDUCTION SCHEME GREEN PAPER
Department of Climate Change, Australian Government,
The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Green Paper canvasses options and
preferred approaches on issues, such as which industry sectors will be
covered and how emission caps will be set. It also includes ways to
address the impacts on Australian households, emissions-intensive
trade-exposed industries and other strongly affected sectors.
Click Here
HOODWINKING THE PUBLIC ON CLIMATE CHANGE
Received Email: July 22 July 2008: To Kevin R Beck
With the release of the green paper today you will no doubt pursue recalcitrants who back the doom philosophy
of that evil element – carbon. The reference I gave you this morning presents a better approach to reducing
the carbon excesses, viz. Ibbotson’s “Newcastle Protocol” instead of “Emissions Trading”, if in fact this is what you may want to do.
You will also realise now, (after reading selected parts of
Ibbotson), that anthropogenic CO2 is not even significant in global warming, particularly
when you put water vapour into the equation. The experts do not want to talk about this because it is
uncontrollable, (non-anthropogenic), and there are no easily available government funds to support the academics and scientists in R&D in this field.
To give you a snapshot of the specious nature and uselessness of this
whole exercise I suggest you read some of the papers of Gary Novack.
Click Here
The public is really being hoodwinked and the pollies are sure to strut their stuff in their inimitable and puerile fashion.
Do your homework and your platform will be technically unassailable.... Keith
|
PERCEPTIONS OF POLITICS AND GOVERNMENT IN AUSTRALIA
Unless otherwise attributed, the commentary and articles below are
authored by Kevin R Beck, Australia
The Australian National University's
democratic audit
""Australia may enjoy a global reputation for integrity in its government,
but the public's ability to investigate and expose what corruption does occur
is being severely curbed by unnecessary restrictions on access to information.
If sunlight is the best disinfectant, then the mantras of privacy, security and
trade secrets are being used increasingly inside government across Australia to justify keeping citizens in the dark.
Spin-management by political staffers working for government ministers is one of the
biggest hindrances to accounting for whatever corruption—including gross mismanagement—is happening.
An increasingly politicized public service is learning that the best path to career advancement is to suppress,
cover up and lie. As one retired major-general complained publicly this year, "The political staff will support their
minister at all costs, including, probably, the cost of truth." (Author: Ross Coulhart)
The federal government has no independent standing "anti-corruption body", choosing instead to rely on such
checks as departmental internal investigation sections to assist federal agencies in controlling
fraud and corruption. But the lack of an independent and aggressive corruption watchdog has allowed
excessive interference by political staff from ministerial offices, who are often far too predisposed to
cover up scandals and corruption.
There is a limited form of independent oversight through the Commonwealth Ombudsman's Office," (extract source:
Australia: Corruption Notebook)
Senator Russell Trood
a member of Australia's parliament and the governing liberal party is a highly qualified, and respected, internationalist.
Give this one may well question why the nation as been saddled with an alternative and less qualified and talented Foreigh Minister, in the
person
of Alexander Downer?
The biographies, and publications, of both men's performance and career, seem to speak for themselves.
Could it be that Alexander Downer is one of a number of carefully selected, factional politicians, from across the states,
who ensure that John Howard remains unchallenged intellectually and politically?
|
Nicholas Stern made climate an economic issue for the Howard government
Broken systems of government in Australia
For all of their sophisticated use of media spin and
psychological techniques
the politicians, and their strategists, come across as
fundamentally dishonest.
Their efforts of manipulation are not as effective as they would believe.
If it were not for the collusion of the two political parties and the structure of our voting system including its compuslroy
aspect the two major parties would find it very difficult to
control the manner and operation of our democracy.
The senior members of our political parties are
aware of this.
The people perceive the system is
broken
but are
disengaged, and perhaps, angry
yet powerless to doing anything about it. The governments ensure that they
present complex and ponderous explanations to deter the ordinary citizen from wanting to look to closely or challenge them. Here is an example from Victoria.
A propensity for self delusion or a lie?
"Open and accountable Government is part of my government's commitment to the people of Victoria.
One way we are delivering on this commitment is through the provision of first class online information and services.
We believe the best way forward for Victoria is a Government that consults, listens and works together with
all Victorians, while providing leadership and decisive action." (extract from the web site of the Victorian government, Premier Steve Bracks).
|
The Australian Constitution establishes two types of government in Australia, federal and state.
Territory government is a creation of the federal government and local government is a creation of the state government.
The territory and local governments are not mentioned in the Australian
Constitution. The federal government is dominated by
the Australian liberal and National Parties, in coalition, and the states are governed by the Australian Labor Party.
The most advanced of the the major
political parties, in terms of holistic strategies and
sophisticated assessments and capabilities, including the ability to interact with a wide spectrum, is by far the federal liberal and national parties,
with the liberal party being the more sophisticated. The least sophisticated in dealing with
a complex world, coalescing interests and the rise of the "individual" as a player in politics are the liberal parties in the states and the
labor party politicians, advisers and branches at state level. This may explain the success of the Howard government and it is likely that this is a unique
time in Australian government. The Ministers and advisers of the federal government can set aside their grievances and suspicions and
to achieve their objectives. The labor party cannot and it is thought to be more inward looking. The
stellar performers
of the party are forced to stand mute behind
the
failed lights that rarely shone bright
who refuse to leave the stage.
I interact regularly with quite a number of public sector agencies.
Over the yaesr I have noted is a discernible decline in the sophistication, and quality, of the federal and
state public services. This decline is in the middle management to senior levels.
The retirement of career public servants, coupled with the regular, political opportnistic culling has deteriorated corporate knowledge and
the skill base. Narrow education and experience has a damaging effect. Many of the current incumbents lack an awreness of the broad framework of
"politics and power". Sometimes I think that they believe they can do anything as if they are immune to external pressure and impacts. One particular trait is the
failure ot honour agreements and to seek to avoid liability and accountability.
There is a plethora of information and research, and commentary, on this proposition
within the
Mosaic Portal
and its linked
resource sites.
The public services,
unlike many political adviser in Ministries,
appear not to see the networks of influence, the risks and their potential exposure
in the broader context of modern political life today that can reach into their departments and workplaces.
They seem to operate in a vacuum of disengagement. On every occasion that I have met with representatives it appears that they do not
do their homework. They narrowly perceive agendas and have no idea as to what the individual is capable of achieving in terms of impacting and influencing
public policy
and government through the combined use of politics, technology, corporate and human networks.
Whilst public servants purport to be a-political, claiming this as a chinese wall, they
operate in a very political internal environment of their own making. They devise systems and measurement processes to protect and justify.
This is not to say that the public services, across the nation, does not deliver service, they do.
Australia has one of the best operating models, and service provision systems and quality services on earth. In many areas they are innovative and consciencious.
Where they do fall down is in their limited, or total lack of, awareness (myopia) of the
motivation,
interest
and
capability
of the individuals with whom they deal beyond those that may appear obvious because of their
status. The public service may not see itself in the same light as a private corporation with
consumers
of differing influence and capacities.
The owner of this web site, Kevin R Beck, experiences varying degrees of myopia every day. Modern communication technology allows any motivated party to research, learn and reach into the world of politics, government and the bureaucracy
using the systems of parliament, government and legislation. These tools, resources and information are provided across the breadth of the Kevin R Beck Mosaic Portal.
|
The Victorian state election of 2006 provides a salient lesson to citizens as to how
Australian political (democratic) systems work. The owner of the network of
Mosaic Portal sites
has on many occasions exercised the citizen's right to participate and interact with governments and political parties.
Of all of them the National party members seem to be more prone to accepting, and fostering interaction whilst the liberals are tolerant.
Labor, well they are in my experience, ignorant an full of hubris. Returning to the state electionin Victoria I want to find out what the values of the political parties
might be. Kim Beazley proposed (September 12, 2006) that we should add a line to the visa application for immigrants and tourists to Australia.
The line would request that they respect
our values. They would sign. The liberal and national parties in coalition in the federal government have enunciated
values. So has the media.
So why is it that when I ask about the values of te elected member for Clayton, in Victoria's state parliament, Mr.
Hong Lim, a parliamentary secretary (the junior minister for communities)
in the state of Victoria, I am accused in parliament (22 August, 2006, Hansard reference, Leighton. Member for Preston, "Clayton liberal candidate")
of being a racist and of unsound mind by another member of the Victorian parliament? Is Hong Lim unable to articulate his own defence and debate?
The probable answer, in my opinion, is yes. He is not capable. I think he was put in the role by political largesses to suit a political agenda.
Mr. Hong Lim is the elected labor candidate. He represents an Asian minority.
What are his abilities to relate the values, and to fully represent his electorate? They seem not all that
persuasive.
What is his grasp and command of the English language? I think it is marginal and that he is not
capable of articulating, personally,
the values outlined by the leader of the Australian labor party, Kim Beazley.
Why is it
that Mr. Leighton, another parliamentary member has to spring to his defence?
Could it be that the member for Clayton, Mr. Hong Lim,
is unable to articulate his position in parliament? In any event choosing Mr. Leighton (or him being chivalrous) was
an extremeley poor strategy on the part of the labor party. Now labor party member Janice Munt, (page 31 Hansard, 12 September 2006)
member for Mordialloc has entered the debate in parliament,
casting aspersions upon the mental, and other capacities, of Mr. Beck and his good friend Mr, Michael Carty, candidate for the electoral
seat of Clayton,
at the coming election in November 2006. Extract from the Hansard record:
MEMBERS STATEMENTS
Liberal Party: Clayton candidate
Ms MUNT (Mordialloc) — Last month the member
for Preston revealed the similarity between a letter from
Michael Carty, the Liberal candidate for Clayton, which
was published in the Monash Journal, and a political
blog written by Kevin R. Beck. Mr Carty now claims
he did not plagiarise Mr Beck’s work and that they
wrote the letter together. On Monday I was astonished
to read yet another letter from Michael Carty in the
Monash Journal, this time attacking the member for
Clayton over a letter that he claimed the member wrote
on the subject of water usage which was published on
14 August.
The member for Clayton has written no letters to the
journal recently. Perhaps Mr Carty was thinking of a
letter from Tony Kelly, the managing director of Yarra
Valley Water, which appeared in the journal on that
date. Mr Carty admitted in his earlier letter that he did
not have much idea of what an MP actually does. He
has admitted to a partnership with Kevin Beck, whose
ideas are different, to say the least. Now he is so
muddled in his thinking that he has confused the
member for Clayton with Yarra Valley Water’s
managing director. The member for Preston was
right — Mr Carty is not suited to public office. If he
refuses to resign, either the Leader of the Opposition or
the Liberal Party must do something about it." (end of extract)
Ms Munt is easily astonished since the Monash newspaper is a localised, part
time edition with a readership base hardly likely to care about my unusual ideas or for Mr. Carty
to have any real impact on the election result. Of more significance is that this is Ms Munt's heady and substantive contribution to
parliamentary debate and her role within the government. She gives observers a window into her eloquence, debating and political grasp of the world beyond her office door.
On 22 August 2006 the Honourable member for Preston, Mr. Leighton, called me a racist for questioining
the member ofor Clayton,
Mr. Hong Lim's
contribution to government and his suitability to represent the
whole electorate. A significant barrier to citzen interaction with the Australian Labor Party is the maturity and
capacity of party officials, staff and political
representatives, who are invariably and aggressive and defensive if questioned.
"All the liberals know about health and education is how to sack nurses and close schools", Ms. Alison Crosweller, a labor governmentv spokesperson
quoted in the Age Newspaper, cover, Friday, September 15, 2006.
The question arises - what are the performance measures and expectations of the Premier Steve Bracks regarding her labor
representation in the electorate and
in the parliament? Not much if the resport of a inter party parliamentary committee is
anything to go by. The Public accounts and Estimates Committee, which has more labor members than other political representation
reports that the Bracks' government and its chosen guardians of the public interests
do not perform well at all.
"Missed targets in education, health and gaming and an apparent reluctance to account for their performance (op cit)". Government departments refusing to tell the people's representatives what they are doing.
Well over $500,000,000 spent on misleading and breach of rules advertising where the government spins its story to misrepresent to the public
and present a different picture. Students in school who cannot read and write at or near the national benchmark,
departments that waste money overspend and underperform. According to Crosweller the "government welcomed the committee findings." Is she daft as to the content?
Using the typical
widespread immoral
and reprehensibly
unethical
practice of political hacks
They selectively respond and distort
the truth about
public policy
Ms Crosweller mouthed off into a cerebral fairy land.
Political staffers, such as Ms Crossweller, are paid from the public purse. This is outrageous given that they do not serve the publuic and often act against the public interest.
They are not elected, yet they speak as if they are the voice of the elected representative. If the speaking backfires they take the bullet for
misrepresentation and illa dvised thinking not the politician.
When you take the above and add it Ms Munt's quality record of
debate and representation the performance bar is not very high if there is one at all.
Ms Munt is not an exception she is one of many, along with the member for Preston, Mr. Leighton, and Mr. Hong Lim
who are labelled as average. We are unable to gauge performance because it is deliberately hidden.
Our governments, and the members thereof are the creators of the lack of regard for politicians.
They present
an average to mediocre spectrum of
political governance in parliament in Victoria and in other places in the nation.
How can electors choose quality performers if the preselection processes of labor and the liberal party
do not offer quality candidates from which to choose? Queensland is the glaring example.
The Beattie government is returned despite the abysmal record because the alternative is not pallatable.
This is the case to a degree in Victoria also.
So far Mr. Hong Lim the actual member for Clayton remains silent whilst others try, in their limited way, to deflect attention from him.
Where is he and why does he now need another labor party member to argue his case and throw the insults that he should be capable of delivering.
Is this the silent election strategy of a sitting member who might believe that being given a safe seat is
enough of an effort? If Mr. Lim was actually selected for the role to
to just bring a portion of multicultural votes, and pick up the automatic labor block,
and thus represent a portion (rather than the whole electorate) then why is this not stated to the voters in Clayton and to the public,
by the labor party? It is naive to pose the question, isn't it. Labor is never going to admit that it has a political agenda that is not necessarily in the
interests of voters in the state.
One might expect that the labor party in Victoria should at least have the ethical
standards, and backbone, to own up when asked if certain people are being given
preselection and safe seats for some agenda other than fair representation of the
voters. What about George Seitz? According to media he is engaged in some questionable practices which
amount to very pretty blatant insult to democracy and government operation in Victoria on the part of the Labor party.
Political hacks with little exepreince and ability abound, particularly in labor, and they show us their inadequacy in parliament when the best they offer is a stridnet claim of the fitnes of others. This political pot is calling the
kettle black.
Every person has the right to be represented including minority ethnic groups in Clayrton.
We need a broad parliament which includes the minority groups that Mr. Lim represents. We also need to have people who can articulate in the house of the people.
What we do not need is the secret political agendas of power brokers, and a system of patronage,
within political parties that corrode the nation's parliaments and democracy.
Mr. Lim, appears to my mind, and assessment, to raise issues as to whether he can fully represent his electorate. However it is
difficult to determine if Mr. Lim has any other capabilities that are of value to the broad electorate if he never answers
criticism or challenge. My substantial grounds for questioining his contribution are that,
(a) he has no substantial debate record in the parliament. (b) He has no substantial debate or publicity in
the electorate, (c) in regional (as a minister for communities) (d) state coverage and no (e) sunstance in the mainstream
media. He is however a parliamentary secretary?
|
YOU MIGHT CONSIDER VOTING FOR YOUR
NATIONAL PARTY OR INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE AT THE NEXT STATE, TERRITORY AND FEDERAL ELECTIONS
No matter where you live in Australia, in the country or the city. No matter your religion, political beleifs or associations or colour of
politics, if you want to be represented in parliament by someone who is likley to treat you with respect and remain loyal over the years then you should vote for the
National candidate or an independent. They are also more likely to let you participate and
hear your views without the filter of "your political baggage." Those who see government as the personal feiefdom of
one of the two major parties (labor and liberal) argue that a vote for an independent is wasted because they are "not permitted to do get aneywhere. The government of the day wil actually
work to over ride your vote by making it worthless. These people have little concept of the notion of fair and equitable
representation and there is not one value one vote in their
small minded world. The reality is they are not just thugs they are legalised vandals even criminals if
one feels passionately about Australian democracy and the role of parliament. They will ensure that your representation is devalued.
There is a growing number of independents in our parliaments
and where the parliament
is fairly evenly distributed between labor and liberal it can be an independent
that decides who governs. This happens in the states and territories but not so much in the
federal parliament. The crude and unnaceptable of the "senior conservative party members" and their mentality is
not only evident in their behaviour in
Queensland
and towards independents it quite open when National Senator Barnaby Joyce speaks his mind or argues the point. In
Queensland the liberals cannot get it in their heads that they are the "juniors" of the conservative party and the Nationals are the
seniors.
This arrogant assumption as to control is especially nasty when Senator Joyce
votes differently to how they (the government members) do in the parliament.
The greater number of political party members are followers and fill the seats of the parliament
without adding value to the innovation and
quality of our democracy. They maintain the status quo and accept the handouts
from their senior
party members in the bainet room with
gratefulness. Many aspire to representing their electoral voters rather than themselves. This is an honourable thing. Some do not and they are quite transparent and identifiable.
All claim to debate rigorously in the party room
but when they emerge they are as one. The rule is solidarity is strength, and division is political death.
On this basis the renegades who defied the Prime Minister and the cabinet on the
2006 immigration bill should have caused a political stroke tantamount to the beginning of death. This is pure crap.
The media and the machine men and women of the parties peddle this triteness and they convince the
voters that this is fact. The Democrats imploded because disunity is death. If you cannot run the party
how can you run the country? What about the parliament actually running the country? What a novel concept.
The "executive" of governments, a handful of politicians, run the country (about five at most and in some states it is one or two) decide what is happening, not the parliament of the people.
In 2005 the National Party seemed to have an awakening that it is possible to be conservative but it is not necessary to be sycophantic.
The party operation is similar to the royal courts of France of days gone by. They just dress differently.
The Nationals are now opening debate in the parliament largely due to the efforts of Barnaby Joyce. Barnaby won his seat in parliament by a whisker and the
liberal machine, men and women, are working very hard behind the scenes to take back what they beleive is rightfully their seat in the house.
If they were to achieve this or labor were to win the seat at the next half Senate election it would be a bad thing for the parliament and democracy.
A vote for the National party member is a vote for the conservatives, and thus the liberals. However the National are allowed to participate and
are allowed to adequately represent you. This is not to say that they do not exhibit
the contemptible political traits in terms of policy and action of the modern politician but
they bring something else to the houses of the people. It could be their "country upbringing". There are of course
nationals who do not necessarily live in the
country.
They do not seem laden with the liberal and labor reticence to deal with you because you are not in "my electorate". Many liberal, and labor, part members have little concept of what technology and changes in society have done to
the demographic and ability of people to
interact
unexpectedly anywhere. Governmens tell us that we no longer have a job for lifetime andthat we must consider
travelling to where the work is. Yet the individual politician cannot extrapolate what this might mean for them in their electorate.
What is my electorate really when I conduct business locally, regionally, nationally and internationally? What interest at anyone time
might I represent?
It is no longer about where I am electorally enrolled, and vote,
it is about where, and when, I choose to enact my interests and how I might
go about the task.
Another factor is with whom I might do these things.
How do these new dimensions of technology, and work and interest,impact on
single, or multiple, politicians and governments and on
whose behalf?
They change the dynamic and the game.
I have had extensive interaction internally, and externally, with politicians, government and opposition political parties over two decades.
These associations have been more on the labor side of politics than the conservatives. Yet the people who have never denied me access, association and respect are
national party politicians.
There was no greater gentleman in the federal parliament than National Leader Tim Fischer. Peter McGauran has remained even handed over the years even when I have criticised him on radio, in the pres and on the web.
An effusive hand shaking politician he is none the less sincere. Barnaby Joyce is sincere and are many state national poiticians.
The labor, and liberal members, I interact with I find are less sincere and seem to be more judgemental than their national counterparts. All politicians are blinkered but the nationals seem less so to me.
As for labor, whom I supported by being a member at the branch and state level. I supported them
in the trade union movement and in the
electicity privatisation of process, against my better judgement, in Victoria and others who I have interacted with at federal and state level?
Well I think they are on the majority side untrustowrthy, very ignorant,
and not worth a moment's consideration. They do not do their homework and will take
cheap pot shots against citizens under parliamentary privilege (refer Hansard in the Victorian parliament, August 22, 2006, Member for Clayton - sppech by Leighton, labor member for Preston)
because they largely lack spine and courage. Leighton demonstrates the depth, and intellectual firepower, of the modern labor politician.
The labor politician of 2006 is a not a patch on the quality of their former political icons.
I think there is no loyalty in this suspicious lot. Their trade union, and narrowly based, backgrounds lend them to
being suspicious.
The liberals well they are more on the arrogant side as if they feel that they are the superior party,
born to be the senior partner. Look at Queensland to see that they have great difficulty knowing their place there. They are the junior.
In dealing with them they tend to see that you as either with them or against them. They are neopitistic like lbaor. All is black and
white, much like labor. Thus they are relatively indistinguishable in the overall political scene.
The media, and political commentators, wrote of the National Party at the last federal election whereas
The members of Australia's governments, and corporations, must think the average Australian is quite stupid. Why?
Because whether you are at work or at home in your community they will tell you lies,
stuff everything up, or think up a new idea to experiment on you. They will underperform and cause you immense discomfort or even great loss.
Then tell you that they have the solution. They will argue, with hand on heart and great contrition,
that they are the only ones who know what to do. They will fix the health system, the education system, make it rain, control the market and interest rates,
create jobs, and make you all wealthy. They have found enlightenment and learnt from their
mistakes. They are listening to you.
What a load of crock, cant and sohphistry, pops out of their individual, and collective, mouths. These people either are, or they employ, spin doctors to lie to you and manipulate.
Their only goal is self survival. It is not your well being because the ideologies,
policies, opinions and objectives of the governments of the day are
far more important
than anything you might
think or have to offer. The government is theirs, labor and liberal/national. The public companies are the province of
a few board memebers and executives and institutional shareholders. These maninstays of society and economy
are not
anyone elses to occupy or own. It is not the public good they serve
because the public good is not synonymous with the
interests of the
power
collective membership. When they go they take the spoils with them regardless of how
they affected your lives or performed their allocated tasks.
The question is why, given the continual diatribe of
lies and
misrepresentation, cost, deaths and misery, do you believe the
politicians
and the public and private enterprise boards and executives who have
little regard
for your contribution and value.
|
What I write here is irrelevant to
most people. It is particularly irrelevant to members of
Australia's political class, the public services and public and private enterprise
power collective.
We have such limited capacity to influence our workplace and limited control, even none,
within the duopoly of political power that controls our federal state, territory and local governments.
We have consigned our democracy and chosen feckless life style pursuits in its place.
DO WE HAVE DISDAIN FOR EVERY POLITICIAN?
The somewhat nebulous,
and collective term "politician", is a mystery.
It we ask people what they think about politicains
we find that it is a "category"
for whom it seems the majority of people have little respect, bar for a few sycophants and
supporters. Interestingly this lack of respect for "politicians" may not
necessarily apply to the individual local member of parliament in your electorate.
This is not
inconsistent with the general population opinion published in surveys. They, the members of parliament, simply ignore that fact. They can for they are
in control. Collectively it seems a pack mentality takes over the individual politician.
It is a sate of acquiescence to the party line (read executive cabinet line). Then there seems to be
a dspensation that allows them to do stuff without
regard to any moral compass or measure of accountability. They make up things, "children overboard" (Howard et al). "job creation numbers",
"weapons of mass destruction", (Howard, et al) "Israeli bombing of ambulance in Labanon a hoax" (Alexander Downer), "every system doing well", (every labor and liberal Premier and Chief Minister across Australia).
It is okay if they do it (that is lie and misrpresent) but watch for the
response if you or someone else makes up things and acts like them.
If ever there was an example that the
democracy is not owned by the people, it is the debate about how long John Howard will remain as Prime Minister.
There are just a handful of people who actually care. They are the members of the coalition government, the labor opposition and few media commentators particularly the
federal parliament press gallery. The Treasurer, Peter Costello, has an expectation that the Prime Ministerial role is his by right of
"royal" passing. Howard is to annoint him and hand owner. In July 2006 he became tired of waiting and spat the dummy. He showed immaturity and self indulgence.
It was obscene, like some poorly scripted second rate play. It is quite immaterial to Peter Costello, and his supporters, that the a very large number of Australians
detest him. One woman within the Mosaic Portal focus group, when asked about Peter Costello, continually refers to his smirk. She is reminded of Costello's glee, and intemperate comments, when Paul
Keating lost his election in 1996. She describes Costello as "not a nice person".
He exhibits an indifference and elitism according to others.
Perhaps it is that he has never actually had to work for the role of Prime Minister, just hang around playing second fiddle. Australians do not vote for their leader and this is a serious flaw in
our democratic process because we can see that our system is manipulated by people
who think it is their personal fiefdom. They are consumed by their own world and the public interest is but a throw away line in their
rhetoric and shallow diatribe.
Peter Costello is not alone in being disliked for his personality traits.
I have a particular lack of respect for the Foreign Minister in Australia's government, Alexander Downer.
It is absolute disregard for justice and humanity, and that of his colleague the Attorney General, Philip Ruddock,
which is akin to a bile. Mr. Downer and Mr. Ruddock, in my mind, exist in an
even lesser category of political description. When Mumbai was bombed, on July 12, 2006, the Honourable Alexander Downer
linked the situation of David Hicks (in Guantanamo Bay, a stark example of the failure of the government to
provide basic human rights to a citizen of Australia) likening him to the terrorists. He said that it was time for
showing strength. He is downplaying the announcement that David Hicks is covered by the Geneva Convention.
Alexander Downer is a person of questionable ability as a Minister. He was a former leader of the opposition and he publicly failed there.
He is a petty little political man whose job is a sinecure from someone else.
He, like many in the liberal government, keeps his position at the whim of
the Prime Minister. David Hicks is in the wrong place at the wrong time, for Australia has Ministers of little compassion and even lesser long term vision. Alexander Downer, Philip Ruddock and John Howard are tarred with teh same brush of mediocrity.
Imagine that these people will retire on a pension of hundreds of thousands of dollars without ever being held accountable for their
inadequacies and inhumanity.
The lack of ability of Alexander Downer in the portfolio, and the senior executives of the Department of Foriegn Affairs and Trade can be
seen in the failure to plan for contingencies exhibited in the Israeli - Lebanon conflict. Downer obsfucates and mumbles that things are being done and that it is difficult.
He has had days and yet he cannot proffer a solution. The department lacks skilled people and there is a significant failure of the
Australian Intellgence community to plan and give foreward thinking information.
Kim Beazley, leader of the labor opposition, blusters that the government is not doing as much as the Europeans. He does not define what this
precisely means ebcause he has no idea what it means. It is a typical vacuous statement, redolent of Beazley's wind baggery.
He carps without offering a solution. His spokerperson Kevin Rudd,
a seasoned diplomat is conspicuously void of ideas. Now Beazley, and Rudd,
continually whine the excuse that in opposition they have no staff.
The real problem for labor is that the advisory staff they have are lacking in skil, ability and
aforethought. Add trhis to their incometency and one can see why they are not an alternative government at this or any stage.
Labor politicians employ hacks of the party without carrying out an exacting critique
of their abilities. If ther US administration is not there to tell Alexander Downer, et al what to say and do in a crisis, then we can see the result.
They trot out the supporting Jewish line and stand mute as
to the proposition that the Arabs have laid a spectacular trap into which Israel, the USA and Australia and perhaps
the United Kingdom are going to walk. The Israelite and Arab political class will never admit that either has the right to exist.
We can see the result when war mongering men of every nation, reagrdless of ethnicity,
gain political control. Welcome to the Isareli inspired, supported by the USA and Australian government's, Armageddon.
|
|
The more threatening the shadows that fall on the
present day from a terrible future looming in the distance,
the more compelling the shock that can be provoked by dramatizing risk today.
Established risk definitions are thus a magic wand with which a
stagnant society can terrify itself (Beck, U, 1999, World Risk Society, pp. 137-8).
Politicians now exploit
individual, and collective, fear and insecurity. None more so than the
Australian government under John Howard. The tools of exploitation,
delivered through extravagant advertising campaigns, and public relations
techniques, control access to information whilst manipulating emotions, opinions and beliefs.
They are designed to present material that is favourable to
Australia's governments and the incumbent executive and political membership.
The public services of Australia no longer serve the public interest or the public good as their primary objective.
Rather they serve the
political whims, ideologies and desires of the politicians who brook no challenge to their authority.
The resources of government are used to silence critics and marginalise objectors. The return on investment in governments and politicians by taxpayers
can be described as marginal at best.
Australians have consigned
their democracy, and government, into the hands of a few
individuals under the management of a duopoly, the Labor and Liberal Parties.
They have over time denigrated and corroded the processes of parliaments.
Parliaments are no longer functioning bodies representative of the nation's population and needs.
The nation's government and
policy processes, at local, state and federal levels, are commodities open to purchase by the highest bidder.
These systems are populated to a great extent by
unethical
elected, and unelected, individuals.
The only way out is for the voters to play a greate role in their governance and to elect a
broader number of quality representatives who are not obligated to the
machine men and women of the two major parties. To place politicians at the electorate level on
enforeceable contracts of performance as a condition of election to office.
regularly assess them and to act accordingly and constantly. (Beck, K.R., 2006)
|
Politicians and governments employing sophisticated tactics or just dumbing down the nation?
It was not until Dr. Geoff Gallop had gone from politics that we could the see real man, see and hear his compassion and
disilluionsment with Australian political life. He resigned as Premier of Western Australia when depression overcame him. These words sum up the quality of the man and the broken state of our democracy.
"Yes we do have to eat to live, but we also need to breathe and to feel. Nor is it just a matter of soul. Life needs to be meaningful as well aspractical and relational," Gallop, June 2006.
"The world keeps getting more complicated and we keep having to explain it to you in simpler terms, so we can get our little
oversimplified explanations on the evening news. Eventually, instead of even trying to explain it, we just give up
and sling mud at each other." (Primary Colours, USA, 1996). So who is to blame for this situation? People who cannot be bothered to educate themselves?
The political and media advisers, who give politicians trite, and uninspiring, speeches and material, thinking
that the average person cannot understand complex issues? Whoever writes the Prime Minister's speeches needs to take lessons in literacy and articulation.
Is it the journalists who are incapable of writing eloquently and succinctly with the
art of language? The television, radio producers and the press editors who demand the thirty second voice grab, and produce the news by rote?
Perhaps it is the editor who wants articles that are either eight hundred or one thousand five hundred words? Perhaps it is all of them in unison dumbing down the nation.
Whatever it is a manipulation using multiple techniques and it is dangerous to the long term
democracy of Australia and its governance.
|
Below are the gateways to Australia's benevolent autocracies where democracy is managed, and manipulated, by a handful of politicians, (unelected) advisers, immoral spin merchants and selected self interests.
Why bother to vote an elected member of parliament if they are directed how to vote?
Simply because if you do not you have no input at all.
It is time for all Australian citizens to actively value their democracy and to take it back.
Do not wait for an election every few years for the choices are limited and controlled.
You have to participate in more ways than just a vote.
What is it that is most important in this country, that affects every aspect of our daily lives?
It is governments and democracy. However in Australia our democracy and participation and right to representation is being stolen in many ways. Here is one example.
Tony Abbott is the government's manager of business in the Australian federal House of Representatives.
He is a Minister of the Crown and sits in the cabinet. He is often
presented as one of the stars of the parliament and a person with leadership aspirations.
In the parliament on Wednesday, 31, June 2006, he described an opposition politician
as a "grub".
"Kelvin Thompson, Shadow Minister for Public Accountability moved
suspension of standing orders at approximately 12:40 pm to allow
the House to debate a motion regarding AWB shares held and sold by the
Member for Gwydir and former Deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson.
When Mr Thomson had raised this matter in Parliament on other occasions
he had been advised by the Speaker that the correct way to raise this
issue was through a motion.
In an attempt to shut down this embarrassing debate for the Government,
the Leader of Government Business, Tony Abbott moved:
That the snivelling grub over there be not further heard
The Leader of Government Business, Tony Abbott was
not required by the Acting Deputy Speaker of the House to
immediately withdraw..."
Despite the motion clearly being out of order it was put to a vote.
The Leader of Government Business, Tony Abbott should be deeply ashamed
of his conduct in the House of Representatives.
He should have volunteered to withdraw the disgraceful comment immediately.
The Acting Deputy Speaker failed to make the Minister unconditionally
withdraw the comment and persisted in putting the out of order
motion forcing Labor to move a dissent motion against him.
The Governments conduct was so extraordinary that the Speaker was forced to
enter the Parliament and resume the Chair to restore order." extract statement, Australian Labor Party,
www.alp.org.au, 25 May 2006)
Tony Abbott made a sarcastic apology.
Examination of Mr Abbott's time as a minister, the tone and quality of his debates in parliament and
his creation of division in Australia, particularly with regard to women, implies
that he is, on balance, a politician whose take home salary and benfits appear to
exceed, quite extensively on too many occasions, his contribution to
public life and the quality of governance of the nation.
He demeans the parliament and the people whose house it is purported to be. This proposition has become a joke.
The Speaker of the House, is a member of the government. The speaker of the House of Representatives, at any time (whether labor or liberal),
has demonstrated on too many occasions, a bias, and a disregard for
the value that he delivers to the people of the nation by his thoughtless and partisan decisions.
The speaker, in this case a government liberal member, ejected an opposition (labor) politician who objected to Mr. Abbott's denegration and abuse in exactly the same words Mr. Abbott used.
When a member is ejected it denies representation to the people who pay for tyheir candidate to be there.
The Speaker stole the peoples' democracy. He showed a poor perfroamnce in the role, lack of respect for the people of Australia and their rights, to be represented.
He demonstrated the lack of values he brings to the role and value delivered, to the operaton of this house of the parliament, for
the pay he receives. The Speakers of Australia's parliaments, in theory and practice,
should be independent, but they invariably are not. They are partisan and their conduct demonstrates the belief by members that the parliament is their domain and
we just have to put up with it. The parliament of Australia, and its inhabitants,
are not held in high regard.
"Australia has one of the lowest participation rates by the
wider community in party politics. It would probably be fair
to say most Australians have a low regard for politics and politicians.
Most believe that individuals can make no difference. Many have given up.
I believe we can all make a contribution to a better Australia." (Extract from the maiden speech of liberal SEnator Bill Heffernan, 10 December, 1996.
In these words lie the very reason why this Speaker and any member of parliament
should realise that they are accountable. However for many, including me, he has, like Mr. Abbott,
been found extremely wanting and irresponsible fuelling
mutual contempt.
Who holds these people accountable? It certainly
is not their leader, the Prime Minister, the Premiers or Chief Ministers, or the
individual members of Australia's parliaments.
In a world where accounability, and performance, is measured by different,
and exacting, standards these people stand arrogantly apart.
They legislate to give themselves, employers and others the right to judge ordinary citizens.
However they (particularly the Eexcutive) imbue themselves with immunity.
imbue themselves with special status
and hold themselves to be above the common standards. They are well aware that we can only determine their future on limited occasions and the ballot boxes.
This is both sad, and disheartening, because many citizens have no one
to look up to in these places. "They can safely treat us with barely concealed contempt." (Quote: The Profit Clinic, John Counsel, Chapter 11, Small Business Books 1996, 1997).
The Premier of Victoria, Steve Bracks, is a former school teacher. No doubt in that role he was charged with presenting an ethical and professional image to his students.
So why is he apparentky incapabale of a similar behaviour as the Premier of Victoria?
Prior to winning office the labor party of which he is leader made much of the liberal government's period of administration and quality of governance.
"Labor remains committed to open Government and will
repair the damage done to democratic process in recent years by:
Strengthening the FOI Act and ensuring requests are responded to
within the permitted time;" Labor: New Solutions policy February 1999, p. 129.
The Attorney General (the state's highest legal officer)
in the current government, lead by Steve Bracks,
also made much of the former government's ethics, integrity and probity.
In 2006 the Victorian labor Premier, Steve Bracks and the Attorney General Rob Hulls, can both
be confidently described as hypocrites. The Attorney General is more culpable in that he allows a law to be degrdede, avided and corrupted by unelected people and by public servants.
This raises questions as to what they have to hide and why they are willing to degrade the democratic processes
through secrecy, obsfucation and lies?
of the state under question. These two politicians
provide no ethical, or moral, leadership to the other executive members of cabinet and to the public service.
The 2006 Ombudsman's report on Freedom of Information is the document that squarely sheets the hypocrisy home. The government ledaers and ministers actively flout the FOI laws. The public service breaches its code of conduct and deliberatley interferes with
the operation of democracy and degrades the quality of the state's governance.
They verge on criminal behaviour.
Ministers rebuked for toying with FOI, Keith Moor, Herald Sun Newspaper, 02june 06
"THE state watchdog has accused government ministers
of delaying the release of sensitive documents
possibly for political purposes. Ombudsman George Brouwer also
found evidence of ministerial
staff trying to change decisions of Freedom of Information officers
to hand over documents. He said this lent support to the
allegation that the supposedly independent FOI decision-making process was
open to political manipulation..... SOME government agencies had a
culture of concealment, rather than openness, when dealing with FOI requests".
At the very least these people are
unethical
and unprofessional.
They are paid to serve the people yet the politicians and their
advisers have corrupted public service independence. They have rendered
the public servants, government servants. This is in itself might not be a bad thing since the constitutions of the nation make no mention of
the public servant role as head. However the capacity of the ministers is not of a calibre to compensate.
Out of this
public policy
is abysmal, unimaginative and too often partisan in nature serving political interests and not the state or the nation.
There is little evidence that there is an ethical or moral compass at the top and the advisers to the Premier, and Ministers, damage the processs of government and
they are a disgrace in that they assume to themselves, with the tacit approval of Mr. Bracks and the cabinet, powers and roles not conferred on
them by the constitution or the electoral process. These people too are thieves of the peoples' democracy and are not fit for high office. We need to take back our democracy and
ensure that they serve the public and not their own interest.
Then why delegate it?
|
|
AUSTRALIA'S ELECTORAL SYSTEMS AND POLITICAL PARTIES |
| Australian Elections and Political Parties |
| Australian Federal Elections |
| Electoral Commission |
| Public Record |
| Australia Political World News Archives |
| Political Journals Listed in the Australian National Library |
| Representation |
The Greens Party may well be the ethical party with the
an applaudable consciousness of public interest. Unfortunately they have little
economic sense and almost no negotiating ability. Because they lack experience and
will not compromise they cannot get bills through parliaments. They are
zealots, oblivious that incremental wins build foundations. They ride on the
wagon of emotive debates of the time e.g. climate change, uranium and environment, without ever knowing how to
create a balance that
might deliver an outcome of worth. For them irrational solutions are the only foundation of the future, a c-change shock wave approach.
Blinkered to any other view, they harp, voicing varying levels of hysteria.
Greens
|
| Nationals |
| Liberals |
|
Labor |
| Democrats |
|
Family First Party |
"The independent MPs in the House of Representatives today launched ICAN – the Independent Candidates Advisory Network to provide advice, support, and
a focal point for people interested in standing as true representatives of the people at future elections.
Peter Andren, Member for Calare, Tony Windsor, Member for
New England and Bob Katter, Member for Kennedy launched
ICAN at Parliament House this morning and introduced former
Telstra Country Wide Manager Mr Gavin Priestley, as the co-ordinator of
ICAN."
|
|
|
|
Labor First Bloggers
|
LF Bloggers Catalogue
Varied bloggers and independents
|
Parrot Rhymes and the kiss of a frog
A behind the scenes look at Australia's governance
MEMORANDUM TOP SECRET
Date: Flexible, 2005
TO: Smokey Mirrors, Director of Communications
Australian Government (and coincidentally the White House)
And Special Forces Rapid Rebuttal Team of Truth and Criticism
Spin Room 24
Corridor of Synonyms, Antonyms
Parliament House, Canberra, Australia.
From: Minister for Immigration,
Indignant Affairs
and Department of Extreme, and Dangerous, Stupidity
Dear Mr. Mirrors
I write on issues of high priority.
There has been a litany of misfortunes besetting my portfolio, which was handed down to me by
Lord Syth, who has moved on to become "Overseer General", Caesar of the Legal Maze and Minister, Department for Home Raids and
Variable Intelligence.
Among the several hundred disasters and crimes against humanity committed by dedicated types and culturally challenged despots in my new department
is the case of a woman of advanced age, somewhere between 104 and 110,
an illegal, lurking in the suburbs causing the Department, due to pragmatic regard for the interest of the Australian government,
over that of public interest and humanity, not to make a decision about her status, as they do and should.
Some rude people are calling my portfolio a lumbering one, full of an inordinate number of dills and practitioners
of the dark arts. Some of these people have been following me around for many years transferring from my previous responsibilities in education,
employment, justice, immigration, multicultural and indigenous and
I will discuss a new image with you at a later date, particularly in relation to hair.
Have you observed Senator Coonan and Brendan Nelson's hair? What do you think of the styling?
I digress, back to the more pressing issues.
This Chinese woman was one of many threatening the very fabric of Australian society as we know and love it.
The old girl has been here for ten years, and unlike the other "illegals" who are all locked up in the desert resort
getting a suntan, this person is running lose in the community.
Yes, yes I know what you are thinking, ten years have I been s-lumbering waiting for a frog to kiss me?
There is some consistency here in that she, and the family, were being mentally tortured through waiting, which is
consistent with the policy for treatment of all illegals who are waiting endlessly at our, my and others,
pleasure as granted by the High Court of Australia, but questions were being asked as to why we did not lock her up like everyone else?
I wanted to! We wanted to!
The majority of Australians wanted to and so did the President of the United States, in whom we trust, want us to
and we have been kindly offered places in Cuba for those difficult cases that can be embarrassing.
Sierra Leone is looking a good alternative.
We are always reticent to break down the door in the dead of night and render people a 'non threat'
because lawyers, refugee advocates and other do-gooders and other enemies of the state, for which we have no regard,
are everywhere and ASIO has refused to do these things.
Additionally this woman could not be portrayed as a wandering lunatic nor a passing tourist of uncertain heritage and vocal nuances, even though she,
and they, probably can't speak real English, as we know it. We deported Alvarez and locked up Rau, but people of advanced age and particular
heritage can be influential.
The Chinese community is well networked and resourced.
You know that they have all of the gold from Bendigo,
Castlemaine and elsewhere which they gathered up before James Cook
discovered Australia.
They own all of the good restaurants, pleasure parlours,
and venues frequented by an influential cross section of business,
community, liberal party supporters and even some of our own parliamentary members.
They have so much money that offering them $600,000 to dredge their
pool or local creek, using the very special vote-buying fund for elections, and other government
interests, that we used in late 2004 does not entice them.
They will however consider a swap for a casino but we don't have any.
We will have to grant any Chinese person of Chinese origin a pass!
Now we have the Palmer Report, a most revealing insight into the warped mind of people reflecting the image of their political master of past years gone by.
This unwelcome document dissects how an Australian resident was locked up for a serious amount of time and tortured mentally because she was deemed to be an
unidentifiable, illegal immigrant. There are 200 more, give or take a dozen or twenty or fifty cases, who f--- knows! that are also about to hit the fan
and splatter all over my new dress.
At wits end I am seeking deployment of your Special Forces 'rapid rebuttal'
team, skilled in the use of antonyms, and synonyms, to reduce the pending Palmer document to toilet paper.
The ideas you put forward should be as creative as the lines and justification used for the Iraqi
invasion, denial and then approval of the additional military deployment, last announced by the Prime Minister,
who is friend of George Bush, in whom we trust. You might be able to reuse the Children Overboard Pictures.
Why waste a proven good piece of smoke and mirrors. Pictures should be cropped and presented in optional formats.
The solutions must show as much innovation as our proposals for industrial relations and general management of Australia.
By the way, you must be complimented for arranging a rechristening,
by the New York Times, of our PM, to "Premier of Australia" during his last visit to America.
This yet again, demonstrates the high esteem in which our PM is acknowledged, known, held, and observed,
by the highly educated media, and others, in the USA.
You are continually smoothing the PM's future path onto the American speaking circuit
although some are wondering how you will overcome the propensity he has for talking through his nose and whining?
Do you know when, and if, he will decide to allow Pete Cossytallow to smell the leather chair
and sit at the borer infested timber desk that JW polishes every morning with his sweaty, (free with a packet of weeties and mobile phone), track suit top?
Is it true that you are arranging entry to the US hall of fame,
for special people who are loyal to the White House and Dubya, with attendant honourary citizenship?
I would like to put my name down and I have been practicing my American and
I watch all of the TV programmes to get an idea of the culture and nuances.
The synonyms you have made up for Parrot Rhymes, Minister for Defence, to use in the Senate Estimate hearings,
are breathtaking and wondrous indeed. The art of using the same repetitive phrase
in answer to 100 questions really gets on the opposition's goat. Then there are the gems
you created for the PM such as, 'I had a change of heart',
'we did not contemplate', " I do not give a rats as to your contrary opinion", "the truth is whatever I deem it today to be",
"I never remember yesterday", "I was never minded", "No snot told me", and those killer statements that roll of his tongue
flowing seamlessly, "I was finally persuaded", "I found a heart," "after contemplating
I became minded" and that classic used by every politician in Australia, "the reality is at the end of the day".
I look forward to a speedy reply and remain yours as ever in my dreams.
J. W. Philamandalexclone
Minister for Immigration,
Indignant Affairs
and the Department of Extreme, and Dangerous, Stupidity.
|
Will the Australian,
British and United States governments be surprised when
ultimately the government of Iraq falls under the influence of Iran?
As Australia ponders the actions of its government and allies in the torture of people and as we see our own public service fail in its duty of care deporting innocent people, Australians and refugees and mentally torturing people
We can reflect upon what is it that defines a civil society in these articles below?
|
|
The Australian
government is changing the nature of employee relations in Australia
with a new workplace relations bill. Below is the latest news on human resource management practices overseas
|
Australia's population is aging
it is important that we debate the necessary policies and actions
These articles can give us valuable perspectives
|
|
|
| |
Australia's human cattle processing
