Friday on my mind: what was that edition

A few weeks back contributor Shane mentioned that perhaps Tony Abbott could do with a bit of help regarding public speaking. Now we do realize that Tony is the current Umm Err champion but perhaps the good folk at the Café could give him a helping hand, just to extend his vocabulary a little.

Therefore here is the challenge: to provide a 2 sentence ‘script’ for Tony.

Could it be that Tony Abbott’s “surging wave of discontent” is nothing more than “absolute crap”, and if you’re homeless “it’s your choice”… But then on the other hand if you happen to be a virgin then “it’s a gift”..or maybe it was the other way around, that homelessness is “a gift” and virginity is “crap”.

All suggestions will be duly emailed to Tony for him to practice in the mirror.

In the meanwhile, here are Tony clips that I enjoyed.

And..

Please also consider this an Open Topic for anything which might come to mind.

261 comments on “Friday on my mind: what was that edition

  1. Min, just read Lyn’s link to you here and I love your homelessness is “a gift” and virginity is “crap” line which she quotes. When Tony Abbott first said it, I thought along these lines.

    Virginity’s A Gift?

    What fatuity
    saying viginity’s
    a gratuity
    or gift!

    If you listen
    To him carefully
    You’ll really
    Get his drift.

    Once it’s lost
    by promiscuity
    that’s it
    for perpetuity!

    And you’ll go to Hell!
    You Jezebel!

    What I’d advise
    Is ‘Girls, be wise!
    Don’t listen to
    The master’s voice.
    Enjoy yourself,
    But remember,
    Virginitys your choice!’

  2. patricia. Last line should be “Virginity’s your choice”.

    My two line statement for Abbott:

    “ummmm, errrrr, errrr, and… arrrrr (head begins nodding).
    (body becomes tense) ….arrrr, errrrr, incompetent…., umm.”

    I’ve run out of lines being only allowed two. I think I might be able to get some coherence and resemblance to a two lined statement if I was allowed 20 lines or more. I know that would be difficult but not impossible.

  3. Being a visual thinker the image that always came to mind about Tony’s statement that virginity is ‘a gift’ is something that came wrapped up with pretty pink bows..come to think of it, this could be reasonably accurate 😀

  4. Please leave TomM’s post up as it perfectly illusratates how hilarious he has become. Really losing it.

    And how unsurprising he does this in a topic lambasting Abbott. TomM the Abbott super barracker to the rescue again by attempting to derail a topic being critical of and sending up Abbott.

  5. “Ladies and gentleman,
    It is with great regret that I have to announce that I will be stepping down from the leadership of the Liberal Party in order to spend more time with my wife and children. In an unrelated bit of news Margie has decided to devote more of her time to her business, promoting the opening of new branches in Somalia; Louise is off on a study tour in Norway for the next ten years; Francis is moving to Perth in order to be closer to Maisie the dog (who is believed to have absconded westwards earlier this year after having been given yet another pink bow for Christmas) and Bridget is in retreat while she ponders what gift to give to her Sudanese boyfriend for his next birthday.”

    More background on the close-knit Abbott family can be found here:
    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/tony-abbott-cant-bribe-the-family-to-go-to-mass/story-e6freuy9-1225823746273

  6. Min
    Yes it seems a sip of wine and a wafer of bread just didn’t make the grade.
    I wonder what was offered?
    We know Tony wouldn’t sell his arse (but he’d give it serious consideration), perhaps a billion bucks for a new games room for the kids and a new iron for the missus.

  7. Good morning.

    It’s 5:45 am here in Lucerne. The coach heads off for the long drive to Paris shortly. Switzerland would have to be the most beautiful country on the planet. I didn’t buy a Rolex watch but I did purchase something I’ll never need: a Swiss Army knife.

    ToM, if I may say so, your initial comment on this thread – in my opinion – was posted for no other purpose than to cause some trouble and I fully agree with ME’s sentiments.

  8. As some are aware, I worked for a union some time ago. Officers of the union I worked with (at that time) had a genuine commitment to looking after the members, and prudent expenditure of their funds. Back then being a union official was respected

    Getting a few beers shouted at union expense was about the most generous the largesse ever became.

    If there had been a whiff of inappropriate expenditure (Norm Gallagher and the BLF aside), there would have been a revolt by the membership.

    Activists would not have rested until the culprits were identified and punished politically, the funds would have been retrieved.

    That’s the difference, ALP barrackers are no longer activists. They are expedient apologists who would prefer it if the questions would just stop. They don’t want answers they just want political advantage.

    We now have more questions for Craig Thomson to answer, but the barrackers don’t like any more questions.
    —————
    Not at all Miglo. Jane alleged that I was using a sock puppet.

    As you are aware, I’m not at all bashful about expressing my opinions and any sock puppetry is entirely unnecessary.
    Jane has a great sense of humour, but repeated the comment despite my initial humorous and polite correction. She should square away her allegation/error.

    Enjoy Lucerne!

  9. ToM, this blog being a democracy I don’t think that anyone has the right to demand anyone do anything..it being a free country and all that. You of course may politely request….

  10. TomM, do not realise, many on this site have adopted the Liberals tactics of never apologizing, especially when one makes demands.

    Sorry, TomM, you will be waiting a long time.

  11. Today’s gem.

    It is obvious that Mr. Thomson will be allowed to witness the birth of his baby or words to that effect.

    The word ‘obvious” was definitely used.

    Sarcasm by Mr. Abbott??

  12. We’re not running a union, ToM. You and the Liars Party should stop stalking Craig Thomson. Stalking is a crime you know. Perhaps you have questions to answer. I suggest you get treatment if the symptoms continue,

    If you were not posting under a different pseudonym at TPS, I apologise for assuming the clone whose rhetoric bears a striking resemblance to yours was you. A ToM android perhaps? One of Neil’s socks, perchance?

    Migs, sounds fabulous, having to get up early is a drawback to tours. On the positive side, if you go to sleep while the vehicle is in motion the only negatives are snoring, head lolling, dribbling and falling out of the sea and that’s just your fellow passengers! And of course, you don’t have to bloody drive. Lol.

    patriciawa, loved the pome.

    Min, your 2 lines conjure up quite disturbing images.

    Norman, he says he wouldn’t sell his arse, bit would he give it away? More to the point, would there be any likelihood of anyone with such an appalling lack of taste as to take him up on the offer?

  13. Miglo, do not worry. TomM is not making trouble, though that is obviously his aspiration.

    We are enjoying his adolescent attempts at ridiculing us.

    Enjoy your trip. We will be all here when you get home.

  14. Just had a peek at yesterday’s posters at the 35,000 turn out against the O’Farrell new IR laws.

    Not an personal insult in sight.

    No name calling.

    No bithches or dogs, well none that I see.

  15. Jane re “your 2 lines conjure up quite disturbing images”..which of my 2 lines was that 😯

    Jane re snoring, head lolling, dribbling and falling out of the seat..don’t worry, Migs won’t annoy the other passengers too much… Mind you Migs in the aisle might take up some room, long legs and all that.

  16. “If there had been a whiff of inappropriate expenditure (Norm Gallagher and the BLF aside), there would have been a revolt by the membership. ”

    TomM, I was wondering what is missing, it is the revolt by the membership.

    TomM, thanks for pointing that out.

    There are plenty of comments coming from disaffected union officers.

    Disaffected officials that are now serving and many from the distant past.

    You’re deliberately ignoring the fact that there is bitter fractional fight going on for years within the Union.

    Mr Abbott is using this dispute for his own ends. He could not care less for the workers that the union represents.

    Thanks once again TomM.

  17. jane
    “… would there be any likelihood of anyone with such an appalling lack of taste as to take him up on the offer?”

    Yep, me. Just for the headlines.

  18. Trouble with TomM’s accusations against the barrackers he continuously goes on about, as he always drones on when he has a single point he wants to hammer over and over, is that he’s very selective indeed.

    He doesn’t rant on continuously about the Liberal barrackers or Abbott lovers who always make excuses for his failures or the malfeasances of that party and their cohorts. Yet TomM goes into other blogs demanding they should run to his meme and he gets all uppity (hilariously so) when they refuse to do that. Then he starts into his barrackers meme as a lame attempt at derision without realising it’s the opposite. Finally he goes on about his past as that somehow conveys that (honestly folks) he’s balanced and fair.

    Is it coincidence that he nearly always appears here when either Gillard or her government is being rightly praised, or Abbott is being rightly criticised. When he does so its nearly always with a “look over there at Labor and how bad they are.” Seems to me that rightly praising a Labor government is he biggest no no in his world and that must be stopped and stamped out immediately, so he goes on his cross blog crusades to jump on anyone or any blog that is in any way favourable to the government or unfavourable to Abbott.

    Only bashing this government is allowed it seems and their successes are to be relegated to the deepest pit never to see the light of day. And just criticising this government is not enough, you must do it vehemently and often, and I suspect even then that would not be enough for TomM.

    TomM if don’ want to see bloggers being positive about a Labor government then don’t visit their blog. See it’s not that hard really. In the meantime by doing so and goiing into your “Labor=bad” and “Praise government=barracker” routine you give us all a good occasional laugh, especially when you do so whilst saying you’re not a barracker.

  19. Oh dear I hope Mrs Craig T doesn’t have a long and difficult labour, as Mr tony says Mr C T can only have a short time off.
    So i guess her “delivery Plan” (all the thing these days ) will be toughen up, push it out quick, Tony cannot wait. See it is just as easy as riding a bike.

  20. Sue, she could have induced labour on the weekend.

    It is a wonder that Mr. Pyne did not come up with that one.

  21. I wonder if Mr. Abbott was around for the birth of his girls or was he too busy off surfing and cycling.

    We know he wanted nothing to do with the birth of the son that turned out not to be his. He shot overseas for that one.

  22. Sue, you are so very right. Thank you Tony Abbott..Mrs Craig T should push that much harder in order to comply with parliamentary schedule.

  23. ME whenever I see a TOM post I equate it with those newspaper comment pieces that start:

    At the last election I voted Labor but because of (insert whatever) I will never vote Labor again.

    Boring move on.

  24. You know I really do try and see an upward trend in this:

    http://neven1.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f03a1e37970b015435378281970c-800wi

    …and this:

    http://neven1.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f03a1e37970b015435379118970c-pi

    I try to find the evidence that the world is cooling in statements like this:

    “… the 2010 September ice volume anomaly did in fact exceed the previous 2007 minimum by a large enough margin to establish a statistically significant new record.

    And now that 2010 record is broken — and the melt season isn’t over yet.”

    …and this from a really direputable source:

    In November, Rear Admiral David Titley, the Oceanographer of the Navy, testified that “the volume of ice as of last September has never been lower … in the last several thousand years.” Titley, who is also the Director of Navy’s Task Force Climate Change, said he has told the Chief of Naval Operations that “we expect to see four weeks of basically ice free conditions in the mid to late 2030s.”

    Then I had a Eureka moment. Twist your mind, warp your brain, ignore all the evidence whilst embracing the quackery and turn the graphs upside down, voila global cooling.

    The sources:
    http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/2011/090611.html
    http://psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpress/schweiger-2011/

    You know the whole thing must be bunkum when the US military assign top brass militay commanders to Climate Change task forces, and that includes all the Services and the intelligence organisations as well.

    But someone knows better than all of them and the massive resources they have behind them because he reads Monkton.

  25. Sue, it’s highly sus’..if Brandis had all this evidence then why did he not produce it the first time around.

  26. Mobious, thamks for the links.

    In November, Rear Admiral David Titley, the Oceanographer of the Navy, testified that “the volume of ice as of last September has never been lower … in the last several thousand years.” Titley, who is also the Director of Navy’s Task Force Climate Change, said he has told the Chief of Naval Operations that “we expect to see four weeks of basically ice free conditions in the mid to late 2030s.”

    What would they know ? 😀

    Dare we assume they know a great deal more than the mad monk… I mean the mad lord, Muckton.

  27. “ummmm, errrrr, errrr, and… arrrrr (head begins nodding).
    (body becomes tense) ….arrrr, errrrr, incompetent…., umm.”

    are the sentnces, Min.

    NormanK @3.02pm, gaahhhh! Now that’s going well above and beyond the call of duty. Are you sure you are prepared for a sacrifice of this magnitude?

    Sue, @3.13pm, no doubt poor old Sloppy will have to do yet another back down for Liealot.

    Min @3.38pm, he didn’t produce it because the ink hadn’t dried. We know the Liars Party has form for that sort of stuff, so it would be easy for Brandis to forge the “new evidence”.

    I hope that when this blows up in Brandis’ face, he is forced to grovel to Tomson and have legal action taken against him. The cops must be thrilled. More time wasted.

  28. Sue, the depression was widely broadcast by her male colleague,
    Mr. Robb, but will he draw the line here or come out in sympathy 🙄

  29. “Ladies”, I note that Mr. Turnbull is staying out of the dirt digging exercise by Brandis…. can’t think why that would be…

  30. I was just trying to think of some music..for us naughty “ladies” who dare challenge the men. How about this one, dream on fellas..

  31. Now I know that MJF cried today because the media has told me so. But will the media do a story on the Security guard, if they do here are some questions:
    Did you cry when your arm was repeatedly banged by a door?
    Did you cry when asked to withdraw you statement?
    Did you cry when told you could be fined $20000?
    Did you cry when told you do not know your duties?
    Did you cry because you are a girl?

  32. Sue, excellent thoughtful comment on the security guard’s predicament.

    Did you cry when your arm was repeatedly banged by a door?
    Did you cry when asked to withdraw you statement?
    Did you cry when told you could be fined $20000?
    Did you cry when told you do not know your duties?
    Did you cry because you are a girl?

    Did she cry and whinge because she’s not a QC, or Senator in a position of power, and earning ? a handy salary !

  33. I thought about playing ‘I am the Apeman’ for Tony but changed my mind, left in his ‘stately home’ will do

  34. Pip, that’s about my taste in music 🙂 Carly Simon wrote that one about Warren Beatty.

    My plan for this evening is…

  35. ‘Albo’ strikes back

    Coalition’s George Brandis accused of acting like ‘quasi police foce’ over Thomson claims
    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/coalitions-george-brandis-refers-second-set-of-craig-thomson-claims-to-nsw-police/story-fn59niix-1226133189475

    Labor frontbencher Anthony Albanese accused the opposition of acting like a “quasi police force” by referring the new allegations to police.

    He said politicians should not interfere in the judicial process and the latest reports were simply allegations.

    “It’s a really good idea if politicians don’t pretend they’re some quasi police force,” he told reporters in Sydney on Friday.

    “It’s important in this country we have a separation of the political process from the judicial process. It’s important that parliamentarians respect that, and I intend to respect that.”

  36. Pip, if it’s the Kinks it just has to be. I seem to remember..well I won’t say but it was in the park outside of QClub.

  37. Sue @3.46pm, my thoughts exactly. Get HRT and STFU.

    Pip, what worries me about that poll is the 25% who thought it was a good idea.
    25% of people who could see nothing wrong in denying a husband and wife being together for the birth of their child. That’s frightening, imo.

  38. Pip,@ 5.10pm it’s an insult to apes, isn’t it?

    @5.46pm, I think that’s probably pretty close to the truth, real Tea Party attitude. All I can say is that if any of the 25% happen to go into labour, I’d like to extend the pleasure of denying them any support from family and/or friends.

    Min, I’d join you, but I’ve picked up a lurgie. So it’s aqua vitae for moi, I’m afraid. Am breaking in a new keyboard as well. The keys are large with v large letters, for people like me wot have to wear goggles.

  39. Where is the record of the sick leave.

    It appears that she was well enough to continue working as a Senator, drawing a wage but not well enough to go shopping.

    Where is the record of the number of times she was too ill to attend parliament or her office.

    She was well enough to ask questions during the QT’s I viewed. Albeit very nasty and sometimes cruel questions.

  40. Senator Brandis today wrote to NSW police commissioner Andrew Scipione requesting that he “make an assessment and, if appropriate, direct your officers to make an investigation”.

    A shadow minister is demanding that the NSW Police Commissioner assess the alleged allegations. Allegations that were assessed bu senior police and I am sure the decision would have been discussed with the Commissioner before being released.

    Brands made a point of saying he did not talk to the Police Minister this time. Does that mean he was wrong to last time.

    It is time that an enquiry was launched on the behaviour of Mr. Brandis. If this does not occur, there should be an petition launched and sent to the parliament demanding one. If it is good enough for Mr. Slipper, it is good enough for Mr. Brandis .

    It is important that the separation of powers between the political an judicial system be observed.

  41. CU @6.48
    If an inquiry is launched into the behaviour of Brandis he will probably cry and say that he was really, really depressed.

  42. Look this just isn’t good enough, this non-functioning government is working on a Friday. Fancy being so unproductive that you would introduce new measures to make Australian shipping more globally competitive and i repeat on a Friday.

    Like who does this government think they are, a governing, functioning, government thinking of Australia’s future, really!

    Albanese flags shipping industry shake-up
    Posted September 09, 2011 17:57:09
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-09-09/albanese-flags-shipping-industry-shake-up/2878948

    And look at the time the ABC posted the story, 3 minutes to 6 on a Friday night, footy finals, world cup,really

  43. What do the call people that keep making police allegations about a person. Oh, something like litigious, you know those who make an nuisance by make false allegations about others.

    I think that word might only apply to those who go to court on more than one time to pursue a person.

    There must be a word for those who keep making allegations to the police about the same person.

    I know we had a word when I worked for DOC’s, pests. Maybe in this case it is just spite.

  44. Sue, you know that all they are doing is creating a distraction.

    With the latest attitude to Mr. Thomson, shows there is desperation building up in the Coalition. Indecision is busting out all over.

  45. I’m reluctant to intervene here… but I’ll say …

    I think depression is over played as an excuse for poor behaviour.

    But I find it entirely distasteful that so many here are putting shit on a medicated depressive illness.

    I wonder whether the blog owner shares the ugly disposition towards this issue that so many here seem to have.

  46. TomM why are you reluctant to intervene, you have never been before.

    Many on this site have work with mental illness. Many have sufferers in their own families.

    This make me suspicious of the story.

    TomM, you are correct when you say it is becoming a convenient excuse.

    TomM, why are you not able to make the same concessions when allegations are made against those with a Labor background. I am not saying two wrongs make a right.

    Knowing when this illness was diagnosed might lead me to have a different opinion.

    Watching her behaviour in the Senate might lead to suspect she might have some type of behavioural disorder.

    What I am saying, she was well enough to carry out her job.

    At the end of the day, the courts will be the ones that make the decision as to her health.

    This lady can be very vindictive in parliament. It makes it hard to feel sorry for her. It is hard to give her the benefit of the doubt, when she does not give it to others.

  47. CU, Brandis can be labelled a spiteful pest. I wonder what he’ll do if plod, chucks this incongruous lot of dross back at him with a warning not to waste police time.

    I have no doubt they’ll want to know why he didn’t provide this damning evidence the first time he harrassed them. I don’t know that they’ll feel too impressed when he tells them that they were found hidden behind the cushions on Brandis’s couch which is why he didn’t submit them the first time round.

    On the subject of the Liars Party’s stalking obsession with Thomson, apparently Liealot’s excuse for their well crafted fake documents not cutting the mustard with the NSW police was that their standards are too high, thus preventing an immediate arrest.

    He hoped for a better outcome from the Victorians! I kid you not! And he reckons he’s PM material. Even more frightening, of course is that even with that example of complete stupidity, there are, for want of a better word, people who would vote for him! How the hell do they justify the decision to unleash such a creature on the country!

    As for the lovely M J Fisher, if her depression is so bad, why has she not taken leave? It certainly doesn’t seem to impair her ability to sit on committees and pocket the extra cash, nor to assault unfortunate security guards trying to prevent her from absconding with a trolley full of groceries.

  48. Jane, I tend to agree, but wonder if we should wait for the judge’s decision?

    On another, subject, as it were. I was talking to a shop owner about shop lifting in general, and she said that it’s often more affluent women who do it, for some reason. We discussed the technique of someone who’d do a big shop not using a trolley but a wheeled canvas shopping bag, rearrange the contents, removing one or two items which she’d present at the counter for payment and then wheel on out through check- out with the rest unpaid for. Some technque, eh? More like a bad habit than a spur of the moment thing, or temporary lapse in a depressive mood!.

    As you know that’s no imaginary scenario!

  49. I see Tom of Melbourne is twisting things again here, saying:-

    But I find it entirely distasteful that so many here are putting shit on a medicated depressive illness.

    I wonder whether the blog owner shares the ugly disposition towards this issue that so many here seem to have.

    *** Let’s deal with the subject of blog owners and ugly dispositions first. The only ugly vexatious disposition I’ve seen this week is that of Tom and his mate, the blog owner over at Gutter Trash, and they’ve been around the Cafe Whispers blog long enough to know far better than to hint at such an attitude from this blog owner.

    He’ll see the comments soon enough and I hope he ignores them and gets on with his holidays.
    Being the resident troll or contrarian is one thing but the shouting in heavy print above is nasty and unjust.

    No-one is ‘putting s…’ on a medicated illness; poorly described but I get Tom’s drift.
    Everyone here understands that any illness, depressive or otherwise can be a trial for the sufferer.

    No-one who has watched Ms Fisher in the Senate could be blamed for finding it difficult to warm to her, nor is it unreasonable to be just a little annoyed at her defence lawyers tactics regarding the security guard, or the rear guard actions of her colleague Mr. Robb who says it “beggars belief” that she is being charged at all. Why not let the Court decide what to do about it ? She may well be treated very leniently given her mental illness.
    Public comments like his, and the vexatious activites of Senator Brandis and Tony Abbott, about legal matters are unacceptable.

    Or in the case of Sen. Brandis, “quasi” police matters.

    Beyond Blue advocate, Mr Jeff Kennett said , “We have to be careful that we don’t use a depressive illness as the excuse for all human errors.”

    Mr Kennett said he did not want to prejudge the Fisher case, but said: “Most people who suffer a depressive illness feel low or high but they do not lose the definition of what is right or wrong.

  50. ‘The only ugly vexatious disposition I’ve seen this week is that of Tom and his mate…’

    Rising Sea Levels

    ‘A recent study of 27 coral islands in the central Pacific found an increase in land area of 7% over recent years with 86% of the islands being unchanged or increased in area. The popular image of sinking islands exists only in the fevered imagination of minds afflicted by the idea of AGW, not by any actual physical effect from it.’

    Walter Starck 9 September 2011

  51. el gordo, good try but I fear that none are really interested. For every new announcement you find, there are many others saying the Opposite from more reliable sites.

    I assume there was some evidence put forwarded at the Pacific Forum. The leading speakers from overseas seemed to agree with what was said. They I assume where briefed by scientist experts, but as we know, it is the experts that are wrong.

    Now to a more pressing story.

    “A HEALTH Services Union official has lodged a complaint with NSW Police alleging ”systemic and organised fraud within the HSU, including the procuring of secret commissions and corrupt rewards from suppliers and contractors”….

    ……………The official who lodged the preliminary complaint yesterday has sought a meeting with police on Monday to provide a detailed statement. The shadow attorney-general, George Brandis, referred yesterday’s allegations to the NSW Police Commissioner, Andrew Scipione……..
    …………None of this behaviour was secret within the ALP, he said. ” ”When this was going on, the party in many ways lost its moral compass. No one of any ethical authority said to these guys: ‘You are not doing the right thing’,,

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/national/systemic-organised-fraud-20110909-1k21d.html#ixzz1XUjufwKe

    …………………………………………………………………………

    Why are these allegation being taken to the police after at least four years, the day after Mr. Brandis lodge similar allegations. Why are the being taken to the NSW police and not the Victorian police where the union is based.

    It is alleged in the story that the behaviour of the two men were well known at the time.

    Where is the outcry from the members.

    What do we have that the two men are guilty as alleged. If so why has not Fair Works Australia found the evidence after three years, as I assume they have the same information. Could it be that the allegations cannot be established.

    Could we have a nasty fractional brawl within the union that has been going on for years, long before and after Mr. Thomson’s reign. Which I believe is also common knowledge within the community.

    Could we have the union working in collusion with Mr. Brandis to bring Mr. Thomson and the Labor government down. Not beyond imagination when we look at the length this government is willing to go too, gain power.

    What is the role of SMH in this latest allegation. Why is it the wife of the company making the allegations about the cards, not her husband. If I have read it correctly, the company is being accused of charging the union extreme over pricing for the work provided.

    Yes, Mr. Thomson could be guilty as alleged. I am not saying he is. What I am saying there are too many players in this drama, with their own agenda’s to have any idea where the truth lies. There are too many with much to lose, not only Mr. Thomson. If he is innocence, there is a great injury being done to him. If he is guilty, the crime is a long way short of murder or a company director who steals the life savings of thousand.

    Yes they are serious allegations, that need to be kept in content. We would not be hearing about them, if it did not mean that they give Mr. Abbott the chance of becoming PM. The same goes for the petition being sent to parliament over allegations about Mr. Slipper.

    All involved in this matter are entitled to be seen as innocence until proven guilty. I supposed that goes for Mr. Brandis as well.

    It still puzzles me why we are having so much released at this time, when the events are supposed to have occurred in the early 2000’s and are alleged to be common knowledge at the time.

    It is my belief that when rumours that persist over a number of years, especially when being dealt with by a legal body with the responsibility to do so, are not as clear cut as made out. Fractional blues within the union movement are not a pretty place to find ones self. They thrive on innuendo and rumour.

  52. Personally, I think putting shit on closed minded political opinion is fair game, and my specialty is targeting those that are closed minded about the deficiencies of the ALP.

    Subjects that I don’t think are suitable for putting shit on include-
    • Sexual orientation
    • Physical disability
    • Mental illness or impairment
    • Race
    • Sincerely held religious views**

    Recently I’ve observed 2 of the above being ridiculed by some ALP barrackers at the cafe and TPS, and I’m not always inclined to overlook this. Several comments have been disgraceful.

  53. yomm reckons he is against ‘ridiculing’ Mental illness, and then links to a post that is using ‘one prescription at a time’ in its image depicting ‘crazy’ people 😯

    What a tool

  54. TomM’s faux outrage. Again very selective as is his claim about close mindedness. It seems that only one side of politics is to be attacked and those with a closed mind on the other can keep their closed mind with his blessing.

    And this yet again comes back to why should any blog bow to his biased want of blindly attacking Labor and this government.

    TomM at the same time as saying there should not be disparity in blogs states that that only Labor should have its failures highlighted, of course whilst its successes should never ever see the light of day let alone be mentioned.

  55. TomM, I would like to remind you that it was the Opposition that put mental illness in the public arena as a defence.

    Are you saying that one is not allowed to reply to the comments they made.

    We, well I am not making fun of mental illness. I have had to much experience with mental illness to that. It is my experience that many act bizzare and made be seen as committing crimes. It is also very evident at the time that they are unwell.

    I am mocking the Opposition for putting it up as a defence.

    I am mocking the current habit of people using mental illness as an excuse for all they get caught out doing wrong.

    The police, if they believed this to be true, would not be likely to push the case so hard. Most police are not in the habit of pushing cases that have little chance of success. They have plenty of other cases to worry about.

    The lady could very well be innocent because of mental illness, that is not what the comments are aimed at.

    The comments are aimed at the Opposition for making such a big thing of mental illness as a defence.

    It is the Opposition that has impringed on th Senators rights.

  56. In a minor case, a mental illness can be counted as a mitigating circumstance and it will require specialist opinion as to whether he/she believes that this could have influenced her ability to make rational decisions.

    As has been pointed out, depression per se does not necessarily mean ‘getting off the hook’ but it could be taken on board by the sentencing judge.

  57. Accusations of the Cafe Whispers being anti:-

    • Sexual orientation
    • Physical disability
    • Mental illness or impairment
    • Race
    • Sincerely held religious views**

    Wrong on every count …..

    *****Archive for the ‘Cafe Talk’ Category
    https://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/category/cafe-talk/

    Archive for the ‘Gay Issues’ Category
    https://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/category/gay-issues/

    Archive for the ‘Indigenous Australia’ Category
    https://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/category/indigenous-australia/

    Bernardi and the burqa
    https://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/2011/07/11/bernardi-and-the-burqa/

    The Unexpected Lesson
    https://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/2011/07/04/the-unexpected-lesson/

    Cooking at the Café – take one live pig
    https://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/2011/06/24/cooking-at-the-cafe-take-one-live-pig/

    Alexis Baliotis
    https://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/2011/08/31/alexis-baliotis/

  58. On climate change the mob at the cafe have their heads somewhere else and they are not alone.

    Most of the blogs on the wall at trash headquarters are of similar leanings, don’t understand the science and accept what the scientists are telling them.

    The irony is that within 30 years it will be possible to glimpse icebergs off Margaret River.

  59. Oh and el gordo understands the science so well he can prove that the 90% plus of climatologists are wrong along with the US military and intelligence agencies.

    What a joke and the giveaway is the last sentence. Without a wink it can only be a troll, or is it secret sarcasm?

  60. I’m suggesting that some here-
    • have made comments that sought to retard gay rights, the administrators didn’t bother to chide them, nor did any other of the regular participants.
    • last night ridiculed medically treated depression, and the administrators didn’t bother to chide them, and nor did anyone else.

    Those making the statements should be ashamed of the ridiculing and anti gay comments. But their excuses – with the benefit of their rear vision mirror- now look quite lame.

  61. If anyone is still reading GT, can they let me know when the adolesents are finished playing their silly games – it really isn’t worth visiting anymore – such a shame for what used to be a very interesting blog 🙄

  62. Who the hell made you head of the blog police TomM, and why aren’t you being as active or as critical of those other blogs that really do denigrate gays, espouse racism and put down the unfortunate in this country?

    Of course not. You and fairness are antonyms.

    You have a bee in you bonnet because this other blogs won’t dump on Gillard and government enough so now you go into this childish snf churlish attack, and it really is infantile, unlike when you project that averment on others.

  63. So did I Bacchus.

    And you know what the real shame is, reb writes some of the best pieces I’ve read in blogs. Few have either moved me or had me thinking as much as some of his best pieces, and they are nearly always fair, balanced and intelligently critical or laudatory.

    But his great pieces inevitably get drowned out or sidetracked in slinging and abuse. What a pity for such a great talent.

  64. “And you know what the real shame is, reb writes some of the best pieces I’ve read in blogs. Few have either moved me or had me thinking as much as some of his best pieces, and they are nearly always fair, balanced and intelligently critical or laudatory.

    But his great pieces inevitably get drowned out or sidetracked in slinging and abuse. What a pity for such a great talent”

    Me I agree with you hundred percent. Why would one put up excellent post and let them be trashed,

    Why does he migrates to other sites to trash similar posts.

    Sorry, I do not understand where Reb is coming from.

  65. Does not Reb realise he does not have to support either side.

    He can focus his engergy on supporting what he believes to be right.

    It does not matter from which side of the political fernce it camed from.

    Support policy, not party.

  66. ‘Why does he migrate to other sites to trash similar posts.’

    From my understanding GT started out as a left wing blog and over time, because of Reb’s great sense of humor and articulate presentation, gutter trash became a small robust environment.

    Politically its evenly balanced, so migrating is what a journalist in the new media has to do. Get out more often to avoid becoming stale and predictable,

  67. el gordo I suggest that you google to see what balance is.

    The problem is that he is stale and predictable. His posts are not, but he allows them to be trashed.

    Maybe he did start out as a left wing blog but it has become a hate Julia blog. I ask why?

    What is robust about rubbish??

    There is no humour and is not robust. It has lost it’s way.

    el gordo, I am curious why you call yourself el gordo?

  68. “Maybe he did start out as a left wing blog but it has become a hate Julia blog. I ask why?

    Is it because he cannot stand women. I cannot think of any other reason.

  69. Gotta disagree in this case CU. There’s nothing wrong with the robust debate on GT. People there are free to express an opinion – a good thing IMHO…

    BUT, it has denigrated into a juvenile site…

    Let’s go next door and poke those girls with a stick and see what happens, coming back to gleefully boast of our exploits back out our house. OK, now let’s go and bully those sissy boys on the other side and see how they react, coming back home to once again boast of our exploits…

    FFS, that sort of behaviour was frowned upon in junior high school, little lone (sic) from a bunch of supposedly intelligent politically astute adults on a blog.

    I’ve got better things to do with my time – sorry…

  70. “have made comments that sought to retard gay rights, the administrators didn’t bother to chide them, nor did any other of the regular participants.
    • last night ridiculed medically treated depression, and the administrators didn’t bother to chide them, and nor did anyone else”

    Sorry TomM, there has been no comments that retard gay rights. The opposite is true. Most on this site support the cause.

    There has been no ridicule of medically treated depression .

    You are either lying or choosing to see what you want too.

    There has been ridicule of the opposition for raising this as an excuse for stealing.

    Sorry Mate you are on the wrong track. What’s more you know you are.

    If you believe this will win you brownie points with miglo when he returns, you are mistaken.

    Do you really believe he is not able to keep track of what is going on while he’s overseas,

    If you consider yourself his friend I would take a good look at your actions.

    Sorry TomM , you are coming across as an arsehole. The question I ask, is why?

  71. el gordo, there is no true faith, especially when it comes to politics.

    There is good and bad policy.

    Politics is not about faith. I leave that to those who need religion, I do not.

    Politics is about policies. Policies that meets one’s needs.

  72. AFL scores for any Saints / Swans fans

    AFL AFL by KevCorduroy

    Full Time St Kilda 8.9.57 – Sydney Swans 12.10.82 #aflsaintsswans

  73. Most of the blogs on the wall at trash headquarters are of similar leanings, don’t understand the science and accept what the scientists are telling them.

    Did you read what you wrote, el gordo? Who the hell do you think does the science, you nonce? Scientists is the short answer. So who is most qualified to tell us what the research shows?

    God forbid you should answer Monckton: fraudster, liar and sham, who wouldn’t know genuine scientific research or the truth if it bit him on his lying unqualified backside.

    OMG, Minchin is your authority? Minchin?

    Anti sexual orientation?
    Anti mental and physical disability or impairment?
    Racially prejudiced?

    What planet is ToM inhabiting?

    Considering most on this site have relatives and/or friends who are gay or suffer mental and physical impairments or are non white, or have disabilities of their own, I take very robust exception to that load of old cobblers from you ToM.

    Have the courage to name names, instead of hiding behind your usual innuendo and distortions or admit you’re trolling.

    Sorry TomM , you are coming across as an arsehole. The question I ask, is why?

    Default position, CU?

  74. el gordo trolling Ltd News again. And are there names and documents as proof, of course not.

    And let us remember this is what Ltd News did to Rudd.

    Tinny debate on levy as Liberal tensions rise

    If people believe everything is rosy in the Liberal party then they live in another universe, and those tensions will erupt the moment the polls turn if they do or the Liberals win an election.

    Will be interesting to see if the same vitriol and condemnation is levelled against them, I suspect not.

  75. Mobius, or when Turnbull/Hockey realize that Abbott will become another Old Araldite. With the carbon tax out of the way, I think that we’ll start to see some movement from some members of the Opposition. There are still a number there who remember how JWH refused to promote talent, and Abbott is Howard with even less of a conscience.

  76. I know at the last election Abbott screwed my local member, Joanna Gash, and one other well performing Liberal member I can’t remember.

    Telling thing is with Gash is that she had never been afraid to go against the party or the PM for the benefit of the area and sometimes directly contradicted Howard, which is why in 11½ years he only ever visited the area for a couple of hours during the 2007 election, and she never got any significant portfolios under Howard.

    Abbott had promised her (and the other Liberal) significant positions if they did well in the election and he won. They found out after the election that Abbott had offered those promised positions to the Indies.

    Strange thing with Gash is that she now comes out in full unquestioning support of Abbott’s brain farts and has turned into an unthinking negabore aping Abbott’s attack points, even when those ill thought out policies would impact negatively on Gilmore. That is so unlike her but illustrates how poisonous Abbott is and another example of why he would be such a terrible leader of this country.

  77. And how long did good old Petro Georgiou languish..JWH’s ‘broad church’..only as long as it was white and C of E.

  78. “Maybe he did start out as a left wing blog but it has become a hate Julia blog. I ask why?

    Is it because he cannot stand women. I cannot think of any other reason.

    I have no problem with GT trashing Gillard, especially in reb’s pieces where he’s nearly always fair and lucid in his deep criticisms of her and the government. If that’s how GT continued to do business and the articles were debated then I would still be there, plus it’s absolutely reb’s right to do what he wants with that blog whether we or anyone else likes it or not.

    What I object to is when members like TomM spill out into other blogs to tell them how they should be run because they cannot muster enough vitriol and hatred against Gillard and the government in just one blog so must spread it, yet are very selective in which blogs they pick to spread the blind hatred.

    As to not standing women, it doesn’t ring true for me on the little I know of reb through only reading his blogs and posts. Gillard being of the left has greatly disappointed over the gay marriage debate as she has caved into the Labor right, who are just as bad as the Liberal right in many aspects.

    I can fully understand the disappointment and anger of gays against Gillard on that as she would have been one of the few potential leaders who would have held up hope of completely reversing the discriminatory laws in this country, implemented solely on the lobbying of biased and homophobic religious lobbies. For all her supposed toughness and breaking through, on this one thing alone she fully caved in and whimpered in submission to both the right and Christian lobbyist.

    Then there must also be the disappointment of it seeming that Gillard is failing and Abbott really has a good chance of becoming leader of this country. At least with Gillard in place there’s always a hope that the discriminatory laws will some day be repealed, just as she (and Rudd) have already changed some laws to the better for gays. With Abbott in power all those changes will be trashed and with almost certainty he will unimpeachably do the bidding of the right wing Christian lobbies to bring in harsher anti-gay legislation, winding back decades of hard fought gains and with the final hurdle so close.

    Imagine how that must feel for gays looking at Gillard and realising that her failure to break through and hold true to her ideological beliefs can potentially turn everything they have gained and hope to gain into gutter trash to be washed away by religious zealots like Abbott.

  79. ‘…spread the blind hatred.’

    Once again I would just like to make the point that it’s political derision and Julia deserves it.

    This week the CO2 tax will probably be passed, so you can imagine how fkn angry I’m going to be.

  80. ‘This week the CO2 tax will probably be passed, so you can imagine how fkn angry I’m going to be.’

    If you had anything approaching a rational thought process, it should be the libs who you are angry at, for ‘promising’ to put forward a policy that will cost more than Labors, do less, over a subject that both you and they consider to be ‘utter crap’.

    At least Labor are following on with the strength of their convictions (and following the advice of the experts in the fields). tabot is simply playing cheap and blindingly obvious populism.

  81. The PM is clear that she does not support gay marriage. I am sure that many in the community do not as well. I suspect the reason they do so, differ widely.

    Many are xenophobia and hate anything that does not fit in with their fundamental Christian values. There are others who have not given the matter much thought, as the issues have little to do with their own lifestyles.

    There are a growing number of people who do not have opinions on gays one way or another but they do have a strong belief in justice and fairness and support the campaign for same gender marriage.

    The PM has said that we will support whatever the Labor Federal Conference decides. There is a likely chance that the vote will support same gender marriage. I see no evidence that the PM is attempting to influence the vote either way.

    This is seen by some to be the weak, by both sides of the argument. The problem is that belief of those who have different views, need to be respected. Views of all sides need to have the respect of all.

    No one has the right to imposed their beliefs on another. They do not have the right to denied others their rights.

    I understand that Reb, and many others feel the pace is slow, but there has much been achieved in the last decade. Much will be achieved in the near future.

    Nothing will be gained by trashing the PM. Yes, disagree with her policies. Yes, voice your opinion about the progress she is making. There is little to be gained by trashing the PM and Labor.

    All that will be achieved is that Labor will be replaced by the Mr. Abbott and the Coalition. How that achieves what they want is beyond me.

    It is time for them not to show their frustration by hitting out at all and sundry. Please do not attack us that do give support. It is not fair and you run the risk of turning many off.

    It is time to work on your local Labor members and union leaders that have a vote at the Federal Conference. It is time to continue to build support in the community. Much more is achieved with a little sugar. Discard the vinegar.

    The perception of the government is bad. It is a very unpopular government, with an unpopular PM. This government has done much good that does not fit in with the communities perception.

    No, I am not blaming the media, though it does not help much. I am not even sure that this is a phenomenon that is only found in Australia. The same thing appears to be occurring in the USA and UK.

    We can influence this government by saying what we don’t like but also putting forwarded what we would like to see happen.

    Reb and others that visit this site, we are not your enemies, why try to make us so.

    Mobius and Bacchus, I like and agree with most of Reb’s posts. I find it hard to agree that the debate is robust and one is free to express their opinion. One is immediately attacked personally if they dare do so.

    I have no problem with genuine criticism, I welcome it. I do not make comments to seek the gratitude of others. I like to debate and will listen to arguments of others. I do not wish to push my ideologies down the throats of others. I do not want to have their views pushed down my throat.

    I agree whole heartily that what they do on the site is their business. They leave themselves open to criticism when they, as you say migrate to other sites to impose their views and throw insults when this does not happen.

    If we are not welcome on the other site, just let us know. There is no need to trash those who frequent this site and the site. It is uncalled for.

  82. Doh
    the carbon tax legislation is to be introduced this week
    the vote will be in october/november

    of course the coalition if they keep to their record of no debate than the coalition could offer to vote on it this session.

  83. “This week the CO2 tax will probably be passed, so you can imagine how fkn angry I’m going to be.”

    I also imagine you are going to understand how happy I and many others will be.

  84. I am sure that many in the community do not as well

    Poll after poll confirm that the vast ‘majority’ of voters do support it.

    Mind you, going on her comments, supporting it would probably bring howls of playing the popular vote (quite rightly too)

    A have a feeling the the upcoming Labor meeting (?) will be interesting.

    I also have a feeling that Labor might be putting a bill forward for this after that meeting, against Gillards personal preferences (but for which she will probably be quite glad of)

  85. CU re I am sure that many in the community do not as well..

    And mostly when you ask these people if not/why not the answer is always based on the person’s own personal prejudices, mostly people who are insecure within themselves and who have to cite ‘reasons’ such as unnatural, against God’s will.

    Marriage equality is a basic human right and no different from the days when Catholic couldn’t marry Protestant, when black couldn’t marry white. In Australia we have excellent anti-discrimination legislation, this issue stands out as the glaring anomaly.

  86. The perception of the government is bad.

    I do blame the media for this. There has been a continued, rolling campaign ever since Labor were initially elected t paint them as bumbling incompetents. Not one issue has gone through without htis ‘perception’ being painted. Some times, there is an element of truth (in some cases, it has been totally accurate). But in most, it has been based on lies and perpetuated through all forms of media, print, radio and television. I have noted particularly in the images put up by both leaders, tabot is always grim and determined, or sharing a joke with a voter, whereas I challenge you to find an image in a media outlet that is kind to the PM. Always an awkward or confused expression, always in the most unflattering pose.

    And it is continuous, day after day

    No, to me, it is clear where this ‘perception’ comes from.

  87. Tom R, I was trying to be fair. I do blame people who are too lazy to make the effort to question what they read.

    Will some one please tell Nikki Savvas to check her facts.

    She stated on Insiders that when Mr. Howard was unpopular, it was before he was elected. No, it was during the time he was PM.

    Yes he was unpopular for most of his political from the time he was Treasurer in the Frazer government.

    I do not understand how many so called political journalist’s have such a poor knowledge of politics, especially political history.

    It was nice to see it pointed out that Mr. Abbott has no choice but to support legislation that allows the Malaysian Solution to go ahead.

  88. Tom and Min, I wrote that badly.

    I did not mean that there are many, and that their views should count.

    What I meant or was trying to say that some do exist. Some are also genuine in their beliefs but they have no right to force their beliefs on others.

    What I think I as trying to say, we want this number to decrease not grow.

    I am getting myself into a big tangle. What I mean is that nothing can be achieved by insulting those who have different views. They are entitled to their views. Thankfully they are not the majority.

    A Catholic priest told my father that he was not married to my mother.

    His reply to the priest was that was good, because he was sick off her and wanted to get rid of her. Not another word was heard from the priest. My mother attended the monthly mass for years.

    The priest never forgave my father for putting the police onto him. My father reported the police that a stack of wheat had disappeared during harvesting.

    My father did not know that it was common practice for the priest to take one stack from each church member. It might have been good manners to ask before taking.

    That was in the early 1940’s. Non Catholics had to sign a paper that any children would be bought up as RC’s.

    My father had no objection to us being bought up as RC’s. He even sent us to boarding schools etc. He did not divorce her.

    He did not practice any religion as far as I can recall. He objected to being told what to do.

  89. I was trying to be fair.

    I have abandoned being ‘fair’ to our media

    I have decided to treat them as intensely as they treat the Government. I just prefer to stick to facts when doing it, and am trying to keep away from ‘MSU’ while exposing their lies and exaggerations.

    And yes, I posted perhaps to quickly in response to your earlier post in regards to gay marriage. The remainder of your post disputes the earlier suggestion, and basically said what I tried to.

  90. Hallelujah! A bit of realism thrown into the mix…

    THE sources invariably have been ”senior” and ”well placed”. Which gives you some confidence, really: would we believe them if they were ”junior” and ”badly placed”?

    And they have traversed a wide range of options: Julia Gillard might consider resigning (vigorously denied), Kevin Rudd is preparing for a comeback (no shit, Sherlock!), Bill Shorten isn’t ready (he’s been ”ready” since he was 17), and Simon Crean could be drafted to ”save the furniture” (forget it, just take it straight to Vinnies).

    http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/gillard-is-right-to-fight-20110910-1k2k5.html#ixzz1XbxkPwdd

  91. “Many are xenophobia”

    I think you mean “homophobic” 🙄

    (Unless you’re suggesting all homosexuals are foreigners)

    “The PM has said that we will support whatever the Labor Federal Conference decides”.

    Really? Have you got a link for that? All I’ve heard Gillard continually state is that “she believes marriage is between a man and a woman.”

    I haven’t heard her say anywhere that she will support the decision of the ALP conference. Mind you it will be nice if she does..

  92. ‘The next fortnight will be Gillard’s most important in politics. If she survives them, she may yet have a way to run.’

    Fair enough.

  93. Reb, yes indeed the PM has said just that. Marriage is between two consenting adults, full stop end of story. Race, nationality, religion or sexual orientation have no place in a secular nation. As I have said over and over, in Australia we have had civil registration of marriage in 1856 – churches would have, as they have had in the past a choice as to whether not they will marry certain people. Some churches now refuse to marry people who aren’t ‘of the faith’ or aren’t members of the congregation. Marriage equality will be the same, some churches will welcome couples irrespective of gender, others won’t. And the churches who refuse..well who would want to go within cooee of ‘those type’ of churches anyway…

  94. BTW,

    Can I extend my sincere appreciation to those who have made supportive comments about me. It means a lot (sincerely).

    It would be fair to say there has been a fair degree of antagonism over the blogs lately, and I acknowledge my role in that.

    In my defence, I would say that my personal politics have varied much from “centre-left,” instead, under Julia Gillard, Labor has taken a dramatic lurch to the right in some issues of prominence most notably its abhorrent Malaysia Solution which it seems determined to pursue, and Gillard’s personal opposition to gay marriage.

    It is becoming increasingly apparent that Gillard is beholden to right-wing factions, and is almost becoming a puppet figure who’ll say and do anything to retain power.

    In saying that, I acknowledge, that there have been achievements and an Abbott lead Coalition government would be reprehensible.

  95. “Reb, yes indeed the PM has said just that”

    That she will abide by the decision of the ALP conference?

    That is most excellent.

    Then maybe Australia will catch up with “the rest of the world”

  96. Reb, I must admit to have been of two minds about the Malaysia Solution.

    My reasoning is that I do agree with Gillard that we do need a regional solution to a regional problem. However, as Australia is by far the wealthiest nation in the region then surely Australia has the resources to be ‘the regional center’.

    We do need to stop the people smuggling trade and the only solution that I can see is to enlist the cooperation of Indonesia. Howard tried this – Rudd tried this – result, wise nodding heads and the Indonesians doing sweet ba…the $$s gained from the people smuggling trade doubtlessly goes to the top. East Timor would be ideal but the Indonesians won’t wear a substantial military presence by Australia there.

    The two High Court rulings, January and recent basically put the kybosh on all feasible offshore processing, therefore it will be interesting to see what the government comes up with. The Opposition of course will continue to rattle on about Nauru even though this has effectively been ruled out by the High Court decisions.


  97. “Stop grizzling reb..you got the bl**dy thing back”

    Yes, but not before it was just arbitrarily deleted, presumably because it highlighted someone’s self-evident stupidity.

    I mean, what has xenophobia got to do with the gay marriage debate? FFS 🙄

  98. Sorry Reb, I meant. xenophobia and all the other phobias that I could find. They are against everything as far as I can see.

    Helping my son moving out. Do this between jobs. Please forgive me Reb

  99. Reb, I am sure we will.

    Focus on putting pressure on those union leaders that also have a vote.

    Bigger the vote, the less chance of the PM backing out.

  100. From Bob Brown..

    http://bob-brown.greensmps.org.au/content/media-release/gillard-abbott-edge-towards-unholy-alliance-scuttle-global-law

    The Gillard Government and Abbott Opposition are edging towards an unholy alliance aimed at agreeing on legislation for offshore processing of refugees in breach of international law, Greens Leader Bob Brown said today.

    I’ve read this opinion elsewhere too, that there is nothing that “anyone” could do to amend the Migration Act which wouldn’t be in breach of our international treaties.

  101. therefore it will be interesting to see what the government comes up with

    Looks like we might not have long to wait Min

    ‘Malaysia asylum seeker policy resurrected ‘

    http://www.smh.com.au/national/malaysia-asylum-seeker-policy-resurrected-20110910-1k30q.html

    I didn’t see anything in there about amending the act, and I hope they don’t. Work within the limitations they have. Personally, why not just set up our own ‘people smuggling’ business. hire out boats to ship them over safely. They can start the processing the moment they apply.

  102. Tom, from your link.

    The Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, said legislation would be drawn up to allow the government to send asylum seekers to any destination named by the Minister for Immigration, including Malaysia.

    My first thought was: And who might the next Minister for Immigration be? Does the government really want to legislate to hand that sort of power, to send people “to any destination” over to the Liberals?

  103. Tom, I would have to see the wording of any new legislation but from the way that the SMH have described it as ‘any destination’ named by the Minister..welcome to Nauru or Timbuktu or the salt mines in Outer Mongolia.

  104. In fact, could Afghani’s for example be sent straight back to Afghanistan thereby bypassing the previous High Court ruling that offshore refugee applicants should have access to Australian courts.

    But as stated, I’d have to look at the proposed amendment’s wording..it could be just lazy reporting from the SMH.

  105. Min,

    Reading your link to a previous thread .. the first thing that struck me was that obviously the “fishermen/smugglers” did not know the consequences and/or they were so desperate (for thier families’ welfare) they didn’t care …

    … in the first instance (didn’t know) we should be assisting the Indonesian government to educate people at risk (fishermen) … however this is not a strong suite of the present Australian government …

    … in the second instance (desperation), I suspect we have agents working undercover with the Indonesians to identify and locate possible smugglers and crew – if that’s the case why aren’t we using possible crew to turn for a bigger return – ie offer ten times the amount to turn in the people smugglers …

    … in relation to the “revised” legislation I suspect you will find that modern (lol!)journalists spend far to much time and energy “speculating” rather than actually investigating – most of them couldn’t write kiddies story books … correction – that’s what they actually attempt …

    … new legislation will take time to develop … it ain’t easy …

  106. TB, excellent idea. If the Big Bosses were unable to find crews due to Australia obtaining the cooperation of the Indonesian authorites to put out an education campaign we might be getting somewhere..

    Some of the crews are hardly more than kids and don’t have a clue that they might spend years in prison.

    Any aid coming from Australia would have to be specifically targetted..just throwing more aid money is likely to be just lining the pockets of officials and an education program may never see the light of day.

    It was the open ended ‘any destination’ that struck me…but how would the government phrase the Act otherwise? It can’t be “any country which has signed the Convention on Refugees”, because then of course it would exclude Malaysia.

  107. (I’m not sure I like the look of that kind of transit-ional (in)justice; not any more than I necessarily like the look of (TPVs and/or) declarations of safe and/or safe return, and an embedded inability to recognise transitional (in)justice as a human-scale, live, and (re)lived issue of (un)forgettable quasi-refoulement; say, for Afghanis taken flight, washed ashore, given the semblance of protection, but no essential access to the eternal sunshine of a more- or less-(re)spotted mind.

    On other matters, I might be a little disappointed that comments have been called closed elsewhere, just when the mapped interrelations were beginning to get interesting, but such is life.)

  108. “I suspect we have agents working undercover with the Indonesians to identify and locate possible smugglers and crew”

    I believe that this was happening under *gasp* the Howard government….

  109. It was the open ended ‘any destination’ that struck me…but how would the government phrase the Act otherwise? It can’t be “any country which has signed the Convention on Refugees”, because then of course it would exclude Malaysia.

    Er, that would be a good thing wouldn’t it?

  110. Yep, a Howard government plan, in its basis a good one except you have to be on real good terms with the Indonesians for it to work.

    And since we are apparently allowed to spread innuendo without proof it is also stated that those Australian authorities in Indonesia help sabotage boats or gave info to the Indonesian authorities so they could be sabotaged. it is even averred that this may have cost loss of life, something Howard vehemently denied but in these days of denial by a politician meaning guilt then his government must have done it.

  111. Moral high ground, Adrian …? Don’t think that can really be taken …

    Disclaimer: I have always believed that onshore assessment is a much easier, cost effective, humane and Australian way to deal with asylum seekers and refugees … that it takes time must be recognised by those advocating quick release into our society …

    The Howard, Rudd and Gillard governments should all hang their heads in shame for playing gross politics with innocents (those who are not “innocents” will be returned to whence they came) … blaming one government, while condoning another just as bad, does not send the right message to the present government …

  112. Here here TB, and you are as one with Clive Palmer on this.

    You and a Robber Baron singing from the same song book, who would have thunk.

    Onshore processing is 96% cheaper than processing on Nauru. Don’t know in comparison to other offshore centres.

    Of course governments, all governments, don’t like this because onshore detention centres are highly visible, easily accessible and simple to blockade by protesters. It also means the media, NGOs, charity, religious and legal organisations and/or individuals can have effective approach to asylum seekers. They can also be filmed and spoken to from outside.

  113. We cannot put a human face to asylum seekers now can we, no votes to be won on that when chest thumping in demonising the plight of poor unfortunates whose homelands have become nightmares and make up an entire 5% of our annual immigrants and a fraction of those who come here that really are illegal immigrants.


  114. “We cannot put a human face to asylum seekers now can we, no votes to be won on that when chest thumping in demonising the plight of poor unfortunates whose homelands have become nightmares and make up an entire 5% of our annual immigrants and a fraction of those who come here that really are illegal immigrants.”

    I agree. Yet some here defend Gillard’s offshore policy as “necessary”…

  115. Min @4.12pm, I agree. It’s a very silly idea, because of the danger of the Liars Party gaining power. Onshore processing is the go, for all the reasons mentioned above.

    ME, particularly where this country has contributed to making those homelands nightmarish to live in.

    I really don’t like the idea of tampering with the Immigration Act. Like Min, I worry about who will administer the Act when this government is no longer pulling the levers. This is not well thought out, nor does it look beyond the next 2 years.

  116. So what are you saying, Adrian? You agree with this nonsense?

    Of course governments, all governments, don’t like this because onshore detention centres are highly visible, easily accessible and simple to blockade by protesters. It also means the media, NGOs, charity, religious and legal organisations and/or individuals can have effective approach to asylum seekers. They can also be filmed and spoken to from outside.

    … and I bet big Clive would agree with my other suggestion … that the money we save onshore is used to educate, train and develop those accepted to become contributing members of our society …

    I don’t like Clive Palmer … he is a Robber Baron … but if he and I agree on this … who cares … its right …

    I take it the post, sreb, replied to was sarcasm – I know it is – I’ve known you to long – surely you can’t defend the Gillard government (or any government) in what they are doing?

    You don’t defend the indefensible these days surely?

  117. Reb, I feel that you might have to put pressure on McCLelland, the minister responsible to the marriage act. On Meet the Press.

    He is saying it stays where it is. I say, he needs to reconsider.

  118. ME, particularly where this country has contributed to making those homelands nightmarish to live in.

    Jane, we have invaded two countries in the last 12 years … I know how I would feel if another sovereriegn country invaded Australia – especially under false pretences …

  119. ME. the Coalition can be trusted. If power becomes cheaper after privatisation, it will place in tne world that has occurred.

    “……HE state’s electricity assets are likely to be sold under the O’Farrell Government, with key members of cabinet preparing to overturn the Coalition’s opposition to a sell-off.

    A government source told The Sunday Telegraph that “selling electricity is an absolute no brainer”.

    “Not only do you get the money for some gold-plated infrastructure, you also bring down the price of power in this state,” the source said.

    “The only people who would be opposed to a sale would be the Electrical Trades Union, and with the kind of money this would raise, you could buy each one of them a gold-plated tooth brush.”

    The government source said “of course the cabinet support it” as it would deliver up to $60 billion to the government.

    But Premier Barry O’Farrell – who opposed the privatisation in 2007 in a political move that helped end Morris Iemma’s leadership – is taking a cautious approach by waiting for the findings of an independent review to be delivered next month……

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/state-power-sale-on-barrys-agenda/story-e6freuy9-1226133898019

  120. Abbott is Howard with even less of a conscience.

    Or talent.

    Mind you, going on her comments, supporting it would probably bring howls of playing the popular vote (quite rightly too)

    But, but wouldn’t that indicate consensus and having that thing so dear to the heart of the Liars party, a *drum roll* mandate?

    I hope the National Conference gives the nod to gay marriage. I’ve never understood the logic behind the anti crowd and all that malarkey that it’ll be the end of marriage between men and women.

    It would be interesting to know how many of the sanctity crowd are cheating on their spouses? And whether the divorce rate puts a dent in their sanctity of opposite sex marriage?

  121. (Some probably will continue to ‘defend the indefensible’ of an oft-issue-conflated ‘off-shore processing’ if it means an architecture for ‘trade’ in ‘safer’ places and circumstances, not merely people, can be generated regionally, even globally; I’m still not seeing that as naturally inconsistent with either generic humanitarian norms or grundnorms for extant international law.

    Joining the invisible dots, it might be nice, if Australia were to be invaded, if some sort of re-orderly transition to a regional protection framework for all asylum seekers were to have been in place, perhaps even for those few Australian asylum seekers confidently relying on a not-Fortress Australia for a moat-if with no bridge.)

  122. Reb, I defend Julia Gillard’s asylum seeker policy because it makes sense to me and seems the most humane option. Why lock people up in Nauru, when they can live comparatively freely in Malaysia as do the thousands of other refugees there, but with human rights guaranteed?

    With the Coalition’s Nauru policy we rent space to build a prison and house asylum seekers who are locked up and guarded by Australian officials until those found to be genuine refugees (more than half of them?) come here anyway. Traumatised, angry and alienated they become extremely expensive immigrants as well as security risks.

    The Malaysian solution though far more complex does not involve detention and has arrangements in place to protect the human rights of refugees returned into the refugee’ community there. That also promises to help advance the cause of human rights generally in Malaysia. As well the swap means our humanitarian intake is dramatically increased and the burden on countries like Malaysia is lessened.

    This government seems to be working conscientiously with the UNHCR and other governments in the region trying to come to a cooperative arrangement which meets human rights concerns and breaks the people smuggler business. Watching how these criminals are ‘reading’ the politics here and sending as many minors as they can here to exploit the High Court ruling, tells me that free for all on-shore processing of asylum seekers will encourage many more boats with many more unaccompanied children. There will be more tragedies at sea and there will be many more problems with detainees rioting, along with other security issues of the kind we’ve seen so much of recently.


  123. “Why lock people up in Nauru, when they can live comparatively freely in Malaysia as do the thousands of other refugees there, but with human rights guaranteed?”

    Theire human rights are “guaranteed” are they?

    The High Court doesn’t seem to agree with you.

  124. Doug Cameron doesn’t seem to agree with Gillard and offshore processing either.

    He seems like one of the few Labor Senators with any sense of ethics and decency left.

  125. Yet some here defend Gillard’s offshore policy as “necessary”…

    A piece on ABC Breakfast News has stated that Refugee advocacy groups favour the Malaysian solution. There was no context given for this but the pretext was that if it stopped refugees getting onto boats to make the dangerous journey to Australia and it had some form of orderly processing attached then it was the preferable solution.

    Nauru was not the solution because it was just another Christmas Island only in another country.

    As an aside, and again I don’t know the context or what has happened in the background to cause this to come into being, but the Sri Lankan Navy has intercepted a refugee boat where the refugees final destination was Australia. The report was this was part of a wider and more rigorous effort on behalf of Sri Lanka to stop people smugglers in that country.

    I wonder if our government had any hand in that?

  126. The High Court doesn’t seem to agree with you.

    And yet, if they change a couple of words in the act, apparently they will?

    Although, as I said, I would prefer that they work within the law as it is. It doesn’t look like they will though 😦

  127. the pretext was that if it stopped refugees getting onto boats to make the dangerous journey to Australia and it had some form of orderly processing attached then it was the preferable solution.

    Wonder if they will be taking up my solution of setting up their own ‘people shipping’ operation in direct competition with the smugglers 😉

  128. I will try to chase up more on this Tom.

    The way I understood it that is exactly what is being proposed. The processing in Malaysia, though on their soil, would be done by Australia with the aid of NGOs/Refugee advocacy and have oversight by the UNHCR with the added benefit to a number of other displaced groups in squalid and harsh conditions in Malaysia being sent to Australia as part of the deal. Those are displaced people that would never get a look in of being resettled anywhere but would now have recourse to getting out of their situation.

    I gather from that if successful a regional framework will be established and the model will be used in other countries that have refugees parked in squalid camps living in harsh conditions. The intended outcome as stated by Waheed on News Breakfast will be some form of orderly queue. A real queue, not the one the refugees bashers state currently exists and the asylum seekers that get onto boats are jumping.

    All pie in the sky to me, ambitious, prone to so many loopholes and the good will of countries that abandon goodwill at the drop of a recalcitrant word. The lofty aim of killing off the dangerous boat journey is a good one but I doubt whether that is achievable.

  129. On ABC radio this morning there wasd an interesting stat:

    It costs $40,000 to process an asylum seeker on Australian soil whereas it costs 12 times as much – nearly half a million dollars – to process an asylum seeker off shore.

  130. “What I do like is that tabot is offering to work with the Government on this.”

    Yes, much rolling on the floor laughing at that one…

    “My name’s Tony Abbott and I’m here to help”

  131. ME
    On Sunday profile on the ABC radio last night they were speaking with an Australian who is with the UN. The Malaysia solution was the topic.

  132. Yes reb. That is one thing that is not detailed by the government in their Malaysian proposal, how much will it cost?

    The cost for Nauru can be fairly well established, a much more expensive Christmas Island, which is a much more expensive onshore solution, but the cost for the Malaysian solution is completely unknown and must be significant.

  133. And let us not forget that all this huge expensive being borne by the tax payers is to process just 5% and less of our immigration intake.

    The rednecks and wingnuts that are all for the massively expensive Howard solution are the same ones kicking up a fuss at the cost of a flood levy, carbon price, the NBN, the MRT, the stimulus for the GFC and all the other government programs that are of benefit or are potentially beneficial to them.

  134. Hadn’t thought of that reb, and it’s true, with the added benefit of that feeding back into the economy instead of bleeding out of it.

    Also it would give the rent a crowds somewhere to go a couple of times a year for their protests.

  135. ……onshore processing would create many jobs in local services…

    Excellent point, reb. And it has the additional benefit of shutting up whingers who would still moan about the cost of onshore processing, in that it could quite easily be cost neutral or turn a profit. That would leave very little room for the anti crowd to manoeuvre.

    Meanwhile, the government and the opposition should be convinced (OK, it’s a leap) that onshore processing is the way to go.

    Having said all that, they shouldn’t need a financial incentive to do the right thing. This obsession with offshore processing is disappointing in the extreme, along with the treatment of the unemployed.

    And wot ME said @9.26am.

  136. Möbius Ecko

    The cost of the deal with Malaysia has been in the public arena since it was first announced.

    Gillard announces Malaysian solution
    May 7, 2011

    “Mr Bowen said the exchange would cost $292 million over the forward estimates period.”

    http://www.theage.com.au/national/gillard-announces-malaysian-solution-20110507-1ed0h.html

    The Erika Feller interview can be found here:

    http://www.abc.net.au/rn/sundayprofile/stories/2011/3314519.htm
    (Thanks to D Mick Weir)

  137. That was the old cost NormanK.

    Because of the High Court ruling and need to ensure the welfare of asylum seekers along with the ruling on unaccompanied minors, the cost of any offshore processing must now have blown out considerably.

  138. Möbius Ecko

    I may have this wrong but my understanding is that the High Court said that the Minister does not have the power under the Act to declare somewhere as being ‘safe’. They did not hand down an opinion on Malaysia as a ‘safe destination’ beyond the fact that they are not signatories of the Refugee Convention. This should not be dressed up as a moral decision by the High Court – it was a ruling on the Law as they chose to interpret it.
    Any modifications to the Act would be done in order to grant the Minister this power to declare somewhere safe. The arrangements with Malaysia need not change in any way.

  139. The way I read it is that the Minister (or government) cannot just declare somewhere safe they will have to ensure it. Same as with unaccompanied minors, the Minister cannot just blanket move these minors they have to provide written justification and assurance of safety for each case.

    This oversight and ensuring a destination is safe will add overheads to the cost of offshore processing.

  140. Möbius Ecko
    No doubt the next couple of days will be revealing in this regard (if the government do go down the path of legislative amendments). Empowering the minister to be able to declare, in his/her own right, that somewhere is safe is my expectation.
    On the question of minors, the crystal ball is much less clear.
    Did you listen to the Erika Feller interview? I can’t recommend it highly enough. This is a genuine insider, not some over-inflated ego who pontificates on all things political such as we find on the programme of the same name on the ABC.
    If transcripts are more your thing, try this:
    http://www.abc.net.au/sundayprofile/stories/3314682.htm?site=sydney

  141. N and ME

    Bowen, at the news conference, had an interesting interpretation for minors. In that the removing of minors could apply to any minor, even those minors where the parent has been rejected for asylum.

  142. One newspaper at least has got the story correct

    BY CHRIS JOHNSON, CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT

    The legislation would be “broad in nature” to “enable the Government of the day to design and implement its best solution”.

    “The amendments will restore the understanding of the third country transfer provisions of the Migration Act that existed prior to the High Court’s decision,’’ she said.

    “They will ensure the government of the day can determine the border protection policy that it believes is in the best interests of the nation.’’
    http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/national/national/general/govt-to-legalise-offshore-processing/2288748.aspx?storypage=1

  143. I don’t know how Abbott will be able to oppose this amendment for it means if he is in power he can pursue Nauru to his hearts to content and any government of the day can process refugees wherever they deem it safe to do so.

    If Abbott opposed the government’s amended legislation he is claiming that only he has the right to say where they are processed and it can only be Nauru. I can’t see how that will work.

    As to Bowen’s point on unaccompanied minors, very revealing and just going on his statement and the departments interpretation of the High Court ruling on this, Bowen is right. No unaccompanied minor will be able to be sent away from Australia, even ones that are found not to be genuine refugees after going through every process.

    This I’m certain will lead to a massive influx of minors being sent to Australia by whatever means possible, and it is a problem for whoever is in government.

    Thanks NormanK.Excellent. The part below is the one I noticed because this has been my interpretation of what Gillard had always intended before the media broke it down to simple and erroneous/distorted headlines and the opposition as usual started on its =bad three word slogans. (sorry long copy and paste)

    ERIKA FELLER: Well you’re right in staying we’ve put a lot of work into it and we are very supportive of the idea of a regional cooperation framework. For us a regional cooperation framework is not about regional processing centres. It doesn’t exclude that there be some degree of regional processing, but that is not the be all and the end all of a regional cooperation framework; that’s the first point I want to make.

    For us it’s about helping states in the region deal on a cooperative and a burden sharing basis with a set of shared problems. There are a number of asylum seeking groups who come to the region, pass through several countries in the region and occasionally make their way also on to Australia, and we would see a regional cooperation framework putting in place arrangements which would enable the burdens and responsibilities to be shared, not shifted, which would eventually lead to building up the capacity of the states in the region to manage their own asylum systems in a responsible and cooperative way and which would ensure that solutions for people who come into the region and who need protection are available in the region or beyond.

    So we had suggested that a regional cooperation framework could have three pillars, if you like. The first pillar would be an asylum support office, regional support office, which would be available to all states in the region. They would be able to come to this office and obtain support for managing their asylum problems.

    We also suggested that there could be a structure or a process to deal with the problem of rejected asylum seekers – that is, asylum seekers who are found not to have valid refugee claims and in relation to whom the solution of return is probably the best solution.

    And then the third pillar of this could be, for example, a common resettlement identification office, so that, let us say theoretically people were found to be refugees in Malaysia, in Thailand, in Indonesia, perhaps even in Australia, a resort could be had to a common solutions office, a common resettlement office, where the responsibilities for finding resettlement options could be shared. So, to put it more simply, not everybody who arrives in a particular country and is found to be a refugee has to stay in the country, but they do need a solution which addresses their protection concerns and this office could help find solutions in the region or elsewhere.

  144. Someone might be able to correct me but from memory Gillard first muted the term “regional cooperative framework” in announcing this policy, that was when East Timor was suggested. It was dumbed down to regional processing centre, or Malaysian Solution so as to attack the government and her.

    Regional Cooperation sounds good whereas Malaysian Solution can be demonised.

  145. Mobius, Gillard’s first choice was indeed East Timor and for the reason you have provided – and there would have been many benefits to this, such as providing much needed employment and infrastructure to what is the poorest nation in the region.

    However, the East Timor government knocked back the proposal fairly quickly – it was suggested that East Timor was most definitely not keen to get offside with the Indonesians. A substantial military/semi-military presence on East Timor soil by Australia was one reason given which might aggravate Indonesia.

  146. ME
    I think the Minister just answered your question during QT. No change to the arrangements with Malaysia therefore we can reasonably assume no increase in costs.

    With regard to your remarks about the use of names to describe plans in the area of asylum seekers, I will resist the temptation to launch into a rant regarding the lazy media’s fixation with narratives and templates. Preaching to the converted, I suspect. The government has never referred to the deal with Malaysia as the “Malaysian Solution”.

  147. Thanks NormanK.

    So I gather that there are actually two things that need to be amended and put into the hands of the Minister, which I’m not really that happy with as a concept, and that is the choice of regional processing centres (and a network could be established) and the handling of unaccompanied minors.

    I know it would add a layer of bureaucracy but I would like to see an independent agency or advisor be an arbiter to the Minister’s decisions. We all saw what happened under the Howard government when laws were changed to give a power solely to the discretion of a Minister, and indeed it was assumed up until the High Court ruling that the legislation as Howard had introduced it was in place, and that was the fate of asylum seekers and where they went was always at the discretion of the Minister.

  148. Mobius, in the case of unaccompanied minors I am fairly certain that it has to be the Minister who is responsible because of the need to have ‘a person’ personally responsible, rather than ‘a committee’.

  149. ME
    I’m not up-to-date with what has been said here previously so I apologise if this is covering old ground. The Centre for Policy Development has in fact proposed just such an independent body. Sounds good to me – too much power in the hands of a politician.
    You might be interested in the whole document if you haven’t already read it.

    A New Approach: Breaking the Stalemate on Refugees & Asylum Seekers

    http://cpd.org.au/2011/08/a-new-approach-breaking-australia’s-stalemate-on-refugees-and-asylum-seekers/

  150. The government has never referred to the deal with Malaysia as the “Malaysian Solution”.

    … and they wouldn’t would they … like sticking a target on your own back …

    If the last government lost its way … then this one doesn’t even know where its supposed to go!

  151. That’s because the last government created the maze TB, turned out all the lights and destroyed all the maps to the way out,

  152. TB, I cannot see how the Migration Act can be reworded which would be acceptable to either the Greens or the LNP. And even IF the government could get it through the Senate there is bound to be another High Court challenge.

    And THEN the High Court will be faced with a dilemna, is the Amendment’s purpose to get around their previous ruling? If so they could indeed knock back any amendment.

    If personally doubt whether the government could even get it through the Senate…No by the Greens on account of offshore processing and No by the LNP because they have knocked back the idea of Malaysia.

    The government are I’m sad to say looking like rabble on this issue..and as you know, that’s something coming from yours truly.

  153. TB Queensland
    Have you read the transcript of the interview with Erika Fuller? She

    is UNHCR’s Assistant High Commissioner for Protection – the highest ranking woman at the UNHCR. In the United Nations hierarchy she sits directly below the Secretary General. She is an international authority on refugee law and for several years she was the UNHCR’s representative in Malaysia. She was closely involved with the Australia-Malaysia Agreement. She is also Australian ….

    Hardly an ALP barracker or mainstream hack providing their own interpretation of events.

    http://www.abc.net.au/sundayprofile/stories/3314682.htm?site=sydney

    Or perhaps the Centre for Policy Development document linked to above?

    Both of these documents show that the minister and this government are not forming policy while sitting around having a cup of coffee. In many ways the Malaysian deal has been a decade or more in the making and has the support of many advocates (human rights and asylum seeker) and should be seen as one of the first important steps in Australia engaging with the region to find a solution to irregular migration. Shake off the templates and narratives so often attached to this debate and have a close read of these documents.

  154. That doesn’t follow Min.

    The Greens will knock it back because anything other than onshore processing is off their agenda, even if that means asylum seekers continue to come by boats.

    But under what reasoning will the opposition knock back regional processing at the discretion of the Minister? They still get to have Nauru as their solution, they only need to gain government to implement it.

  155. Mobius, why would the opposition knock it back? Just to be bloody-minded of course.

    The Greens position seems to be that they have no position regarding people smuggling whatsoever.

  156. Not in this case Min. Just what are the opposition knocking back, their own policy?

    Are they really going to say that Nauru is the only place on the planet that can process refugees, and even then they are not being denied that, they can utilise Nauru to their heart’s content if they win government, the legislation leaves that open to them.

    The way I see it the only thing that they could argue on now would be TPVs. But haven’t they been ruled illegal and from the stats they were ineffective anyway.

  157. Mobius, the whole debate seems a complete mess to me. Nauru were not a signatory to the UN Convention before Tony Abbott’s visit. Prior to that JWH said that Nauru would sign, but they never did. When Tony Abbott visited they weren’t – that is, he visited (from memory) on the 12th June and Nauru signed 18th June.

    Tricky business IMO..how come Nauru after years and years of not signing did they suddenly sign following Abbott’s visit.

  158. Min, as far as I know, Nauru have not put domestic laws in place to activate their signing of the UN convention….

  159. Abbott looks to knocking back the changes to the legislation that gives him exactly the same power of the current PM if he were PM.

    So on what grounds is he knocking back the legislation, Malaysia is a proven failure and Nauru is a proven success.

    First of all how is Malaysia or any other regional processing centre a proven failure, none apart from Nauru have been set up?

    Second. He is saying that in all the world and with all the options available, only Nauru is viable, yet Nauru is now a proven failure because the smugglers know that if they can get the asylum seekers there they have a greater than 90% chance of getting to Australia. Nauru is no longer a deterrent because the squalid camps of Indonesia and Malaysia are worse than Nauru and the refugees now know that.

    What is Abbott going to do, turn Nauru into a worse place than Malaysia thus taking away the very reason he is now knocking back Malaysia?

    Abbott has just wedged himself.

  160. Comment from Andrew Bartlett: “Trying to comprehend how the Coalition can oppose the “dumping” of refugees back to Malaysia, while supporting pushing boats filled with refugees back to Indonesia.”

  161. Min, change of topic for a minute….

    Ask Your MP for an Inquiry
    http://newsstand.good.do/emaiMP/email-your-mp-3/

    Tonight, Cabinet will meet to decide whether or not to hold an inquiry into the Australian media.

    An email from you, to your Labor MP or Senator, will demonstrate the public support behind the call for an inquiry.

    Email below your Labor MP, or Senator if your MP’s not from the ALP.

    We know that finding your own words is the most effective way!

  162. Pip, Australia signed the convention but brought in TPVs and razor wire both clearly contra to the convention and several others such as the rights of the child. As long as the country is a signatory seems to be the rule.

    Yes I wondering about the difference in dates – the Australian says the 26th September but there is a pic of the Naruan president signing a few days after Abbott’s visit there.

    Also in the Australian..

    NAURU has moved to ratify the United Nations refugee convention, placing pressure on the Gillard government as it negotiates an asylum-seeker swap with non-signatory nation Malaysia.

    Nauru’s move, which follows a visit to the Pacific nation by Opposition Leader Tony Abbott, was announced by Nauru’s government information office this afternoon.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/naurus-un-move-on-refugee-convention-adds-to-pressure-on-labor/story-fn59niix-1226077250521

  163. She was closely involved with the Australia-Malaysia Agreement. She is also Australian ….

    NormanK.

    … BUT … Norman … I have no need to read your “interpretation” of “closely involved” as being “agreement” … Richard Towle puts that little bit of nonsense to bed …

    From a Lateline interview:

    RICHARD TOWLE: We’ve never been a party to the arrangements. We were asked by both sides for views as to what needs to go into the arrangements to give them some integrity and we’ve spent the better part of three months trying to explain what those core fundamental safeguards need to be in terms of the framework of the arrangements, but also explaining clearly that they need to be implemented in practice.

    http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2011/s3308139.htm

    I’ve spent five years playing word games with Liberal diehards … at this stage I am quite happy to do the same with ALP diehards who think they can twist and turn the lies to make it the truth …

    … and I suggest YOU read the rest of the transcript to get a quite different picture of how the UNHCR might feel after today …

    … they DO NOT support the government they ADVISE governments …

  164. The NSW police are going after corrupt practice by certain union leaders, hopefully this will bring down the Gillard government.

  165. El gordo, the only ones who would be brought down would be the union officials themselves..IF they’re found guilty that is.

  166. And just for a change, some good news..

    AUSTRALIA has posted a trade surplus in 15 of the past 16 months, with exporters showing resilience in an uncertain global economic climate, despite the high Australian dollar.

    Economists say the impressive result will drive a further improvement in the nation’s current account deficit and underpin its top-line AAA credit rating – a bonus given the state of the global economy.

    http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/australia-continues-impressive-trade-run/story-e6frfku0-1226135100072?utm_source=World+News+Australia&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+newscomaubreakingndm+(NEWS.com.au+%7C+Breaking+News)

  167. In other news, intergalactic cosmic rays have a profound effect on climate.

    You know that’s your problem el gordo, you make outright assertions and emphatic statements with no ifs, buts or maybes. Rarely any sources or evidence and it proves you are wrong so often.

    In this case you even ignored the headline that should have had you being circumspect from the outset and then you ignored the hook line beneath that should have been the big telling point.

  168. Isn’t it something that Howard sole platform in 1996 was a debt truck attacking the current account deficit and a promise to reign it in yet through 11½ years through the longest sustained economic boom in our history he managed record deficits after record deficits with only managing minor current account surpluses a couple of times.

    Labor on the other hand didn’t campaign on the current account yet have managed several record surpluses and this during a GFC.

  169. ‘…you make outright assertions and emphatic statements with no ifs, buts or maybes.’

    Yeah, I know its pathetic, but others may find the extra knowledge worthwhile.

    I have deliberately ignored the academic battle on the blogosphere between Spencer and Dressler.

  170. Pip @6.41pm that reminded me of one of my fondest memories of the ’07 election. It was Senator Button’s wife who said that Hyacinth would rather throw the keys of the Lodge into Lake Burley Griffin than to hand them over to Therese Rein.

  171. “I really don’t like the idea of tampering with the Immigration Act. Like Min, I worry about who will administer the Act when this ”

    What is being tampered with is a law Howard bought in. This not a solution that Mr Howard would adopt if he thought of it.

    It should either be Malaysia or onshore.

  172. el gordo, the last time they went after crooks in an industry, to get all the bad unionists was in the building trade.

    Problem was that they roped in very few from the union movement. Plenty from the bosses camp.

    Liberals have tried that before with little success.

    Mainly because many of the rumours and beliefs do not pass scrutiny.

  173. “Labor on the other hand didn’t campaign on the current account yet have managed several record surpluses and this during a GFC.”

    So it is all due to Labor policies?? Which policies have they introduced that have helped us increase our exports??

    Perhaps this has something to do with it

    http://www.rba.gov.au/chart-pack/commodity-prices.html

    As you can see from the graph the mining boom started around 2004. But since 2008 commodity prices have exploded.

    WE are in the middle of the biggest mining boom in our history as a country.

    And Wayne Swan cannot balance the budget.

  174. (Speaking of a crook building trade, what’s happening with the final Orgill Report’s recommendation for a broad-scale inquiry into a rundown building industry, which could look at all the fun neoliberal precursors to hamstrung governments’ inabilities to act on their own behalves and/or to mitigate all the horrible disasters and outrageous wastes associated with pinkbatts debacles and school hall cock-ups? Surely, The Australian and other like-minded bastions of government accountability must be vociferously calling on government to enliven that recommendation to get to the very bottom of all that terrible, decades-long backsliding in public- and private-sector capacities and (un)productivities.)

  175. what about it?

    ………………………

    ‘The interim report into the BER stimulus program has been largely positive, but says value for money was not always achieved.’

    “The report’s author, Brad Orgill, says even if some money was wasted, it was worth it, because the program achieved its aim of propping up the economy.’

    http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2010/s2976298.htm

  176. (what about it?

    Precisely, CU; it’s amazing how the potentially most wide-reaching and arguably damning aspects of a report, the context of/for it all, can be vanished from the public mind and from the agenda simply by maintaining a fore-narrowed focus.)

  177. (Putting it another way, the final Orgill Report (at least to this reader of it) seemed to take a tentative step back from the immediate issues and the government(s)-of-the-day; and some tentative steps towards taking a broader and deeper look at the (d)evolved ecosystem of governments capacities and public-sectors capacities and private-sectors capacities, their interrelationships over longer timescales, their mechanisms of (dys)function, and (re)viewable implications for, and between and among, all of them.

    That arguably patent strand of constructive criticism evident in the report, so studiously not-reported by the MSM in its pre-narrative zeal, is precisely the strand latentised by the report’s being said to have just looked at the government-of-the-day’s BER, and not the underlying matrix in which the BER happened to happen, even as the actual report seemed to explore-audit quite a bit more of that matrix-territory and to manage to make recommendation(s) flowing from that multi-focal investigation and those combined strands. But, if someone were to say to me that the final Orgill Report did/didn’t give the BER a big thumbs-up, and that’s the end of thought on the matter(s) raised by the report, I’m inclined to say ‘okay’ on this and every other occasion.)

  178. Legion & CU, let’s hope that Treasury has a viable contingency plan for GFC 2.0 looming on the near horizon …

  179. Point is Neil that Howard specifially campaigned on the current account deficit and how bad it was to the point of it being his sole election platform and driving around billboards on it. He promised emphatically he would bring down the current account as it was Australia’s shame it was so large in the red.

    He then on gaining power proceeded post record deficit after record deficit despite being in the longest sustained global economic growth period in history. And he did absolutely nothing for that deficit, not a single thing. It just disappeared like all his promises.

    Labor on the other hand immediately bought in infrastructure to move more goods and move them more efficiently, have bought in training and other schemes to improve productivity that was being screamed for through a decade of Howard and have implemented a stimulus that aided in getting goods and services out of this country and a small decline in reliance on foreign goods and services because of that.

    The opposition at the time promised a debt only 2 billion less than this governments yet for all their promised spending none went into infrastructure and productivity gains. Then there’s the point as in now being highlighted they just make things up and it’s actually their policy to do so, so that promise of spending and giveaways was more than likely bullshit and their actually final figure was something like $70 billion worse than Swan’s.

  180. Min,@7.32pm, not bad seeing Hyacinth wouldn’t live in the Lodge, instead parking her repulsive frame in Sydney at great expense to the taxpayer, what with all the flights to and from Sydney so the Rodent could check in for his daily nagging.

    Funny how silent the msm and the cheerleaders are about this waste of money. And about Costello’s $10bn hole due to crap currency swaps and selling our gold reserves for bargain basement prices.

    ME @9.27am, But all you hear on that score is crickets and the occasional tumbleweed rolling by.

    They seem to have pinned all their hopes on crucifying Craig Thomson which is only bearing small shrivelled fruit atm. If Brandis’ latest witch hunt fails, they’ll either have to manufacture some more “evidence”, or actually formulate some viable policies.

    I’m inclined to go for George finding some more documents from an “anonymous source” down the back of the couch, provided the printer doesn’t run out of ink. They’re far too lazy, barren of ideas, talent and ability to go the policy route.

  181. jane
    hyacinth would not live in canberra. it wasn’t the lodge.
    but if i was to relay the reasons, oh the gossip, but then some things were never spread in the media in those days, it was just rumored by the cabbies.

  182. Anon, meaning the H* wouldn’t come within cooee of a certain friend of JWH…or that JWH wouldn’t have H* come within cooee of her.

  183. more like the tension of being in “the” place of………yes well enough on that we will leave it with the cabbies and lots of canberran residents.

  184. “Legion & CU, let’s hope that Treasury has a viable contingency plan for GFC 2.0 looming on the near horizon …”

    TB, what do you think Mr. Abbott could do better.

  185. anonymous & Min, I think I know the gossip at which you hint. All I can say is that there is someone in this country who has appalling taste.

  186. Pingback: Tony Abbott Says Virginity’s A Gift | polliepomes

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s