By 2353NM

Finland and Sweden are currently exploring joining NATO. The about face from long term neutrality has come about because of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The ABC reported recently that there has been a significant shift in the attitude of the Finnish and Swedish Governments from ‘don’t poke the (Russian) bear’ to a position of seeking allies for protection should Russia do to them what it has done to Ukraine. It could be Putin’s largest mistake as his border with NATO aligned counties doubles assuming Finland and Sweden apply for NATO membership and the applications are accepted.

So what does this have to do with Australian politics? Good question.

When the last elections were held in Sweden and Finland, the candidates for the leadership role, cognisant of the opinion of a majority of their communities would have probably rebuffed the idea of NATO membership if the question was even raised. Circumstances have changed – as has the opinion of the majority of Finnish and Swedish people. Their governments have reacted accordingly.

Australians only get one chance every three years to make a judgement on the capability of our federal political leaders. To make the best decision, we need to be aware and make a judgement on the potential leader’s vision, ethics and moral judgement. To borrow a phrase from the movie ‘The Castle’, ‘it’s the vibe, your honour’ because the things that will test us all are the things we have no idea about until they eventuate. This is far more relevant to our future than if an Opposition Leader forgets a statistic or a Prime Minister forgets where they are in a press conference.

The Coalition and some media are arguing that Albanese’s ALP doesn’t have the knowledge, skills or abilities to form a government, an illogical argument as the only way to get direct and recent experience is to do the job. When Morrison started work in the Prime Ministerial office, we didn’t even get a say in his elevation, as the only election he won was one of his political party’s Members of Parliament. At that time, he too had none of the experience in the job that he now claims is mandatory.

In addition, Albanese and a number of his ‘shadow Ministers’ were Ministers in the last ALP Government, a minority government that had to form a consensus with independents in Parliament to get anything through both Chambers. Current member for the seat of Kennedy, Bob Katter recently observed on the ABC’s ‘Q&A’, he was one of those independents and the Gillard Government never lost a legislative vote in Parliament, unlike the current Coalition Government. Albanese, as the then Leader of the House, was responsible for working to get the consensus.

So how is our media helping us get an appreciation of the ‘vibe’ of the two potential Prime Ministers? Generally they aren’t. If political rivals such as Bob Katter are happy to claim Albanese is willing to listen and compromise (which usually produces a better outcome anyway), surely the media should be discussing it – as it gives the rest of us some idea on how Albanese is likely to operate, should he become Prime Minister.

We also know that Morrison certainly changed his fiscally conservative tone during the early days of the COVID pandemic where his government aped the Rudd ALP Government of 15 years ago and effectively wrote cheques for everyone to keep the economy ticking over, albeit at a reduced rate. But the actions weren’t of his own doing, he was generally dragged kicking and screaming to the correct place by public opinion, state premiers or even at times his own MPs. Even then, according to Morrison, at various times he wasn’t responsible for holding a hose, giving an injection or ensuring there was a qualified person in the Happy Memories Aged Care home to provide care, empty the bedpan or provide adequate nutrition.

Someone who might be accused of having too much time on their hands has produced a cross referenced and attributed list of 995 ‘achievements’ of the current Abbott/Turnbull/Morrison Coalition Government, none of which are flattering. Yes, it includes the lack of action on climate change, the lack of creation of a federal anti-corruption commission with ability to investigate all federal workers using the same process and appointing political mates to government boards and tribunals. If ‘someone on the internet’ can produce a list like this, it can’t be that hard for the media to find out the information and report on it.

If the media in this country was doing its job properly, Albanese would be asked questions about how he managed the ‘Leader of the House’ role in the Gillard government, his skills and experience, vision for the future as well as the skills and experience of those around him.

We have some experience of Morrison’s management of government, his skills and experience as well as the skills and experience of those around him. The media should be asking Morrison his vision for the future, why his record doesn’t demonstrate his lack of accountability, ethics and morals and how he would do better if re-elected.

The biggest story in this election campaign is our gobsmackingly incompetent, bad faith media.

— Dr Sheep Person aka Underclass Prole (@noplaceforsheep) May 8, 2022

Instead, most media is letting bare faced lies (or strategically chosen statistics if you’re feeling generous) such as the Liberal Party’s recent social media ‘Look at the Facts’ advertising go straight to the keeper. Fortunately Crikey didn’t (paywalled).

Parts of the media are asking why there is an emphasis on dog whistling and gotchas in the current election campaign. As Laura Tingle recently wrote on the ABC’s website

In such times, perhaps the most interesting thing to emerge from our own leaders debate this week wasn’t what leaders said, but what a room full of uncommitted voters were asking about.

They didn’t want to know about trans people in sports or, for that matter, China or the Solomon Islands. They wanted to know what the two parties were doing about housing affordability, and nurses in aged care, and the NDIS, and electric batteries and vehicles, and what plans there were for dealing with disasters, and funding recovery from them, in the future.

In other words, they just wanted governments to do things. And to do them competently.

Maybe the same reporters complaining about the lack of discussion around experience and vision for the future should realise they are contributing to the general lack of knowledge around politicians’ experience and vision for the future. Their part of the solution should be to ask the questions people want to know about and report the responses without fear, favour or bias. It’s not that hard.

What do you think?

In some countries journalists are dying for freedom of speech. In Australia they are dying to ask something dumb. Free to read in @crikey_news todayhttps://t.co/5jTBLP48uy

— David Hardaker (@d_hardaker) May 9, 2022

 2,978 total views,  4 views today

By 2353NM

You should feel a bit sorry for Tim Banfield. While he did choose to become a member of Clive Palmer’s United Australia Party, then put his hand up to be the UAP candidate for the Illawarra based seat of Whitlam at the upcoming federal election, he didn’t deserve to be sacked as a candidate 24 hours after giving a ‘wide ranging’ interview to a local ABC journalist in February. He claims that candidates are only allowed to speak to other UAP members rather than the people they are proposing to represent.

“Because really, at the end of the day, what’s a politician there for? It’s to serve the local community and to serve the public.

“If you can’t do that then what’s the use of being in there.”

Mr Banfield, who is a founder of the Destiny Alive Church, said the party was run like a “communist party” with all control centralised.

Palmer’s UAP seems to have a problem communicating with those outside the party. The yellow and black advertising around the country promises ‘freedom forever’ but doesn’t even attempt to explain what the ‘freedom’ is and how they aim to get us there. Some time ago, we ventured onto their website and asked for some information on why we were lacking freedom, how the UAP was going to implement it and what benefits there were to the rest of Australia should Palmer’s UAP gain enough seats to form a government. Despite concerns about getting large quantities of spam email – we actually got nothing, not even an answer to the question.

Palmer is also known for his views on COVID vaccines. At the end of February, Palmer was rushed to a Gold Cost private hospital after contracting the Delta version of COVID and double pneumonia. According to a report on several websites, Palmer refused ICU treatment at the hospital and discharged himself. He then

called specialists in the US who treated former President Donald Trump …

where he was fast-tracked into a drug trial where they pumped a cocktail of five antiviral drugs into him.

Two of the drugs included ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, which have not yet been approved by the Therapeutics Goods Association (TGA).

Palmer’s senior management contacted American gastroenterologist and Ivermectin advocate Professor

Thomas Borody along with a team of US specialists.

The US doctors worked with Palmer’s doctors to monitor his treatment at home, including having an ambulance waiting outside in the event he needed to be rushed back to hospital.

“I would have died otherwise, without doubt,’’ Palmer told Sky News.

It does seem to be Palmer’s way or the highway. What chance is there of any MP reliant on Palmer’s patronage representing the views of their electors rather than Palmer’s? Representing views other than Palmer’s worked so well last time – just ask Jacqui Lambie, who lasted all of 6 months as Senator reliant on Palmer’s patronage about a decade ago.

Are the two major parties any better? The ‘traditional pre-election budget wisdom’ of throwing truckloads of cash to interest groups hasn’t overhauled the government’s perceived popularity. It probably didn’t help that the night Prime Minister Morrison was slapping his mate Treasurer Josh Frydenberg on the back and congratulating him on delivering the best shot at an election winning budget, retiring Senator Concetta Fierravanti-Wells was in ‘the other place’ laying into Morrison for alleged bullying and autocratic behaviours.

At the end of March, Morrison and NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet ratified a number of candidates for the federal election, rolling the State Executive in the process. The State Executive had been attempting to establish candidates in a number of federal NSW seats for months with a lack of support or assistance from Morrison and his supporters. The battle has turned legal with various groups arming themselves with lawyers and going to court – then appealing decisions that go against them.

Senator Fierravanti-Wells retired as her other option was to be placed in an unwinnable position on the Liberal Party’s NSW ‘Senate ticket’ as an outcome of the bickering. Fierravanti-Wells certainly isn’t the first to suggest that Morrison is not the ‘good Christian’ that rode in on the white charger to save the Liberal Party when Turnbull was deposed, and there could be just a little ‘spite’ in the timing and verbiage. It certainly was timed well enough to keep the discussion going around Morrison’s reported ‘his way or the highway’ behaviours.

Later the same week, NSW Upper House MP Catherine Cusack joined the fray. Cusack, who lives in North East NSW and announced her resignation from the NSW Upper House two weeks earlier over the lack of flood relief, stated she was a Liberal Party MP who would not be voting for the re-election of the Morrison Government. She went on to accuse

Morrison of having “ruined” the Liberal party and said he had “trashed” its values over two decades, as state director, “then as a scheming MP and now as prime minister finding loopholes in our constitution to delay preselections in order to get his way”.

She criticised Morrison for “forcing moderates to vote for [former Liberal and now United Australia party leader MP] Craig Kelly” when his preselection was under threat before the 2019 election.

She has warned she will vote against the prime minister over factional “scheming” and politicised allocation of flood relief.

“But he has outdone himself engineering a federal intervention to jump over the organisation all together.

“He got what he wanted at the expense of destroying our rules-based selection system and disgusting virtually every member of the NSW division.”

Crikey recently discussed the current war in the NSW Liberal Party and claimed that Morrison is up to his neck in the political intrigue. It seems the traditional mum and dad business owners that have supported the Liberal Party for decades are being pushed out and replaced by fundamental Christians, who are more interested in power for power’s sake than promoting a (small “L”) liberal philosophy. As Crikey suggests

It’s a situation as self-destructive as anything that’s going on in Labor – but you won’t read about any of it News Corp, not in any depth. Thank God they’ve decided to stay away from cheap political sensationalism at last!

What is it about conservatives and clinging to power?

What do you think?

 3,562 total views

By 2353NM

The ‘Gold Star of Dishonour’ for the most unedifying display in the first week or so on the 2022 Federal Election campaign is a tough call.

Is it George Christensen announcing his cynical candidature on the One Nation Queensland Senate ticket? If an elected politician runs for election and fails, or is disendorsed by their party, the taxpayer funds a ‘resettlement’ allowance of around $100,000. Christensen, who announced his resignation from the House of Representatives at the conclusion of the last Parliament has announced he is contesting the election as a member of One Nation. One Nation have placed him in the third spot on their Senate Ticket for Queensland, which makes Christensen almost unelectable. According to their website

We are a party that stands for Australia and Australian values. We defend our constitution and stand up against global agendas for the individual rights and fundamental freedoms of all Australians.

The team at One Nation puts people before politics and we will continue to fight for Australia and its citizens.

Facilitating an existing politician to potentially access a $100,000 ‘golden handshake’ is an interesting interpretation of ‘Australian values’.

Or is the winner the Australian media? Looking for cheap sensationalist headlines rather than actual reporting and information sharing has brought them to relying on the cheap ‘gotya’, rather than seeking out information and presenting it in a readily digestible package for their consumers.

A few weeks before the election, Prime Minister Morrison was asked the cost of various staple items including milk and petrol. He didn’t have an answer, which brought howls of how out of touch he was. If you pop down to the local Aldi, Coles or Woolies, there is a range of milk so vast, even a milk producer sent it up in their advertising of yet another variation on the theme some years ago.

Do any of the media actually expect the Morrisons to jump into the family car on a Thursday night and do next week’s grocery shopping? You’d hope the security people would ensure that won’t occur.

On Day 1 of the campaign, neither Albanese or Morrison covered themselves with glory according to the media. Albanese was asked what the ‘cash rate’ was. He didn’t know the answer. The question showed a lack of understanding, rigour and research.

Labor leader Anthony Albanese was asked straight up: What’s the unemployment rate and what’s the “RBA rate”.

He didn’t answer the second question at all and fumbled on the answer to the jobless rate.

Later he fronted the media and apologised for getting it wrong.

But immediately after that a journalist asked him again, “What is the cash rate?”.

He answered: 0.1.

This time, it was the answer the journalist was looking for, but in this case they were both wrong.

The cash rate, as set by the short-term money market, as of Monday, was 0.06 of a per cent.

It’s the interest rate banks pay to borrow funds from other banks in the money market overnight.

That’s different from the Reserve Bank’s “cash rate target” which is currently 0.1 per cent.

Morrison was ‘caught out’ on the composition of his cabinet, which is a little more concerning as he is the one that chose his cabinet. Education Minister Alan Tudge announced he would be resigning from his position in March. As at Day 1 of the campaign, Morrison correctly stated while Tudge had stood aside and an acting Education Minister had been appointed, Tudge still held the warrant from the Governor-General to hold the position and still was technically Education Minister. Regardless of the election outcome, all Ministers return their warrants to hold office at the end of the election process so even if Morrisons Coalition wins, there is no guarantee that Tudge will be in cabinet in the next Parliament. Arguably sloppy management but equally as arguably it could be a compassionate response to an employee of the Crown that is under severe stress.

Regardless of the media’s obsessive chase for the easy story, our political leaders are human and make mistakes. The wisdom of effectively ‘winding up a clockwork doll’ that looks like Morrison or Albanese every morning and expecting them to perfectly parrot overly rehearsed responses to expected questions day after day is ridiculous and shows there is no substance behind the facade. It really doesn’t matter if Morrison doesn’t know the price of milk or fuel for his car (which fuel are you talking about – E10, 91,95,98, diesel or even LPG?). It’s probably a good bet that anyone who drives an EV or relies or public transport with occasional use of taxis or ride shares has no clue on the current petrol price either. Chances are if he loses the election and retires he will probably have to be retrained in filling a car, pushing a shopping trolley, using an ATM and many other ‘life skills’.

Greens Leader Adam Band spoke at the National Press Club on Wednesday 13 April and said

Like, elections should be about a contest of ideas. Politics should be about reaching for the stars and offering a better society.

And instead, there’s these questions that are asked about – can you tell us this particular stat or can you tell us that particular stat? And those questions are designed to show that politicians are somehow out of touch and not representative of every day people.

Bandt is correct, What is important is that Morrison and Albanese do have an understanding that the recent significant increase in fuel prices has increased transport costs for a wide variety of goods, services and materials that come into the country, moved around the country and are exported from the country rather than how much they would pay for petrol if they took the Comcar into the closest petrol station on the way to their next engagement. In a similar way, while the price of a bottle of milk does influence your living costs, there are greater concerns than the media’s implied ‘crisis’ – if the price goes up 10 cents, no one can afford milk on their corn flakes every morning.

While Christensen is a deserving nominee – we expect no better of a politician that has been in the business of attracting attention to himself for years – the winner of the ‘Gold Star of Dishonour’ for the first week of the election campaign has to go to a significant proportion of the Australian media. While we all like to expend minimum effort in the successful completion of what ever job we are attempting, in a lot of cases we have to try harder. As most of us will not have the opportunity to talk with both Albanese and Morrison during this election campaign we are relying on the media to ask meaningful and relevant questions on our behalf. So far they have generally failed miserably.

What do you think?

 156 total views

By Melissa Marsden

Sunday’s episode of ABC Insiders showed viewers exactly what media bias is all about and how, come election time, even some of the most respected journalists can fall into the trap of playing double standards.

Despite some criticism of the Liberal government’s election campaign, more of the discussion focused on gotcha moments than actual policy.

Political Editor for news.com Samantha Maiden began the discussion by declaring that Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese needed to “sharpen up”, having days earlier been unable to provide the exact statistic of people currently unemployed across Australia.

In the same breath, when referring to Prime Minister Scott Morrison, Maiden merely stated that he had committed a “blunder” at not knowing the price of bread and milk.

Maiden’s false equivalency between the two failings shows just how the media’s bias against the Labor party has flourished over the years.

Just last week in an article in The Advertiser (paywalled), Maiden said that:

“Unlike the “gotcha” questions the Prime Minister Scott Morrison was asked at the national press club earlier this year … what’s the price of milk, bread and petrol? … these are not figures that bounce around and he should have known the answers.”

Everyone can forgive a brain freeze now and then.

Just think back to student exams, that moment you are asked a question you know the answer to but you just can’t pinpoint it. A number rarely brought up in everyday life.

The price of bread and milk however, for most Australians, is far easier to remember.

For Australians struggling to find employment, or are facing the increasing wave of underemployment, the exact statistic is of less importance than the consequences of that predicament.

Let’s remember that official employment figures fail to include Australians who are working casual hours, struggling to make a living wage.

Perhaps this is where gotcha questions have their merit.

Not to back politicians into corners where statistics get regurgitated like they are being read off a spreadsheet – rehearsed and memorised, not felt or experienced.

But instead to highlight the broader social issues at play.

Unemployment, insecure work and failings in the welfare system have left a trail of vulnerable, and at times angry Australians fighting to have their voices heard.

Both sides of politics have failed to adequately address this issue.

Scott Morrison has repeatedly told Australians that they will receive “a fair go for those who have a fair go”, failing to accept any responsibility for the conditions that force people into insecure work and welfare.

Likewise, Labor too have failed to commit to a revue into or action towards an increase in the rate of JobSeeker rates, instead choosing to emphasise an increase in social housing and rent assistance.

Maiden’s quizzing of both Albanese and Morrison’s awareness of simple living costs may have been ‘gotcha questions’ – however a journalist can only ‘get you’ if you are unprepared.

Perhaps what Maiden meant was that during a federal election campaign all politicians ought to be doing their homework before fronting up to the media.

Particularly when attempting to show the public who can both manage the economy and understand the everyday struggles of working and vulnerable Australians.

As a university student, a young person, a woman and a person with a physical disability, looking for opportunities to earn a living, whether or not a statistic was remembered plays less on my mind than the actual policies that are or aren’t on the government’s agenda.

Not to mention the economic, gender, age and ability biases that so often play into how people are or are not able to secure work.

Maiden said that the prices of bread and milk ‘bounce around’, is that supposed to be a reference to whether you opt for plain white, sourdough or brown, full cream, skim or lactose free?

As someone who has spent significant time counting every dollar before entering the supermarket you soon remember the price of 2L of skim milk is in the $2-3 dollar mark depending on the brand ($2.60 to be precise for Woolworths Lite Milk).

Semantic arguments about fluctuation in the prices of goods detracts from the core issue of inequality and disadvantage.

Regarding unemployment figures, perhaps instead of asking ‘why didn’t Albanese know the answer’, the media should ask ‘why is the consequences of unemployment and underemployment bigger issues in the public sphere’?

We shouldn’t forget that the media are after all the gatekeepers of knowledge in society.

Not only do the media report on political missteps and failings but they are also the ones who decide what is considered important enough to emphasise.

They are the ones who determine that the everyday consequences of increased cost of living, poor welfare and housing are less important in the day-to-day news cycle than whether or not a politician is or isn’t ‘on-the-ball’ enough to pull a fact out of the air in front of a camera.

As much as I respect journalists like Sam Maiden, perhaps it is the media who need to ‘sharpen up’ and put inequality back on the public agenda.

That is not to say some journalists haven’t done just that.

There is still much to be done before structural inequality is given as much weight as a gotcha moment.

This article was originally published on Independent Australia.

 180 total views,  2 views today

By Denis Bright

The Sky News Debate turned out to be a civilized forum despite a touchy interchange about the perceived security problem in the Solomon Islands from both sides of mainstream politics. This largely pleasant tone contrasts with the firebrand rhetoric from the federal LNP during the post-1996 era. Populist rhetoric has been successful in delivering so many seats to the LNP largely on preferences from minor parties in Queensland and NSW.

Now the far-right of Australian politics is taking command of this populist campaigning style. This is taking some of the old oxygen out of the sails of the LNP in campaigning mode.

Networks like Sky News have elevated the representatives of the far-right with a degree of reverence which they do not deserve.

Sky News has indeed offered the far-right of Australian politics a free kick in its bizarre forum for maverick parties on Paul Murray’s Live Pub Test.

The saturation advertising from the United Australia Party (UAP) is also a real challenge to democratic processes. This will give the UAP a level of influence which is derived from the strategic use of preferences in key marginal seats. In the past, this allocation of preferences has been to the federal LNP but Clive Palmer is still waiting for a confirmation of future polling trends before making his call on the allocation of preferences from a vital 5-10 per cent base across key marginal electorates. The results will be influenced by the prevailing social demography.

Almost a sixth of voters are still attracted to the far-right minor parties. Boredom is a big factor in the disenchantment of voters with the major parties.

In Week Two of the campaign rolls, there have been no king hits on either side of mainstream politics. Eyewitness and Sky News networks portray democracy as a vacuous media game in their quest for better news ratings. Verbal slip-ups or nasty tirades at meet the people events in pubs and shopping precincts are all part of the strategic media packaging of news and current affairs. This media game offers little real coverage of policy options for our future.

It is understandable that many potential constituents do not even bother to enrol to vote in the resultant political charade.

While the latest Newspoll results after preferences seem to be highly favourable to Labor (53/47), there are still substantial challenges to the hegemony of both major parties in the detailed results.

Largely private polling on a seat by seat basis in marginal seats will be needed to assess the strength of Labor support in highly marginal seats. The results of this private polling will be withheld until the final days of the campaign and leaked to media networks in a very opportunistic fashion when it is too late to change the course of events.

There is time for Labor to focus more on the concerns of voters in its more disadvantaged traditional heartlands across a vast swathe of electorates in most state and the Northern Territory electorates where concern about inner-city electoral concerns is minimal.

A weakness in the LNP current approach is its emphasis on populist macro-economic rhetoric which is of little concern to voters. The UAP in particular is now stealing the LNP’s old thunder on this issue with its saturation advertising. One of the most deceptive agendas in Australian politics is the ongoing discussion of public or government debt levels which covers budget debts levels.

Ordinary voters are confused by this emphasis on public budget deficits. During the GFC years and the more recent COVID-19 crises, public debt levels saved the national economy from mass unemployment. Temporary relief was offered to the business sector to maintain staff levels during the most recent pandemic. These same voters know that the really important debt level is within their own households to meet housing costs and essential purchases or even car repairs to get to and from workplaces. It is quite churlish of UAP advertising to frame the major debt problem as a crisis in macroeconomic management.

This level of national public or government debt is quite low by international standards. It is dwarfed by the upsurge in private household debt in Australia’s $1.5 trillion economy.

When the Howard Government was elected in 1996, household debt levels had already risen to 60 per cent of GDP as the costs of housing and rents spiralled after the two post-1975 recessions to that date.

The spiral in household debt has continued as shown by the long term data from Trading Economics. Private household debt is running at twice the levels prevailing when the Keating Government was defeated in 1996. The Howard Government succeeded in passing on the debt level to private households in the name of neoliberalism.

Tax concessions to property investors have contributed to the household debt through inflated rental and housing prices.

An average home in Sydney or Melbourne now has a median price of well over $1 million. Many households are on a financial treadmill which contributes to the stresses of life from illness, family breakdown or other emergencies.

The LNP has added to these burdens with its underfunding of childcare support, incredible rates for private health insurance and bonds for access to aged care centres.

A household debt level of 120 per cent of Australia’s GDP equals a debt of over $750,000 per person across Australia. Political insiders with more access to economic data would be able to quote the level of private household debt with add on age group profiles and specific details of debt levels in households with mortgages. The Newspoll/YouGov site would have all this data for access by privileged clients.

Hecklers of the left would once interrupt Robert Menzies during the 1950s about his LNP government’s commitment to disadvantaged households in financially stressful times like the 1953 recession when Labor scored an extraordinary result in the half senate election that was soon torpedoed by the antics of the Petrov affair in 1954.

Household debt levels deserve a higher profile in the middle and later phases of the current election campaign from our current crop of mainstream LNP political elites.

The so-called mavericks from minor far-right parties who are largely poised to allocate preferences to return the Morrison Government. Unless there is a better response from the progressive side of politics, the number of confused voters can be expected to grow. The goodwill from the recent Sky News Debate needs to be consolidated in the interest of democratic values and the future stability of Australian politics which has been in a volatile state from too much name calling since the last days of the Howard years. Any quest for policy solutions is likely to be well rewarded by the electorate over this style of campaigning with its largely vacuous qualities in my local Ryan electorate in Brisbane.

Vital issues like action on climate change and the restructuring of the market economy on more sustainable grounds are well and truly air-brushed by this style of populist self-promotion. I do hope that this type of advertising and mail-outs to constituents are not funded by electorate allowances at taxpayer expense when so many families are enduring economic hardship in flood-prone parts of the Ryan electorate.

Today’s offsiders are largely from the far-right of Australian politics.

 230 total views,  6 views today