The Yoke of Inequality Burdens Us All

By Ad AstraIt was in 2012 that The Price of Inequality by…

Petroleum Crumbs

By Michael Brazel  Let's talk about the attack on the oil processing facility…

Fake Arguments on Fake News

The constipated tedium that follows each call, denial and condemnation after another…

Only the dumb get dumber

In June of 2007 at the height of one of the Victoria's…

Woe To You, ScoMo: The Bible, The Poor…

I have done this before: meeting Scott Morrison on his own biblical…

Perdaman: Santos’ latest attempt to shore up Narrabri…

By David C Paull  Last week in Narrabri, Santos signed a ‘heads of…

Oiling for War: The Houthi Attack on Abqaiq

The attack on the world’s largest oil processing facility at Abqaiq in…

Sanctioning harm under guise of religious freedom

When Attorney-General Christian Porter proposed to prioritise freedom of religion above all…

«
»
Facebook

Kaye describes herself as a middle-aged woman in jammies. She knew Tony Abbott when they both attended Sydney University where she studied for a Bachelor of Science. After 20 years teaching mathematics, with the introduction of the GST in 2000, she became a ‘feral accountant’ for the small business that she and her husband own. Kaye uses her research skills “to pass on information, to join the dots, to remember what has been said and done and to remind others, and to do the maths.”

Government paralysis

It is becoming increasingly apparent that the bullet we thought we dodged in August last year is actually lodged in the spine of the government.

According to Laura Jayes, Scott Morrison is just a front man with the real power residing with “the gang of four” – Peter Dutton, Mathias Cormann, Christian Porter and Josh Frydenberg.

“They are the decision makers around the Cabinet table, their views and judgment hold huge sway. They’re the new praetorian guard.”

Disturbingly, Senator James Paterson told Sky News “We would follow Mathias Cormann into a burning building if he asked us to.”

As history has shown, that sort of unquestioning obedience can be very dangerous.

Nearly all the senior Liberal moderates who might have put a handbrake on the far right have left the parliament – Malcolm Turnbull, Julie Bishop, Christopher Pyne, Kelly O’Dwyer, Michael Keenan, George Brandis, with Arthur Sinodinis and Mitch Fifield to depart soon.

Crazy Craig Kelly is a constant presence on Sky and 2GB and will, along with the Mad Monk, address a conservative conference next week.

Also speaking at CPAC will be Amanda Stoker who was given George Brandis’ Senate position.  She has been described as “Queensland’s youthful answer to Margaret Thatcher” – like that is a good thing?  Perhaps they didn’t see the street parties in England when Thatcher died.

Jim Molan is insisting he deserves to fill the upcoming Senate vacancy because he is “The man who stopped the boats” and “The man who led Coalition forces to success in Iraq.”  I shudder to think what Jim’s idea of failure is.

Angus Taylor is still viewed as a rising star, seemingly impervious to the growing number of revelations of how the Taylor dynasty has used their influence to benefit themselves and their business partners.

Fellow Pentacostal, Stuart Robert, has also risen from the ashes of multiple scandals.

At last year’s Liberal Party annual conference, they endorsed the Young Liberals’ platform to move our embassy to Jerusalem and to sell off the ABC.  They also dumped the moderate and experienced Trish Worth and installed far-right conservative Teena McQueen as vice president.

There will be no social reform under this government – no Voice for Indigenous people, no help for the unemployed, no fair distribution of the wealth earned from 28 years of economic growth, no action on cutting emissions.

They are paralysed by the bullet lodged in their spine.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

Only the rich and privileged deserve empathy

It almost feels like there is a deliberate strategy to firmly let the hoi polloi know that the privileged run to a different set of rules.

Our advertiser in chief has dismissed calls for an increase in Newstart as “unfunded empathy”.  This is wrong on so many levels.

We seem able to fund our empathy for wealthy retirees to the tune of $6 billion a year (and growing) through excess franking credit refunds.

Empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of others.

Can ProMo ever really understand what it feels like to be unable to feed your child?

When he fiercely protects property tax concessions, can he understand what it feels like to be unable to afford rent let alone enjoy the benefits of a property portfolio?

Sure, getting someone a job would be preferable, but how do people even look for work when they don’t have a home?

Increasing Newstart isn’t some sort of “feel sorry for you” gift.  It is an investment in assisting people to be able to look for work.  It is an investment in the children.  It would provide a stimulus as every cent that is invested will be spent back into the economy which might actually go some way towards creating new jobs.

Welfare recipients are painted as liars and cheats with the Robodebt debacle.  Your hard-earned money is funding their indolent lifestyle, says HaveaGoMo.  They are wasting it all on booze and drugs so we will quarantine their income on cashless welfare cards and do random drug tests which, if they fail, will see them lose their benefits.

Unlike politicians for whom we must have great empathy when they suffer addiction issues or have a battle with the bottle due to family breakdowns caused by their own rooting around.  Who can forget the pictures of Tony Abbott and Barnaby Joyce pissed as farts whilst voting on how to run the nation.

Not only is drinking endemic amongst our parliamentarians, we pay for them to quaff the finest wines, not only at their endless lavish dinners but whilst they are actually at work.  And we provide drivers for them because, as Barnaby pointed out in defence of Bronwyn Bishop’s use of limousines to attend the theatre and opera, they are often “obliged” to drink and we surely don’t want them going DUI.

When politicians rort expenses, we are told it’s all within entitlements.  When they gift jobs to their mates, it’s all ok because Labor does it too.

In response to allegations that Angus Taylor has tried to use his position to influence decisions from which he would personally benefit, and that he failed to disclose his financial interest, he argues that any attempt to force the disclosure of “minority, non-controlling interests held at three levels down in a family company structure” would be a major change to the current practice which he insists he has diligently adhered to.

It’s the Stuart Robert defence.  Make your elderly parents (or your brother) the directors of your company and continue to receive government contracts and grants.

Continually, we see different rules applied for individuals.

Union fraudsters Michael Williamson and Kathy Jackson are allowed to transfer their assets to their partners and then declare themselves bankrupt to avoid repaying the money they stole.

Williamson divorced his wife so the assets she received in the settlement were quarantined.  After his release from jail in March, he is back living with his ex-wife in a waterfront house bought and renovated using stolen union funds.

Kathy Jackson has avoided her court case by arguing that she should be given legal aid and her partner’s assets, which now include Kathy’s house, should not be considered.  He, of course, is far too broke to help pay for her defence, having only been paid an annual salary of $435,000 including whilst he was on extended sick leave to help Kathy with her case – help he can apparently no longer offer now that he is unemployed.

Yet John Setka has been portrayed as the worst example of a union thug and mercilessly pursued.  Whilst he has made mistakes, they have not been for personal gain.  He has fought to protect the safety and rights of construction workers.

When we come to corporate malfeasance, such as that from Clive Palmer and George Calombaris or 7/11 and Woolworths, promises to repay the stolen money are accepted.  It was a mistake.  Or it’s not my responsibility.  A few bank executives resign.  No problemo.  Pay a little fine and promise not to do it again.

Crown casinos can fast-track special visas for rich people to come and gamble (or launder their ill-gotten gains).  Refugees fleeing war and persecution, don’t even try it.

And all the while, we hoi polloi look on at a world that we will never be part of – a world where deals are done and circumventing the rules is considered smart rather than an offence, a world where the accumulation and protection of personal wealth is the most important thing – the world of I’m alright Jack and bugger the rest of you.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

Fixing our democracy

One thing most people would agree on is that they don’t trust politicians – and with good reason.

A summary of ‘Truth in Political Advertising Legislation in Australia’ published in 1996-97 succinctly explains one major reason why our democracy is failing.

“The potential impact of misleading or false statements made in the course of electioneering is undoubted. Such campaigning obviously has an adverse affect upon the public interest. It may distort election outcomes, divert voter attention from substantive issues and may even discourage qualified individuals from seeking election.”

Yup.  But it goes on….

“The notion that the law should provide for truth in political advertising is misleading. Any such law would be unworkable. Who is to say what is the ‘truth’? How could such a law be enforced? Instead, when the argument is put for truth in political advertising legislation, it is really being suggested that the law should penalise electoral statements that can be shown to be false or misleading. No law could require that such statements actually be ‘true’.”

And further…

“The rise of practices such as push polling has perhaps been a factor in what some have seen as the deepening cynicism of the electorate towards the political process and highlights the need for ethical standards in electioneering.”

But it’s not just the electioneering process that lacks integrity.

Our system of bestowing power on one side of politics has been abused by governments becoming increasingly secretive about their actions.

There are constant court cases to withhold seemingly innocuous information.  Reports to government are suppressed.  Advice from departments is ignored without explanation.  Contracts and grants are awarded without tender.

If, as has been suggested, it is too hard to get politicians to tell the truth either by legislation or a call for ethical behaviour, then we must change the system.

One way to ensure the electorate hears the truth would be to have a multi-party executive based on proportional representation.

Our preferential voting system could still elect local MPs, but the Cabinet should represent the first preference voting patterns of the nation.

If we had a 24 person Cabinet with 10 Coalition members (7 Liberal, 2 LNP, 1 Nationals), 8 Labor, 3 Greens, 1 Centre Alliance, 1 One Nation and, say, Andrew Wilkie, we would be a lot closer to representing the nation and it would be almost impossible to lie or obfuscate.  Decision-making would be transparent.

We really should be putting a lot more thought into the design of a Republic because democracy is not well served by the current system.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

How good is this crap we are dishing up

Scott Morrison has instructed Coalition MPs that they are not to talk about anything that they did not take to the election.  No-one is to have an opinion about anything or to make any suggestions.  As Ken Wyatt quickly learned, even opening up a discussion will not be tolerated.

They are not to say anything unless they have something to announce.

Since the only thing they took to the election, tax cuts, has passed, they have had to go to Peter Dutton to fill the breach with confected problems.  Toss in the usual union-bashing, and yet more drought stuff to keep the Nats happy, and that seems to be all they intend to do.

Greg Hunt pops out occasionally to announce threepence ha’penny for medical research, or to make a fanfare about the generic version of a drug being put on the PBS.

It’s hard to take this newfound interest in suicide prevention seriously when they continue to keep innocent refugees in limbo, when they lock up Indigenous people for petty indiscretions at alarming rates, when they refuse to introduce responsible gambling legislation, and when they refuse to do anything about climate change that is destroying people’s livelihoods.

The highest age-specific suicide rate in 2017 was observed in the 85+ age group (32.8 per 100,000), yet the Coalition refuses to discuss assisted dying.

The lack of affordable housing is having a devastating effect but the Coalition clings to tax concessions that favour investors and which distort investment away from more productive enterprises.  Had they adopted Labor’s policy of restricting negative gearing to new properties in the future, they could have stimulated a flagging construction industry.

They talk about caring about stopping domestic violence, but the lack of emergency refuge whilst millions are spent on advertising and awareness campaigns shows they do not understand the crisis.

We don’t have enough money to increase Newstart yet we have enough to cut taxes, pay billions out in excess franking credit refunds, and deliver a surplus.  It is glaringly apparent that a surplus is more important to this government than the people who are struggling in poverty.

The Taylor dynasty keeps hitting the news, but only about how they have used their positions to try to get public money or some deregulation that just so happens to benefit them and the organisations with which they have been involved.  Energy and emissions reduction have become a plaything rather than a policy.

The restart of polling shows the electorate are quite impressed with the ScoMo show – thumbs up and take my picture.

How good is this crap we are dishing up.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

Yes, Barnaby, you were wrong

Barnaby Joyce seems to be trying very hard lately to find someone to be popular with.

First, he tried for the climate change deniers by penning a ridiculous piece that he thought would attract attention.  It didn’t.

Then he called for an increase in Newstart for people in regional areas, something he was not interested in when he was leader of the Nationals.

Now he has admitted he was wrong to resist a banking Royal Commission.

And that he was wrong to classify the Indigenous Voice as a third chamber of parliament.

While you’re on a roll, let’s get it all out Barnaby.

You were wrong to piously lecture us all about the sanctity of marriage when you were rooting a junior staff member.  (And you were wrong not to use contraception)

You were wrong to lie to your family and colleagues.

You were wrong to organise jobs for your mistress.

You were wrong to change Hansard to cover up an incorrect answer and then lie about it.

[At the time, the head of the agriculture department, Paul Grimes, said he no longer had confidence in his “capacity to resolve matters relating to integrity” with Joyce.

Joyce’s response was to sack Grimes “to remind him where the authority starts from”, boasting that he “got a lot more sense” out of bureaucrats after the firing.]

You were wrong to move the AVPMA to Armidale on a pork barrelling whim.

You were wrong to make cuts to the animal welfare branch of the department leading to a lack of regulation in the live sheep export trade.

You were wrong to divert environmental water from the Murray-Darling for agricultural use and you were wrong to hand over many millions of dollars to a select few to buy back water that doesn’t exist.

You were wrong to accept a cash award from Gina Rinehart and you were wrong to meddle in her family affairs.

You were wrong to try to drive through a flooded river leading to your brand new taxpayer funded $95,000 Toyota Landcruiser being written off.

Barnaby has shown appalling judgement, and morals, throughout his political career.

These poor decisions are always presented with the arrogance of someone who doesn’t need to listen to advice from anyone, a man who likes to receive and bestow favours.

A man who is absolutely certain he is right, until he thinks it might be politically advantageous to admit he may have been wrong.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

The failure of the small government approach

Over the last several decades, the scope and influence of government has dwindled.

Assets have been sold, businesses privatised, services outsourced, public servants retrenched, funding cut, and deregulation pursued.

To what end?

We used to own the Commonwealth Bank and Medibank Private, giving us the ability to help determine interest rates and private health insurance premiums.

We used to own Telstra and the power generation and transmission grids, giving us control over prices and the crucial communication and energy networks.

We used to have a Public Works department to build and maintain the infrastructure we needed.

We used to have a Commonwealth employment service which actually hooked people up with jobs rather than imposing draconian compliance regimes and fines.

We used to run the aged care, disability, and mental health service sectors.  Making them for-profit businesses has led to some terrible outcomes for clients.

We used to own our air and seaports and our railways.  Now, foreign companies set prices and enjoy the profits.

We used to value the expertise and independent advice from an experienced public service.  Now, departmental advice is regularly ignored by Ministers without explanation, and private consultants are engaged to produce reports with a desired outcome – or we just let the lobbyists like the Minerals and Property Councils and the gambling and hotel industry write scripts for the government.

When NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian said “we allowed the building industry to self-regulate and it hasn’t worked”, she was congratulated for her frankness when she should have been castigated for her naivety and her abrogation of duty.

When you let the market rule, maximising profit becomes the only consideration.

Our regulators have become too timid, lacking the expertise, will, or funding to enforce regulations.  Occasionally fines are handed out for transgressions but prosecutions are rare and jail time for company directors basically unheard of.

The government is so keen to attract investment that they are willing to offer tax concessions and royalty holidays and approvals based on promises rather than plans.

It’s all about the jobs, the government says.  But what sort of jobs?  The government itself could be making investments and providing services, creating secure employment where workers’ entitlements are protected and results are open to scrutiny.

The role of unions in protecting workers’ rights has been deliberately and systematically undermined.

Taxes for wealthy people and businesses have been coming down for years but this has not trickled down to lifting the lower end out of poverty.

Privatisation hasn’t resulted in lower prices.  Outsourcing hasn’t resulted in better services.

Deregulation hasn’t shown businesses stepping up to fulfil their part of the social contract in return for making things easier for them.  They have done what they can get away with at every turn.  Very similar to the politicians’ response when they are caught spending public money on themselves.

Ethical businesses falling over themselves to provide the best product or service for the lowest price with the best interests of their employees, the community, and the environment uppermost in their decisions is a myth that small government proponents wish was true.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

Jim Molan says he deserves to be gifted a Senate spot – again

Appearing on Q&A, retired general and former senator Jim Molan told us that he deserves to be gifted the upcoming senate vacancy which will be created by Scott Morrison’s need to get rid of Turnbull ally Arthur Sinodinis.

When asked why he felt he should be given the job, his answer was “on merit”.

Kudos for the confidence Jim, but is it actually justified?

Molan spent his whole working life in the military and has several military awards.  But some question his role in the Battle of Fallujah in Iraq during 2004–05.

After he retired in 2008, Jim published a book calling Running the War in Iraq.  He may be the only person who calls that war a success.  The next year he wrote an article calling for us to double our troop numbers in Afghanistan.  Go harder, was Molan’s advice.

It’s unsurprising that Jim sees the military solution to everything, which is perhaps why our immigration and customs turned into Operation Sovereign Borders enforced by a black-clad bemedalled paramilitary Border Force.

Jim was given a job and he did it.

He didn’t have to think about the cost.  He didn’t have to think about what would happen to the people who came seeking asylum but ended up incarcerated in offshore gulags with no future in sight.  Or those who were prevented from even trying to flee.  He didn’t have to consider what the reaction from people smugglers would be, diverting people to travel by plane to come here or sending them on hazardous Mediterranean crossings instead.  Jim stopped the boats.

He was appointed Special Envoy by Tony Abbott and given a few million for something that no-one seems able to specify.

On the back of that, Molan ran for preselection for the Coalition Senate ticket for the 2016 elections.  He obviously did not sufficiently impress the powers that be who put him in the unwinnable 7th position on the ticket.

After several senators fell on the section 44 sword, Jim puffed out his chest as he was called up from the reserve bench.

After once again failing to impress his own party in the 2019 preselections, this time being relegated to the unwinnable 4th spot, Molan cancelled a scheduled appearance on Q&A, saying he “would find it hard to defend my party”.  They, like many of us, had apparently failed to recognise Jim’s self-proclaimed “merit”.

Jim then ran his own personal under the line campaign much to the chagrin of the Nationals.  He bragged on Q&A that he got the most votes ever of anyone in the whole wide world, or something equally as hubristic.  The short answer to that is, once again, you didn’t get near enough Jim.

The thing that sticks most in my mind from Molan’s time in parliament is the climate change denialist speaking tour he went on with Craig Kelly, Tony Abbott and Andrew Hastie.

That and his constant calls for a stronger military.  He stated on Q&A that we need a national security plan and “I’m your man” to deliver it.  Jim has been an advocate for veterans but he’s hellbent on making more of them.

And if we don’t do something urgently to reduce our emissions, Jim will have a whole heap more refugees to deal with adding to the victims of his wars.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

Christians don’t want to protect their rights – they want to take yours

Many of the same people that are calling for religious freedom protection are also resisting constitutional recognition of our First People.  They say we are all Australians and no-one should be given special consideration – unless they are religious, in which case they want to be exempt from the laws of the land.

Religious people want protection from discrimination enshrined in law but want to ignore the laws that offer that same protection for people of diverse sexuality.

They want to ignore the marriage equality law and teach their children that it is evil.  They don’t just want religious schools to teach that – they mounted a concerted campaign against the optional Respectful Relationships program in state schools.

They insisted that we have religious chaplains in state schools to reinforce their message.  Parents have to go to the trouble of asking for their children to be excluded from scripture classes rather than the other way around.

One state school principal sent home a note advocating Special Religious Education saying “The potential to develop moral and ethical positions within a framework of Christian values should not be underestimated in today’s world.”

Which kind of implies that the rest of us are incapable of behaving ethically without the fear of divine judgement motivating us.

They want the choice to send their children to religious schools, but they want you to pay for their choice by taking money from the public system which is available to all.  They then want the right to decide who they will accept in their schools whereas state schools must provide a place for all children and cater for the needs of the individual no matter how challenging they may be.

Despite our Constitution insisting on the separation of state and church, Christians resist any call to remove the Lord’s Prayer from parliamentary proceedings.  The juxtaposition of promising to do God’s will on Earth with the dishonesty, greed and cruelty of the proceedings that follow just make the whole exercise a farce.

Christians have an abiding belief in the sanctity of life with seemingly no regard for the quality of that life.  They insist that others must not be given choices about reproduction or assisted dying.  Because of their beliefs, they feel others should have no agency over their own lives.

Charities face deregistration if they engage in political advocacy.  For some reason, this rule seems to be ignored when it comes to religious organisations.

Their tax-exempt status applies not only to their charitable work but also to their profit-making business enterprises.

As was painfully exposed in the Royal Commission into child sex abuse, Christianity does not automatically confer some higher moral status.  It does not guarantee goodness.  The prospect of ‘burning in hell’ did not cause these men of the cloth to repent and seek forgiveness.  On the contrary – they abused the trust placed in them and the power given them.  They protected their reputation at a dreadful cost.  Even now, they refuse to comply with the mandatory reporting of suspected abuse claiming the sanctity of the confessional overrides the law of the land and the protection of innocent children.

To ask now for even greater ‘special protection’ is gobsmackingly arrogant and shows a complete lack of awareness of the dangers of exalted status.

There are many wonderful Christians making practical contributions towards making this world a better place.  I would suggest that is because they are good people rather than a consequence of their worship (or fear) of any supernatural being.

In 1965, Pope Paul VI gave a Declaration on Religious Freedom.

“..all men are to be immune from coercion on the part of individuals or of social groups and of any human power, in such wise that no one is to be forced to act in a manner contrary to his own beliefs, whether privately or publicly, whether alone or in association with others, within due limits.

It is in accordance with their dignity as persons-that is, beings endowed with reason and free will and therefore privileged to bear personal responsibility

…men cannot discharge these obligations in a manner in keeping with their own nature unless they enjoy immunity from external coercion as well as psychological freedom. Therefore the right to religious freedom has its foundation not in the subjective disposition of the person, but in his very nature. In consequence, the right to this immunity continues to exist even in those who do not live up to their obligation of seeking the truth and adhering to it and the exercise of this right is not to be impeded, provided that just public order be observed.”

Or as twitter puts it:

Freedom of religion is “Hey, that’s against my religion so I can’t do that”, not “Hey, that’s against my religion so YOU can’t do that”.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

Scott Morrison’s leadership is a mirage

If Scott Morrison was leading the Coalition, he would have announced that a referendum on constitutional recognition will be held during this term.  He seems to want to do it with Labor’s help.  He even sent the well-meaning but ineffectual Ken Wyatt out to gently test the waters, suggesting a Voice could be legislated.

But Craig Kelly said no and the threats were followed by a hasty retreat.

If Scott Morrison was leading the Coalition, he would repeat to them what he said in April last year – that electricity from new coal-fired power plants would cost twice as much as power from existing coal power stations.

Or what he said about the NEG and subsidies for coal and gas energy:

“The days of subsidies in energy are over, whether it is for coal, wind, solar, any of them.  That is the way I think you get the best functioning energy market with the lowest possible price for businesses and for households and that is what the national energy guarantee and our energy policies are designed to achieve.”

But Craig Kelly said no to the NEG, we want coal.  Angus to the rescue with a fund to subsidise coal and gas with a few renewable projects thrown in for cover.  And here’s a feasibility study for a new coal-fired power station to tide you over.  And a great big new coal mine to boot.

If Scott Morrison was leading the Coalition, he would distance himself from the climate change deniers in his party.  He would state that the views expressed by backbenchers Barnaby Joyce and Craig Kelly are ill-informed and not consistent with the government’s commitment to meet its Paris targets.

But this weed is allowed to flourish.

If Scott Morrison was leading the Coalition, Jim Molan would not be running a personal campaign against the wishes of the party.  Twice the Liberal preselectors rejected him, presumably for good reasons.  His public job application for a Senate spot that is not yet vacant is inappropriate.  It will be a party decision.  A leader would tell him that.

When the NSW Liberal Party state executive tried to dump Craig Kelly, he threatened to go to the crossbench if he wasn’t chosen as the candidate.  Scott Morrison pleaded with the executive to endorse Kelly so he wouldn’t embarrass the PM.  That is not how a leader responds to threats.

If Scott Morrison was competent enough to lead this government, we wouldn’t have to rely on prayers and miracles.

But sadly, that may be all we’ve got for the next three years.

How good is ScoMo?

Not even good enough to stand up to a failed furniture salesman lobbing bombs from the backbench.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

The batshit crazy ramblings of Barnaby Joyce

Two days ago, the drunken adulterer who used to occasionally fill the role of leader of our country posted this on Facebook:

Warning:  The following post was written by Barnaby Joyce and contains no commentary or analysis by me.  If you don’t want to waste time reading his ramblings, this isn’t for you.

“The very idea that we can stop climate change is barking mad. Climate change is inevitable, as geology has always shown.” These are the views of New Zealand lecturer of geology, David Shelley. A person vastly more competent than me and the flotilla of others telling the kids the world is going to end from global warming.

The central theme of David Shelley’s analysis is that sea levels are rising and have been for thousands of years and will fall during the next ice age which is expected about now, give or take a thousand years.

When the ice age does arrive temperatures will drop around ten degrees. A warmer planet will be a disconsolate chronicle and many, maybe most, will die from starvation as is the usual experience of man or beast in previous ice ages.

The weather is going to brutally win the population problem and the parliament of Australia has no power against it. One may suggest that warmer weather is the better problem of the two.

One of the few graces of being on the backbench is you can be honest with what your views really are. I believe this is one of the greatest policy phantoms, the misguided and quite ludicrous proposition that Australia can have any affect on the climate. If we could we should be the first to make it rain and, more importantly, stop the recurrence of an ice age anytime in the coming millennium.

Politics takes politics to the absurd. We have to absolutely affirm that our domestic settings can deal with a proposition which is stated quite clearly by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that: “In climate research and modelling, we should recognise that we are dealing with a coupled nonlinear chaotic system, and therefore that the long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.”

You don’t get the feeling when you listen to the political propaganda or the supporting lobbyists that there is any doubt about their capacity to “fix the climate problem” I do get the feeling that you will be tried for heresy if you dare question the zeitgeist so you basically have to lie about your honest assessment of what the hell we are doing to our economy, standard of living, our basic rights and the real future of our children.

Today, more than in the past, the political debate is set within a predetermined paradigm. Participants can not ague outside these preset boundaries. Maybe it is over cynical but I believe the promotion of the primacy of the state over the individual is very well served by the apparent necessity of climate policy.

Private property rights are removed, by the implementation of vegetation laws, because of “climate action”. The state will limit your access to electricity because of “climate action”. You will drive an electric car because of “climate action”. You will divest the nation of its largest export because of “climate action”. Rather than state there is no prospect whatsoever that any action of ours, and most likely of anyone else, will have any affect whatsoever on the trajectory climate is on.

We have instead the congenial narrative that we are all trying to make the world get cooler, but one path or the other path is the better alternative of cooling policies . We will do this by shutting down all our power stations, replacing them with windmills and rejiggering our nation away from our largest exports of mining and agricultural resources to carbon neutral tourism and the knowledge economy. Australia will be the catalyst to a global epiphany and the totalitarian Chinese regime will follow our lead because of our righteousness followed by India and the United States.

No, I don’t think that will happen. I hate to say it but I doubt the majority of people on the planet, give a toss about the Paris Agreement. I would be amazed if one percent of the planet could competently explain it.

I will make one prediction; after this is published it will be promptly followed by the remnants of the traditional media in furious pursuit of my heresy. Questions will be asked by the fourth estate and high octane derision will issue forth from the climate change actionistas.

No doubt I will be accused of not knowing what I am talking about, and when it comes to predicting the weather more than a fortnight or so out, that is true. But of those who ask the questions, will any of them truly understand what on earth are they are talking about.”

Barnaby, you are the last person anyone would bother asking about climate change.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

Australian Values are for migrants, not governments

Last year, Peter Dutton was making a lot of noise about “Australian values” as part of a push by him to make it harder for migrants to gain citizenship.

Despite his proposed bill not having seen the light of day, the Home Affairs website advises that, in order for people to apply for permanent residency, they must sign an Australian Values Statement:

“Australian society values respect for the freedom and dignity of the individual, freedom of religion, commitment to the rule of law, Parliamentary democracy, equality of men and women and a spirit of egalitarianism that embraces mutual respect, tolerance, fair play and compassion for those in need and pursuit of the public good.”

Fine words no doubt, but more impressive in their aspiration than their application.

How can we say we respect freedom and dignity of the individual when we keep thousands of people in immigration detention indefinitely?  Or when we impose the cashless welfare card on people based on their postcode rather than their individual circumstances?  Or when we see Aboriginal youths locked up and abused in juvenile detention?  Or mothers taken from their children and incarcerated for not paying a fine?

How can we say we value religious freedom when a noisy minority, including politicians, call for a ban on Muslim immigration, the building of mosques, the wearing of the burqa or even the hijab, halal certification, and the private practice of Sharia law?  The same people who want to demonise Islam regard any criticism of their religious beliefs as victimisation and persecution.

Conservative Christians in this country don’t want the freedom to practice their religion – they already have that.  They want to be exempt from the laws of the land regarding discrimination and to impose their beliefs on everyone by opposing legislation on issues like same-sex marriage, stem cell research, abortion and assisted dying.  They have insisted that secular schools employ religious chaplains yet demand the right to employ only those who adhere to their beliefs in their own schools.

Government secrecy and their increasingly heavy-handed approach to whistleblowers and media reporting shows the government has little regard for the rule of law.  Their inaction and suppression of information about illegalities – the Australian Wheat Board/Sadam Hussein scandal, the RBA Securency/One Note bribery case, the bugging of the East Timor parliamentary offices, the payment to people smugglers to return asylum seekers to Indonesia, possible war crimes committed in Afghanistan, bugging of the phones of foreign politicians, the abuse of asylum seekers held in indefinite detention – all raise important questions about the application of the law when it comes to our government.  As does the constant rorting of expenses, opaque process for giving out contracts and grants, and post political employment of Ministers.

I am not sure what Parliamentary democracy even means when the government views all MPs who aren’t them as losers and the PM tells us it will be him alone that will determine policy.  It is ridiculous for the government to tell Labor and Greens MPs that they must agree with all Coalition legislation because they won the election.  Everybody sitting in those chambers won and have a duty to represent their constituents.  If we really had parliamentary democracy, the government would be willing to amend legislation to improve it.  All votes would be free rather than party dictated.

If men and women are considered equal in Australia, why is there still a pay gap?  Why was Julia Gillard treated so appallingly?  Why are female politicians bullied by their colleagues?  Why is feminist a dirty word, eschewed by conservative women as well as men?  Why is their a domestic violence epidemic that sees a woman killed by a current or former partner every week?  Why are there no female priests or imams or rabbis?

Any idea that our government ‘embraces mutual respect, tolerance and fair play’ is laughable when you look at how they conduct themselves during Question Time and in interviews, constantly denigrating and misrepresenting Opposition parliamentarians and launching very personal attacks.  The lies told during the recent election campaign show no respect for the electorate and absolutely no intention of fair play.

If it is intrinsically Australian to show compassion for those in need, why is the government ignoring the universal cry to increase Newstart payments?  Why are asylum seekers locked up?  Why are 116,000 people homeless?  Why are people being bombarded with historical Robodebt overpayment claims?  Why can’t pensioners afford to pay their power bills (which could be immediately cut by 9% if they chose to classify electricity as an essential item and exempt it from GST or they could subsidise it through an energy supplement to welfare recipients)?  Why are we classified as ‘lifters and leaners’?

Any government who claims to pursue the “public good” whilst ignoring climate change cannot be taken seriously.  Their idea of public good has degenerated into a mad scramble for individual wealth.

In so many areas, this government is failing to respect and uphold the Australian values they make migrants sign up to.

They fail the test for permanent residency.  After their temporary visa expires in three years, they should be deported forthwith.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

The first step towards fixing a problem is to admit you have one

The first step towards fixing a problem is to admit you have one.

If you have an addiction to drugs, alcohol, smoking or gambling, you have to accept that you have a problem in order to take the first steps towards breaking the addiction.

If you are in an abusive relationship, you have to recognise the behaviour as unacceptable in order to move forward.

If you are suffering from chronic depression or anxiety, you need to admit you need help to combat it.

In order to remain fit and healthy, you must take responsibility.  Have regular check-ups.  If your lifestyle is contributing to health problems, change it.

If your business is failing, you can’t just carry on doing the same thing.

You don’t ignore the leak in the roof or the smoke coming out of the oven.

So why does none of this apply to government who has the health of the nation in their hands?

We pretend that the Great Barrier Reef is doing fine.  We pay a lot to kill a few crown of thorn starfish and we talk about cleaning up plastic and demand that any mention of the reef being stressed be removed from international reports because we have a glossy brochure with some lovely pictures and lots of promises.  Astonishingly, or perhaps not, it does not mention climate change.

The Reef 2050 Long Term Sustainability Plan was released in 2015 to satisfy the Unesco World Heritage Centre, which was considering adding the Great Barrier Reef to its list of world heritage sites in danger, that its condition could be improved.

Two years later, experts from government science agencies tasked with advising on the implementation of the plan said that improving the natural heritage values of the reef was no longer possible.

“There is great concern about the future of the reef, and the communities and businesses that depend on it, but hope still remains for maintaining ecological function over the coming decades.  Members agreed that in our lifetime and on our watch, substantial areas of the Great Barrier Reef and the surrounding ecosystems are experiencing major long-term damage which may be irreversible unless action is taken now.”

So what does the government do?  Approve huge new coal mines, whose produce will be shipped through the reef, and push for approval of great swathes of land-clearing in the catchment area.  Oh, and yet another feasibility study, this one into opening new coal-fired power stations.

The cyclical nature of the climate has altered.  There is an undeniable warming trend with all that entails – worse droughts, bushfires, heatwaves, cyclones, floods, hail storms, sea level rises, increasing ocean salinity, spread of diseases.

The government reacts with flood levies, disaster relief payments, drought assistance, cheap loans to maintain unsustainable farms, more extraction of water for irrigators and miners.

They talk a lot about jobs, bragging about how a record number of Australians are in work.  As Malcolm Farr pointed out on Insiders, that’s only because there are a record number of Australians.

Once again, the government is pretending everything is fine when millions are living in poverty, wages have stagnated, job insecurity has gotten much worse, and underemployment figures are at record highs for recent times.

The only time you hear the government talk about housing is the necessity of protecting tax concessions for “mum and dad” investors and keeping house prices rising to boost wealth.

With over 110,000 people homeless, public housing in crisis, the residential construction industry contracting, first home buyers priced out of the market, and city rents unaffordable, the discussion has been highjacked by those with a “property portfolio”.  Some people just long for a bed under a roof, an address.

We have an aged care crisis that is only going to get worse.  It’s all very well to have another Royal Commission but it is painfully obvious, literally, that the sector needs greater regulation starting with a staff to resident ratio and better training for staff.

But this government’s aim is to reduce regulations, despite the daily stories of businesses engaging in immoral and illegal conduct, ripping off workers and customers to maximise profits, creating pollution and waste and using resources with no regard for the environment, and paying financial advisers to reduce taxation.

One of the few examples of the government acknowledging that we actually have a problem is in closing the gap on Indigenous disadvantage.  But every move they make only serves to intensify it.

You don’t teach people to accept responsibility by taking it away from them.  The cashless welfare card will never solve the cause of the problems.  Truancy officers won’t make kids want to go to school.  You don’t instil pride by rejecting the idea of people having a Voice in their own self-determination.  You don’t improve child welfare by locking their mother up for not paying a fine.  You don’t reduce incarceration rates by imposing mandatory sentences.  You don’t increase economic participation by closing down services to remote communities.

This government is addicted to ideology and slogans.  Until they start being honest about the reality of the problem’s we face as a nation, we will continue down the slide of an increasingly divided and fractured society where selfishness and greed are the only motives and more and more people fall through the cracks.  The beauty of our natural wonders and our unique wildlife will be lost.

The government has delivered tax cuts.  Some of us who already have a job will get an extra 20 bucks a week.

So fucking what?

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

The power of religion vs the power of unions

Two pieces of legislation will come before the parliament in the near future.

One is an industrial relations bill to expand the powers of Government to go after both unions and union officials.

The other is some sort of religious freedom bill.

About the same number of people are trade union members as attend church regularly.  Both are around the 15% mark.

This government has branded trade unionists as lawless thugs, yet the occupations with the highest union membership are education and training (33%) and public administration and safety (30%).

They talk endlessly about the CFMMEU and the many convictions they have received.  The vast majority of these have been for people withdrawing their labour or for union officials entering sites without the appropriate approval.

Which hardly compares to the extraordinary number of allegations and convictions against religious men for child sexual abuse.

When the Royal Commission suggested that priests be compelled to report child sexual abuse disclosed to them in the confessional, they just said no.

A succession of religious Prime Ministers have even hastened to provide references for priests accused of abuse or of covering it up.

The government talks of how unions waste their members’ money on political campaigns.

Yet religious organisations spend an enormous amount on political campaigning without anyone showing concern.  If they want more money, they just hand round the plate.  Or introduce a rule that you have to give them 10% of everything you earn.

Then there are their profit-making businesses, subsidised by government and exempt from paying any tax.

If they want more public money for their schools, they just exert political pressure via letters home to parents, sermons from the pulpit, and private meetings with government ministers.

They are organised and cashed up and making a significant push to expand their political power.  They have a ready-made band of devoted followers accustomed to doing whatever they are told to by the church hierarchy.  They are infiltrating political organisations and providing concerted support to religious candidates.

The unions can threaten to down tools if employers don’t do as they say.  The churches can threaten eternal damnation burning in the fires of hell.

Unions seek better workplace conditions for their members.  Churches seek power and control through fear and indoctrination.

As a primary school age altar boy, my husband was punched in the face by a priest so hard that he hit the wall opposite.  This was not done in a moment of rage.  It was in the vestry after mass because he had apparently pulled a face at one of his friends.

He then attended a catholic boarding school where physical violence from the brothers was an everyday occurrence.

So who are the bullies and thugs and criminals?

Why is the government, on the one hand, wanting to introduce legislation to allow religious organisations and individuals to be exempt from the laws that govern the rest of us and, on the other, insisting that they need legislation to make union officials adhere to the laws that govern business executives (who btw don’t really seem to be held to any sort of account at all) with the right to expel the whole union if they don’t toe the line.

They want legislation that, on the one hand, protects religious people from abuse and vilification, and on the other, enshrines their right to vilify others as freedom of speech.

It does not fill me with hope when I hear government ministers say they are praying for an end to the problems we face and speaking about miracles.

I would much rather see the collective voice and bargaining power of workers protected than the archaic rituals and superstitions of cults that worship a supernatural being.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

Ah Bridget, too far?

It was June 2012 and an inebriated Barnaby Joyce had risen in the Senate to speak about the Water Efficiency Labelling and Standards Amendment Bill when he was “distracted” by the sight of fellow Nationals Senator McKenzie.

“Madam acting deputy president McKenzie, you are looking wonderful tonight,” he said. “You are a flash bit of kit in this chamber, there is no doubt about you.”

When an embarrassed Ms McKenzie tried to interject, Barnaby reassured her “It is non contro. Roll with me on this.”

Mr Joyce said his wife had made no comment on the incident: “She knows me better than that.”

Uh huh.

Anyways…back to the ‘flash bit of kit’.

Bridget is taking full advantage of the opportunities afforded to her.

In 2017, despite being a Victorian backbencher, Bridget claimed thousands of dollars to attend a shooting awards ceremony in Sydney.

A spokesman said: “The travel undertaken was consistent with Senator McKenzie’s official duties as Chair of Parliamentary Friends of Shooting. She attended the 2016 Australian Shooting awards as a guest speaker and award presenter.”

Except the rules specifically state that expenses related to parliamentary friends groups are not claimable.  For some unknown reason, they were ultimately deemed to have been incurred ‘in accordance with the rules’ and no disciplinary action was taken.  Apparently having an interest in something means it is ok to charge the government to indulge it.

But our girl Bridget seems to be afforded more leniency than others.

In 2014, she bought a unit in Melbourne while supposedly on Parliamentary business.  All quite kosher apparently.  Sussan Ley, who was sacked from the Ministry for doing the same thing, must be wondering if she should invest more in her “kit”.

Being a team player, backbencher McKenzie chose to fly to New England to help Barnaby Joyce with the by-election caused by him having forgotten his father was a Kiwi.  She neglected to disclose the gift of the free return flight when she updated the register in November 2017 with her latest gifts – free tickets to the AFL Grand Final, hospitality during the Melbourne Spring Racing Carnival and accommodation for dairy awards in Adelaide.

Her expenses were claimed as “electorate business”.  One wonders what electorate business a Victorian backbench Senator had in New England – most of us would call campaigning (and celebrating) party business.  But it paid off, with Bridget being given the deputy leadership five days after Barnaby’s triumph.

Senator McKenzie holds the distinction of being the politician to claim the most in travel allowances last year, spending $652,697 for travel for her and her staff.

In explanation for the claim of 217 nights’ worth of accommodation allowance, Senator McKenzie’s spokesman said the responsibilities of being Minister for Regional Services, Sport, Local Government and Decentralisation required her to spend most of her time in regional Australia, except she only spent 32 nights in regional areas including two nights in Bendigo, 115 kilometres from her home in Ballarat.

Previously, she charged taxpayers more than $1000 for three trips to Melbourne while she was living in the inner-city suburb of Elwood. Now that she is living in Ballarat, last year she charged us $449 a night for 17 nights to stay in Melbourne, an hour and a half from home.  Most of us would call that a commute, particularly when someone else is driving you.

But that’s small fry really.  For some undeclared reason – perhaps something about Beef Week(?) – Bridget found herself in Rockhampton in May last year.  As she hadn’t claimed for expenses to get there, one can assume she went there for private reasons.  Except she then claimed almost $20,000 for a chartered flight back to Melbourne to watch an ice hockey match.  She also claimed $14,000 for a charter flight to meet Prince Charles in Cairns at a basketball game.

Bridget loves to turn up for a photo when grants are being handed out to small sporting clubs.  Considering the cost of having her in the photo often exceeds the grant, one wonders if it wouldn’t be better left to the local member to hand over the grant, perhaps with several thousand extra saved if Bridget didn’t insist on being there.

In September last year, the senator farewelled the Australian Youth Olympic team before attending the NRL grand final and staying at a hotel. Which might have been ok except she was scheduled to speak at a function farewelling the same junior team the next day.  Obviously, their departure was a day late for the footie so saying bye twice was necessary.

Politicians are “personally responsible” for deciding if their use of public resources “achieves value for money”, is “publicly justifiable” and is “ethical”, according to the IPEA guidelines updated in January 2018.

The IPEA also says MPs should be “prepared to publicly justify your use of public resources” and “bear community expectations in mind because your use will be measured against these”.

Which begs the question – ah Bridget, too far?

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

The RBA must be tearing their hair out

The Governor of the RBA gave a speech on Tuesday where he basically pleaded with the government for some help.

“… we should not rely on monetary policy alone. We will achieve better outcomes for society as a whole if the various arms of public policy are all pointing in the same direction.”

Philip Lowe also pointed out that the benefits of the easing of monetary policy are not evenly distributed across the community.  It’s great for investors wanting to expand their share or property portfolio but the majority of people are not in the position to take advantage of lower interest rates to take on more debt.

And we are not seeing a rise in business investment, in part due to policy uncertainty but also due to a lack of demand.  There is no point expanding if you don’t have customers.

Whilst the government might be proud of their record on employment, that optimism is not shared by the RBA who say there is too much spare capacity in the economy and that it is both “possible and desirable” to reduce unemployment and underemployment.

They are hoping that an increase in the tax offset for low and middle income earners will increase disposable household income but it is much more likely to be eaten up by bills and, unlike franking credits, it is not refundable so those on the lowest incomes will see no benefit at all.

One obvious strategy would be to invest quickly in building infrastructure as the Labor party did during the GFC.

“This spending adds to demand in the economy and – provided the right projects are selected – it also adds to the country’s productive capacity. It is appropriate to be thinking about further investments in this area, especially with interest rates at a record low, the economy having spare capacity and some of our existing infrastructure struggling to cope with ongoing population growth.”

Unfortunately, the government has preferred a piecemeal porkbarrelling approach to infrastructure rather than allowing the experts to determine priorities based on need and value.

The commitment to delivering surplus budgets is madness at a time when the economy is lagging and interest are so low.

As the Governor pointed out…

“the Australian Government can borrow for 10 years at around 1.3 per cent, the lowest rate it has faced since Federation in 1901. It is also able to borrow for 30 years at an interest rate of less than 2 per cent.”

It is inconceivable that they would choose now to pay down debt when they could borrow money at such low rates and really kick start the economy through government spending on productivity enhancing investments.

It’s not only the surplus fetish that is a problem as former head of the RBA, Bernie Fraser, points out. The government’s self-imposed cap on tax-to-GDP would also act as a restraint on the economy.

“What this dopey cap does is that it acts as a cap, not just on tax but also on expenditure, so if you have to do something you’ve created a problem for yourself,” he said.

With borrowing costs so low, an exchange rate at the bottom end of its range in recent times, surging iron ore prices boosting our terms of trade, and a nominally low level of unemployment, things should be going a lot better than they are.

But the reality is that social security payments are too low and many people are living in poverty, wages have stagnated, underemployment is rising and job security is falling.

Yet all this government can talk about is tax cuts for the wealthy and delivering a surplus.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

Scroll Up