Critical shortage of AFP officers a grave concern

Australian Federal Police Association Media Release The critical shortage of police officers across…

Nuclear Concerns – Hiroshima, Maralinga and Dutton’s Australia

By Michele Madigan  As always, on August 6th we commemorated the 1945 bombing…

Track Replacement Services Lacking

By Jane Salmon “Fast Track” Visa Process DeRailed, Connecting Service Missing: Mass Transit to…

Communications Legislation Amendment (Combatting Misinformation and Disinformation) Bill…

On 19 September 2024, the Senate referred the provisions of the Communications…

Why are so many women and children being…

By Bert Hetebry The statistics are horrific. On October 7 last year, 1200 Israelis…

RMIT expert responds to PM’s negative gearing comments

RMIT Media Release Debate around negative gearing reform and capital gains tax has…

It's Not Just The Gearing That's Negative!!

Oh no, it wasn't the government who asked for Treasury to look…

Neoliberalism and Tradie Shortage in Australia

By Denis Hay Description Explore how neoliberalism in Australia led to tradie shortage, changing…

«
»
Facebook

Category Archives: Politics

Advertising Gimmicks: Australia’s Nuclear-Powered Submarines

Never trust anything that comes out of a politician’s mouth in an election year. Pledges are made to be broken; promises are made to seduce, not convince. When the subject matter involves fictional submarines, even greater care should be taken.

The prolonged, costly nightmare of Australia’s submarine policy took another turn on March 6. The Defence Minister Peter Dutton could barely contain his excitement with the announcement that the Morrison government would soon be unveiling which nuclear-powered submarines it would acquire. “We will have an announcement within the next couple of months about which boat we are going with, what we can do in the interim.”

To the ABC’s Insiders program, Dutton oozed unsubstantiated hope. “Both the US and UK understand the timelines, they understand what is happening in the Indo-Pacific, and they are very, very willing partners.” The minister was even willing to wager that the submarines would be operational before 2040, when his career and those of his colleagues will be confined to the dust of history. “We are going to acquire the capability much sooner than that.”

The Labor Opposition defence spokesman, Brendan O’Connor, found the details thin and the secretive conduct of the government questionable. “Despite claiming they would keep Labor updated, we haven’t had a single update from the Morrison government on this strategically important decision which is, quite frankly, appalling.” He demanded a furnishing of “a detailed plan in the national interest […] as to how it will rectify delayed and over-budget defence contracts.”

The original understanding was that the government would spend some 18 months examining its options on how best to deliver technology it has never had, nor had any aptitude or expertise in. But we are in an election year, and timelines wax and wane with elastic will.

To this is an added frisson: the war in Ukraine and Beijing’s own foreign policy. In advanced notes given to media outlets on Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s speech to the Lowy Institute, a dark vision is conjured up. “A new arc of autocracy is instinctively aligning to challenge and reset the world in their own image.” That image seems strikingly one Morrison himself resembles: “the spectre of a transactional world, devoid of principle, accountability and transparency.”

All this suggests a hurrying up that has little basis to it. Morrison has, for instance, promised “more than $10 billion to meet the facilities and infrastructure requirements” for the move to the nuclear-powered submarines. The effect of this promised splash remains to be seen, given the absence of Australian skills, which will have to be made up in US-UK training, and the total absence of any facility to host, let alone build nuclear-powered submarines.

Nothing to fuss over. Australia’s burghers are assured that this will be rectified by the construction of a new base at either Brisbane, Newcastle or Port Kembla (minds remain indecisively woolly on the subject of location) which will “enable the regular visiting of US and UK nuclear-powered submarines.”

These arrangements are being pursued as part of the AUKUS security pact, announced last September to much fanfare and controversy – at least to those in Paris. While it advertised to the world that Anglosphere nostalgia lingers with corrupting influence, it left the government of Emmanuel Macron seething.

The AUKUS agreement effectively scuppered France’s own submarine contract via the Naval Group with the Australian government. The original agreement to build 12 diesel-powered attack class submarines, valued at AU$90 billion caused moments of salivation in Paris. French military industry would, or so it was thought, be raking in the cash and prestige.

But even before its termination, the doomed contract already looked like submerging without a trace. There were the predictable delays. There were questions about when the submarines would be operational, by which time they would be obsolete. Then came squabbles over the intellectual content of the project, which was, primarily speaking, a French rather than Australian matter.

For Beijing, AUKUS merely confirmed suspicions that Washington, Canberra and London were keen on encircling a boisterous rival in the Indo-Pacific. As Professor Li Haidong of the Institute of International Relations of China Foreign Affairs University put it, “The US is using the same approach employed to contain Russia in Europe after the Cold War to contain China in the Asia-Pacific region.” To that end, the United States was “building a NATO-like alliance in the region, with AUKUS at its core, and the US-Japan and US-South Korea alliances surrounding it”.

The AUKUS alliance continues Australia’s idiosyncratically disturbed approach to submarine policy. The mutilated French design was a monster without teeth: a nuclear blueprint with its nuclear propulsion removed in favour of diesel power. The AUKUS proposal is not much better, being yet another mangle that contemplates the expenditure of AU$116 billion on a fleet of eight submarines. In whatever form it takes – and the question is serious enough – the submarine in question will have nuclear propulsion without nuclear weapons, a situation manifestly absurd and unlikely to last long.

The balance sheet of this enterprise is a poor one, and risks becoming more wretched. Tangibly, AUKUS has shown Australia’s diplomacy to be subservient and shoddy, alienating its European Indo-Pacific ally while also being laughed at by the United States. (President Joe Biden showed much contrition to Emmanuel Macron by suggesting, disingenuously, that the Australians should have told France earlier.)

Even if these plans firm up in time for electoral exploitation, it will not clarify when these beasts of the sea will actually emerge from the cocoon of the imagination. In decades, the armchair strategists and naval cocktail circuit will be feasting over other prototypes and ways to burn money from the public purse. The Australian nuclear-powered submarine will be a comical relic, the butt of many a joke.

 

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!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

More Bipartisan Flood Mitigation Projects in Challenging Times?

By Denis Bright  

Delivering financial support for sustainable infrastructure were recommendations of the Morrison Government’s Inquiry into the future of our cities in 2018. Commitment to sustainability in an era of profound climate change receives 363 mentions in the Building Up & Moving Out Report.

These changes cannot be left to the states and territories alone. This is a real challenge locally when 50.2 per cent of state revenue in Queensland’s 2021-22 budget is derived from the Commonwealth in combined grants and CST allocations. Queensland’s own taxation revenue is merely 27.3 per cent of current budget revenue.

The projected deficit exceeds $6 billion but the urgency of both sustainable planning and flood mitigation have never been greater.

In some of my previous articles for The AIM Network, I also had reservations about the South East Queensland (SEQ) Regional Plan 2017 and its capacity to deliver the ambitious stated goals without more federal financial assistance. The planning mechanisms ploughed on with some lofty goals which were not supported by adequate financial assistance:

ShapingSEQ provides a regional framework for growth management, and sets planning direction for sustainable growth, global economic competitiveness and high-quality living by:

  • identifying a long-term sustainable pattern of development which focuses more growth in existing urban areas
  • harnessing regional economic strengths and clusters to compete globally
  • ensuring land use and infrastructure planning are integrated
  • valuing and protecting the natural environment, productive land, resources, landscapes and cultural heritage
  • promoting more choice of housing and lifestyle options
  • locating people and jobs closer together, and moving people and goods more efficiently and reliably
  • promoting vibrant, fair, healthy and affordable living and housing to meet all of the community’s needs
  • valuing design and embracing the climate to create high-quality living environments
  • maximising the use of existing infrastructure and planning for smarter solutions for new infrastructure
  • supporting strong rural communities and economic diversification.

At a public seminar organized by the Planning Institute of Australia (PIA) in Brisbane on 14 November 2016, the need for more financial commitment from the federal government to support Queensland ShapingSEQ priorities were raised for consideration by representatives from the office of the Director-General of State Planning at the event.

The Queensland Government is committed to working with the Australian Government to establish and implement City Deals for Queensland under a memorandum of understanding (MOU) agreed to on 10 November 2016.

Under the MOU, a comprehensive SEQ City Deal is set to become Queensland’s second tripartite City Deal, following Townsville which became Australia’s historic first City Deal signed in December 2016.

This commitment recognises the significant work already undertaken by the Queensland Government and the Council of Mayors (SEQ) over the past two years. Collectively, this work has already identified a series of regional challenges and outcomes to be addressed under a City Deal for the SEQ region.

Without more federal funding for sustainable urban development, appalling levels of forest clearing were tolerated in the Shaping SEQPlan. Turning hillsides into outer suburban and semi-rural subdivisions accentuates flood run-offs.

The extent of potential greenfield development (new urban expansion) was anticipated by each of the twelve local authorities in SEQ. Established urban areas in Brisbane, the Gold Coast, Moreton Bay, Redlands, Sunshine Coast and Noosa were less dependent on new urban expansion. However, many of the semi-rural local authorities became havens for this new expansion. Catchments from these hinterlands feed into the coastal local authorities.

Offering hardship assistance to the victims of flood inundation needs to be supplemented by stronger planning controls on the new town plans of hinterland local authorities. This is not a criticism of the need for essential short-term financial assistance to flood victims.

Services Australia is offering only token financial assistance to the flood victims of SE Queensland (SEQ) and NSW despite some fanfare about the level of generosity in public pronouncements (Services Australia web site):

The Australian Government Disaster Recovery Payment is a Lump Sum Payment

Federal Financial Assistance Rates for Major Property Damage

$1,000 per adult

$400 each child younger than 16

In the traditions of the federal LNP for political marketing style of communication, the Prime Minister’s office has grossly inflated the level of emergency assistance offered across Australia by adding COVID-19 relief to total expenditure (PM 27 February 2021).

Most local authorities are fully aware of the risks of the more flood-prone subdivisions where flood market insurance premiums are unbelievably high.  In the case of the Moreton Bay Regional Council and some other local authorities, probability estimates of flooding risks are available for most residential addresses. All new riverside residential developments pose potential flooding problems and drainage hazards even if the sites have not been affected by recent flooding problems.

The media office of BWC Group which operates for property developer Peet Limited explained that drainage problems on the Riverbank estate in Caboolture South within the Moreton Bay Regional Council had been minimal during the current flood run-off problems.

Readers can offer their own feedback on the level of financial assistance to flood victims in high-risk localities across other localities in Eastern Australia. The feedback mechanisms offered by The AIM Network will facilitate your comments.

Even before the great Queensland floods of 1893, local authorities and their colonial governments were aware of the financial and emotional costs of major floods and other natural disasters. The liability of local authorities for allowing housing subdivisions in flood prone areas in New Zealand was reviewed by Sean Brennan as part of his honour research programme in law at Victoria University in Wellington in 2015. Here are some concluding remarks of his paper:

Flooding is a significant problem in New Zealand. Its cost is surpassed only by the recent Canterbury earthquakes. Councils and communities have a real interest in protecting against flooding as best they can, but some of these measures will eventually fail, either because natural forces exceed the limits of the works, or because of problems with the protections themselves.

This article demonstrates that councils can be liable for flooding damage in respect of their own torts, but that a non-delegable duty is arguably not owed to general members of the public. This may have the effect that where a property is uninsured and the contractor who did the work leading to the damage is insolvent, the property owner cannot recover. The extent to which councils should be liable ultimately falls to whether the moral obligation of socialising loss outweighs acknowledging individual responsibility to insure one’s own assets.

In the author’s view, while councils should remain liable at least for harm caused by their negligence, it would be more economically effective for individuals to remain responsible for protecting their assets through private insurance policies.

Stricter legislative bans might be considered on new residential subdivision of flood-prone areas. Voluntary purchases of existing flood prone land for community uses are a possibility in situations where owners and landlords cannot afford to continue high rates of disaster insurance. Some residential relocations have already been completed in the township of Grantham in the Lockyer Valley with support from the Queensland Government.

Fulfilling more sustainable planning initiatives is an ongoing challenge throughout Australia in the decades ahead when federal financial support is available to support the planning acts in all states and territories. Let these bipartisan initiatives continue in the interventionist traditions of economic and social economist Noel Butlin (1921-91) whose works predated the debt and deficit rhetoric of the federal LNP’s post-1996 political era in Australia.

Denis Bright is a financial member of the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA). Denis is committed to consensus-building in these difficult times. Your feedback from readers advances the cause of citizens’ journalism. Full names are not required when making comments. However, a valid email must be submitted if you decide to hit the Replies Button.

 

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!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

If the rules are rotten and they don’t change them, so too will be the government

Election diary No. 16: Saturday, 5 March 2022

1 The problem with the government is the system itself. A system that will always remain imperfect so long as it is short of independent oversight. It’s called ‘politics’, and it will only ever reflect those rules that govern it. If the rules are imperfect and don’t change, then imperfection in government is what you will get. Still, if the rules are tight, drawn up independent of government and overseen by an independent commission, then you can derive some trust in those you elect.

If the rules or the requirements for election are not changed, you can expect more people of the ilk of Christensen, Joyce, Andrews Dutton, Kelly, Laming, Pitt, Porter, Taylor, Tudge, Wilson etc.

If the rules for question time are as ridiculous as we witness, then you get an hour of comedy with laughable answers to Dorothy Dixer’s questions equally silly. “Just pick up the phone and ask stupid.”

If the rules for receiving political donations remain as rotten as they are, they will continue to be broken.

If rules more generally are so open to corruption that you could drive a truck through them, then you must expect corrupt politicians.

If politicians don’t meet your expectations, perhaps it’s the rules that may lead them into temptation.

If hastily drawn up rules like Robodebt and Job Keeper result in further corruption, then it is the fault of the politicians who put the plan together.

If the rules were drawn up correctly, this might not happen.

As reported in the Brisbane Times:

“Australia’s largest construction company, CIMIC, (formerly Leighton Holdings) has been accused of underpaying hundreds of workers, subcontractors and banks in its troubled Middle East operations by more than $500 million in a scandal administrators warn could lead to criminal prosecution.”

I could go on with many more examples, from financial institutions to Deaths in Custody, Aged Care and bullying in schools. There are rules for everything. Kids grow with family rules.

Often it seems that the rules are made to be broken rather than be obeyed. Or is it that bad laws are made to be broken. Those that are surpassed by new and better science or time when influenced by better education or reason itself.

Regulations are an essential part of society. They make for a cohesive community. Good regulation serves us well when applied justly, but it can also be shaped to disadvantage.

I am not joking. We cannot underestimate the importance of our regulatory three-tier government system that make all the rules. Still, every department within the three tiers should review all the instigated rules. They could even start with our constitution.

The danger in looking back too often is that we lose the will to go forward.

2 February 28: Did you see that the United Nations Expert Panel on Climate Change released its latest report? You didn’t notice well; after all, a war is taking place, and we are still trying to cope with a severe worldwide virus.

The headline on SBS news read; “Major new report says it’s not too late to stop runaway climate damage.”

“Even drastic action to reduce emissions won’t completely halt the impacts of climate change – but it will limit the severity, the report finds.”

Headlines like this have been appearing for years now, and the flippancy with which we tend to overlook them never surprises me. Is it to happen yet again in this election or has the message finally gotten through?

3 Just a reminder that the Australian government sits on $4.7 billion in emergency response funding and have not spent a cent of it.

There are elderly pensioners on their roofs right now in Lismore needing to be rescued, and the Minister for Defence is running a GoFundMe.

Sorry, but there are no words I can put my name to with which to shout my disgust.

People often argue from within the limitations of their understanding, and when their factual evidence is scant, they revert to an expression of their feelings.

4 Wednesday, February 3: Penny Wong on Facebook:

“Happy birthday to my mate Anthony Albanese.

We’re still all working on your gift – hopefully we’ll get it to you by May!”

5 I suggest you read Kaye Lee’s latest piece, “What a complete waste of time the last nine years have been.”

6 On December 5 2015, I wrote:

“The Vladimir Putin Shirtfront won the Insiders Matt Price award in 2014. This year it was given to Christopher Pyne for his ‘I’m a fixer’ comment. There were some excellent entries. Abbott got the most nominations with his act onion eating (without tears). Knighthoods, Good government starts today, and in my opinion, he should have been a winner when he outrageously said that his ministers were performing exceedingly well, and it was all due to his magnificent leadership. Oh, I forgot one. ‘Good government starts today’ Others nominated were Hockey’s ‘Just get a job.’ Scott Morrison for ‘There’s a boom up there’ Bronwyn Bishop ‘It was within the guidelines’ Then there were mentions of ministers with large packages, even snakes. There were many others, but for the breadth of its audacity, I’ll stick with my choice.”

Never in the history of this nation have so many people been elected to serve us, but instead, help themselves.

7 The latest fortnightly Roy Morgan poll has Labor leading 56.5-43.5, in from 57-43 last time, from primary votes of Coalition 32.5% (down half), Labor 37.5% (down one), Greens 12.5% (up one), One Nation 3.5% (down half) and United Australia Party on 1.5% (steady).

For further analysis, go to The Poll Bludger.

Bookies have Labor at $1.32 and Coalition $3. 20

8 It seems that the man with all the money has decided that another four car parks in his electorate might be four too many. Or does it look like too much pork-barrelling?

How hypocritical the Morrison government is in withdrawing the $65m of spending on four commuter’s car parks it promised to build in the electorate of the Treasurer, Josh Frydenberg.

 

 

As reported in The Guardian in March 3, Labor’s shadow infrastructure minister, Catherine King, said the cancellation of four further projects was a “humiliating backflip” for the Treasurer and questioned how much money had been “wasted” on car parks that wouldn’t be built.

9 The Age (firewall) reports that a group of economists say that the government will never repay the country’s debt. It will be interesting to see how it responds to this problem in the upcoming budget.

Conclusion

While it might be true that truth is the first causality of war, I contend that it has become a significant causality of our public discourse over the past ten or twenty years.

If l were asked to pinpoint its beginning, l would say that since Tony Abbott’s appointment as opposition leader, political lying in Australia reached unprecedented levels and insinuated itself into our public dialogue, including the media.

So much so that it is almost impossible for the average punter to know just who is telling the truth.

My thought for the day

I think accepting and embracing change is one key aspect of what we try to define as wisdom.

 

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 Ukraine War and the “Good” Refugee

“These people are not people we are used to… these people are Europeans.” (Kiril Petkov, Bulgarian Prime Minister, Associated Press, March 1, 2022).

In the history of accepting refugees, countries have shown more than an erratic streak. Universal human characteristics have often been overlooked in favour of the particular: race, cultural habits, religion. Even immigration nations, such as the United States and Australia, have had their xenophobic twists and turns on the issue of who to accept, be they victims of pogroms, war crimes, genocide, or famine.

The Russian attack on Ukraine has already produced refugees in the hundreds of thousands. By March 2, with the war one week old, 874,000 people were estimated to have left Ukraine. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) estimates that up to four million may leave, while the European Union adds a further three million to the figure.

This is already producing a growing capital of hypocrisy on the part of receiving states who have shown deep reluctance in accepting refugees of other backgrounds from other conflicts. Tellingly, some of these conflicts have also been the noxious fruit of campaigns or interventions waged by Western states.

Offers of generosity – least to fair Ukrainians – are everywhere. Poland, which will be a major recipient and country of passage for many Ukrainians, is showing ample consideration to the arrivals as they make their way across the border. They find themselves playing moral priests of salvation.

A report from the UNHCR notes facilities at various border crossings stocked with “food, water, clothes, sleeping bags, shoes, blankets, nappies and sanitary products for people arriving with only what they can carry.” Anna Dąbrowska, head of Homo Faber, notes the sentiment. “Our two peoples have always had close relations… Of course, we help our neighbours!”

Such solidarity has been selective. Those of African and Middle Eastern background have faced rather different treatment at the border – if and when they have gotten there. The number of accounts of obstructions and violence both within Ukraine and at the border, are growing.

Polish authorities have also been accused of explicitly targeting African students by refusing them entry in preference for Ukrainians, though the Polish Ambassador to the UN told the General Assembly on February 28 that this was “a complete lie and a terrible insult to us.” According to Krzysztof Szczerski, as many as 125 nationalities have been admitted into Poland from Ukraine.

The sceptics have every reason to be doubtful. Only last year, Minister of the Interior Mariusz Kamiński, and the National Defence Minister, Mariusz Błaszczak, gave a very different impression of welcome, suggesting that refugees of swarthier disposition – those from the Middle East, in particular – were immoral types tending towards bestiality. Such arrivals were also accused of being weapons used by the Lukashenko regime in Belarus as part of a program of “hybrid warfare.” President Adrzej Duda also signed a bill into law to construct what has been described as “a high-tech barrier on the border with Belarus to guard against an influx of irregular migrants.”

It’s all well to accuse the Russians of disinformation, but Polish authorities have not been averse to sowing their own sordid variants, targeting vulnerable arrivals and demonising them in the process. In 2021, those fleeing Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq and Yemen were left stranded by their hundreds in the freezing woods along the Polish-Belarusian border.  Eight individuals perished.

In this cruel farce of inhumanity, the European Union, along with Poland and the Baltic States, notably Lithuania, must shoulder the blame. The President of the European Council, Charles Michel, has been openly calling Lukashenko’s fashioning of irregular arrivals as “a hybrid attack, a brutal attack, a violent attack and a shameful attack.” Doing so makes it easier to care less.

Globally, the war in Ukraine is now giving countries a chance to be very moral to the right type of refugee. They are fleeing the ravages and viciousness of the Russian Bear, the bully of history; this is an opportunity to show more accommodating colours. If nothing else, it also provides a distracting cover for the more brutal policies used against other, less desirable irregular arrivals.

This is a strategy that is working, with media outlets such as USA Today running amnesiac pieces claiming that Ukrainian families, in fighting “Putin’s murderous regime,” were engaged in a “battle … for life and death; there is no time for debates about political correctness.”

Countries in Western Europe are also showing a different face to those fleeing Ukraine. The UK, which is seeking to adopt an Australian version of refugee processing – the use of distant offshore islands and third countries, lengthy detention spells and the frustrating of asylum claims – has now opened arms for 200,000 Ukrainian refugees.

Distant Australia, whose participation in the illegal war against Iraq which produced refugees and asylum seekers that would eventually head towards the antipodes, is now offering to accept a higher intake of refugees from Ukraine and “fast track” their applications. The same politicians speak approvingly of a system that imprisons asylum seekers and refugees indefinitely in Pacific outposts, promising to never resettle them in Australia. The subtext here is that those sorts – the Behrouz Boochani-types – deserve it.

In the words of the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre (ASRC), “The Morrison Government has presided over the dismantling of Australia’s refugee intake, leaving Australia unable to adequately respond to emergencies,” with 2022 “marking the lowest refugee intake in nearly 50 years.” True, the global pandemic did not aid matters, but COVID-19 did little in terms of seeing a precipitous decline in refugee places. Australia’s refugee intake cap was lowered from 18,750 persons in 2018-2019 to 13,750 in 2020-2021.

The reduction of such places has taken place despite Canberra’s role in a range of conflicts that have fed the global refugee crisis. Australia’s failure in Afghanistan, and its imperilling of hundreds of local translators and security personnel, only saw a half-hearted effort in opening the doors. The effort was characterised by incompetence and poorly deployed resources.

The grim reality in refugee politics is that governments always make choices and show preferences. “Talk of moving some applications ‘to the top of the pile’ pits the most vulnerable against each other,” opines the critical founder of the ASRC, Kon Karapanagiotidis. “This is a moral aberration and completely out of step with the Australian public.”

Sadly, the good people at the ASRC are misreading public sentiment. This is an election year; accepting Ukrainian refugees will be seen as good politics, just as indefinitely detaining boat arrivals from impoverished and war-ravaged lands – many Muslim majority states affected by the policies of Western states – will continue to be praised.

 

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

We shouldn’t laugh about Morrison’s COVID, we should cry

By Andrew Wicks  

Yes, Scott Morrison has COVID. But jokes aside, how did the most protected man in the country fail to protect himself?

Late last night, the spirit of pandemic (not so) past visited the Morrison household. Via a media statement, written in his inexorable style, the Prime Minister confirmed that he tested positive to COVID. “I am experiencing flu-like symptoms and will be recovering over the next week. I am continuing to follow health guidelines and am isolating(sic) at home in Sydney. Jenny and the girls have thankfully tested negative,” he said.

Now, while the public’s COVID-marginalising-leader-catching-COVID schadenfreude is well established (see: Dutton, Boris), the nice people of Twitter have poked some holes in his story. In his statement, Morrison said he was testing himself “daily since Sunday.” However, on that day, he was in Queensland, meeting with the Premier, Deputy Mayor and all those coordinating the flood response in that state. Users are rightly asking, why did he suddenly start testing on Sunday, and who else did he infect on his travels?

There’s more. As Sally Rugg asked on Twitter, “why no PCR test for two days while symptomatic?” Moreover, how did his PCR test return a result in just a few hours, when it takes the rest of the populace days, primarily due to the lab testing (and transportation) required? Unless, of course, Morrison has a travelling lab that follows him around wherever he goes, or he’s lied about when he knew.

But while there should be no joy in celebrating another’s COVID, Morrison’s case is a moment of reflection, where we should think about all the regular citizens who were put in danger through his policy to favour the economy or the individual; those who faced work or school or the necessities of life, those who had no choice but to work, or somehow survive with zero financial assistance or sat in completely unprepared aged care facilities, disconnected, watching their friends die as they hope it doesn’t walk down the hall. We should think of them as we wonder why the most protected man in the country couldn’t protect himself.

But therein lies the trap. When one actually experiences what we’re all fearing, you’d assume that perceptions would change. Charles Dickens’ Ebenezer Scrooge chose to push his actions beyond mere platitude when he experienced the breadth of his awfulness. He chose to use his power to save the ailing Tiny Tim from death. As Dickens wrote, “Scrooge was better than his word…he became as good a friend, as good a master, and as good a man, as the good old city knew, or any other good old city, town, or borough, in the good old world.”

Whether Scott Morrison will come to the same revelation on the other side of his COVID-induced fever dream, we do not know. But we know where he stands, as we’ve lived it. In the words of the man himself, we should be “living with the virus” and “we should treat it like the flu.”

 

 

God bless us, everyone.

This article was originally published on The Big Smoke.

 

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!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Bullying is symptomatic of world leaders, including ours, and war is the outome

Election diary No. 15: Wednesday, 2 March 2022.

That I’m using the word “war” in my heading is unfortunate; however, it is what it is. A war started by an egregious international bully, an egotist with a right-to-rule attitude, a plank over his own eyes, and a blurred nostalgia for times long gone.

The political bullies of our world use tactics intended to bully people into ignorance rather than a well-reasoned standpoint. They attack their opponents by bashing their character and painting them as villains and charlatans, whereas they are rational people.

The why of it is beyond me. But then, I have never understood the violence of wars: the lives it takes and the destruction it makes.

As I write, I am at the same time glancing at an article in The Guardian written by Pjotr Saucer and Andrew Roth: Thousands join anti-war protests in Russia after Ukraine invasion. It attempts to express the feelings of those Russians trying to understand why their President had begun a war with Ukraine.

I pause my writing, thinking that the article might be helpful to my own understanding, which of course, is limited – an incomprehensible war to those uninformed in European history.

The writing is dark and sad. It quotes a 30-year-old teacher Nikita Golubev:

“I am embarrassed for my country. To be honest with you, I am speechless. War is always scary. We don’t want this.”

“Why are we doing this?”

It was a view expressed by his fellow citizens, a sentiment of anger and hopelessness that was shared by many commuters

“At the Ukrainian culture centre just down the road, the mood was even grimmer.”

Lines of vehicles snake their way along the main roads. Interestingly the writers say Kyiv is just down the road, and the mood there was even grimmer. So much so that it is about to shut down.

A gigantic distance exists between those dictators who wish for nothing but the self-satisfaction they attain from bullying those less intense than them. The ordinary citizen wants nothing more than an equitable society where those who want to achieve can and be assured that those who cannot will be looked after.

The world’s bullies and the dictators insist that we conform to their thinking which is unnatural in a free democratic society where the contest of ideas is a constant. If they were alive today, all past dictators would attest to this truth.

The administrator of the Ukrainian culture centre says the centre:

“… aims to do nothing more than promote the language, traditions and identity of a country Vladimir Putin has denied legitimacy as a modern state.”

Around 3 million Ukrainian citizens live in Russia and have been told to leave immediately.

What happens in Ukraine matters everywhere.

Bullying in general means intimidating or overpowering someone weaker,” be it an individual or a country.

Does history identify the world’s bullies? It often depends on your political standpoint or your sense of right or wrong. The US has been accused of being a bully.

Recent history recognises China’s President Xi Jinping as a bully because others won’t confess to his country’s rightful place in the world. Iraq’s Saddam Hussein bullied his people and assassinated those who wouldn’t conform. Russia’s Vladimir Putin is currently forcing Ukraine to recognise his greatness. Former U.S. President Donald Trump’s ego needed to be fed, and he bullied those who didn’t realise it.

Benjamin Netanyahu was a bully of the Palestinian people. Rodrigo Duterte, President of the Philippines, enjoyed shooting his people, and President Marcos, who preceded him, was just as bad. The sadistic Pol Pot practised genocide, and Augusto Pinochet of Chile terminated the lives of those who opposed him.

Recent history is littered with them. I’ve only provided a handful.

Domestically one doesn’t have to think for too long to recall an Australian bully like Tony Abbott, who taunted Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard as opposition leader. Then you can skip a heartbeat and find the current Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who one can only describe as a bully first class.

No, he doesn’t run around with an AK47 looking for those with a differing point of view looking to exterminate them. We are a little more civilised than that, and our politics is a little more civilised than that.

Last week, verbal diarrhoea flowed from our Prime Minister’s mouth like a bully in overdrive rightfully dedicated to his task.

 

Image from Twitter (@Emperors_Tailor)

 

The abuse of something usually causes it. In this case, it was bullying overload. The diagnosis said that Morrison stands up to “thugs and bullies” all too often, but more often, he acts like one himself.

He said about the war between Russia and Ukraine on the Sunrise programme that:

“This is about an autocratic, authoritarian government that is seeking to bully others.”

Then he moved on to the Today Show, saying.

“There are consequences for this threatening and bullying and aggressive behaviour.”

On the ABC’s AM show, he was asked about the Russian embassy’s claim that Australia’s sanctions are xenophobic; he let it go through to the keeper.

“I’m used to bullies saying those sorts of things when people stand up to them.”

In The Monthly, Rachel Withers responded that:

“In a statement posted to Facebook on Wednesday night, the embassy disputed Morrison’s declaration that Australia always stands up to bullies, citing its silence on the discrimination of Russian speakers in Ukraine. While this is quite clearly spin, the embassy is right in one respect: the Australian government does not always stand up to bullying. In fact, the Morrison government is often the one doing it.”

“… The irony of the PM’s pushback against “bullies” has not been missed on Twitter, where a quick search of the word turns up a number of derisive tweets, noting Morrison’s treatment of everyone from Christine Holgate to trans kids to the Biloela family. Picking on women, children and refugees is obviously not the same as invading a foreign country. But is this really the kind of rhetoric that Morrison, with his reputation for bullying tactics, wants to rely upon?”

The theme is the bullying of women, children and refugees. He is not about to invade New Zealand, but bullying is uppermost in his thinking. He needs to keep his bullying reputation intact. A reputation for bullying that he needs? It is supposed to frighten people. He and Dutton are such like-minded souls.

 

 

On Wednesday of last week, the queen of savage words journalism Niki Savva served up yet another vicious column that said in effect that:

“Morrison spent much of last week’s meeting of his party’s federal executive – sorting out the NSW preselection drama.”

She said he was “yelling and thumping the table” as he sought to get his way while reminding members that “he was the prime minister.”

“I am the prime minister” or “as Prime Minister” is a phrase that will be familiar to political pundits who follow politics assiduously.”

 

 

It is the same one he reportedly used to assert his authority over former Liberal MP Julia Banks after taking the leadership. She recognised it when he condescendingly used it against ABC reporter Anne Connolly in a press conference about the aged-care royal commission.

Back to Rachel Wither’s article in The Monthly, she writes that:

“I previously catalogued much of Morrison’s bullying behaviour towards women after he turned the guns on Tasmanian MP Bridget Archer for having crossed the floor on integrity late last year, so I won’t go through it all again. But it’s safe to say that, in the opening weeks of 2022, little has been done to counter the notion that Morrison is a bully.”

“There are likewise numerous recent examples of bullying and aggressive behaviour from the Coalition as a whole.”

You can read them here.

To say that we are ambivalent about our politicians is an understatement. Now we are ashamed.

To rail against bullying is a strange tactic to use when you are at the top of the list. The lying Prime Minister has shown that he is prepared to play any card in the pack if it enhances his re-election chances. Nothing is beyond him. He is a bully.

My thought for the day

Power is a malevolent possession Prime Minister when you are prepared to forgo your principles and your country’s wellbeing for the sake of it.

 

PS: And of war…

Death abides

Love hides

Goodness vanishes

Suffering manifests

Truth a causality

Faith is lost

Humanity stumbles

But

Hope survives

And

Only the dead see the end of it

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

Politicians should stop using the word “unprecedented” as an excuse for their lack of action

Parts of NSW and Queensland are suffering unprecedented floods. At the same time, they are experiencing an unprecedented pandemic.

Before that, they were dealing with unprecedented bushfires, following unprecedented heatwaves causing unprecedented drought.

The loss of biodiversity is being labelled an extinction event as we clear land and destroy habitats. More pandemics are inevitable as we further crowd the planet.

Despite decades of warning from every credible expert about the inevitable consequences of constant growth with no regard for the environment, our politicians assume surprise when their unbridled fetish for wealth and power wreaks havoc on the world.

We have to sell coal because it increases our GDP. Temporarily. Until the next unprecedented “natural” disaster comes along.

We have to have an arms industry to employ people to make weapons so young men can kill each other and destroy the homes and lives of the women and children caught in the middle of men’s power games.

We have to accumulate more wealth because that equates to success. For an increasingly few.

Knowledge has become private property and disinformation a tool to be used.

Politicians oppose what their opposition suggests purely for political purposes wasting decades, halting progress, and ignoring risk management and prevention planning.

Stop with the Fight Club, the Wolverines, and the Big Swinging Dicks. Stop with the fixation on GDP growth. Stop with the fossil fuel protection gang and the Make-Gina-Richer mentality.

Until you realise that it is going to take an all-hands-on-deck concerted effort to save this planet from the wanton destruction caused by “unprecedented” pollution, we will continue to suffer the unprecedented consequences of your hubris.

 

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!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

The Karma Bus

By 2353NM  

It’s not hard to make the case that the karma bus found Prime Minister Scott Morrison in February 2022. A whole lot of poor choices made by Morrison and his colleagues over the past few years all combined to make February one to remember for all the wrong reasons.

Morrison’s discomfort probably started in late January with his friend Brian Houston standing down as the worldwide head of Hillsong to clear his name from charges that he dealt inappropriately with allegations his father, also a Pentecostal Minister, was guilty of historical child molestation charges. Around the same time, Citipointe Christian College in Brisbane emailed parents and requested them to sign a new enrolment contract that stated

We believe that any form of sexual immorality (including but not limiting to adultery, fornication, homosexual acts, bisexual acts, bestiality, incest, paedophilia and pornography) is sinful and offensive to God and is destructive to human relationships and society

The contract also required students to be enrolled corresponding to their biological gender. Even Prime Minister and Pentecostal Church attending Scott Morrison didn’t support it. Morrison went as far as suggesting that the contract discriminated against some students, however in reality he was likely concerned that one probable ‘acceptable’ outcome of his religious ‘freedom’ legislation had been advertised ahead of time.

Morrison did introduce a religious ‘freedom’ bill to Parliament in one of the two sitting weeks of the House of Representatives in February. The bill, which was supported by a number of ‘Christian Groups’ would allow for discrimination against those who didn’t necessarily demonstrate the beliefs of the organisation because of their lifestyle, sexuality or preferred gender while working for or receiving the religious organisation’s services. In essence it was ‘legalising’ the potential outcomes of CItipointe’s enrolment contract or similar activities. Depending on which MP you believe, Morrison had or had not promised to amend the Sex Discrimination Act ensuring that transgender school students and staff would be protected at the same time the religious ‘freedom’ legislation was introduced.

After an all-night sitting, the legislation was passed only after five Liberal Party MPs ‘crossed the floor’ and supported amendments to the Sex Discrimination Act that stopped active discrimination against transgender school students, initiated by Independent MP Rebekha Sharkie.

The next day, the ’conservative‘ Australian Christian Lobby wanted the legislation to be dumped as

[The exemptions] have enabled faith-based schools to teach their religion and conduct their schools according to their faith values,” ACL director Wendy Francis said.

“The loss of this protection would outweigh any benefits that could be obtained by the religious discrimination bill.

“With the amendments so damaging to religious freedom, the government should immediately withdraw the bills.

Morrison complied with the request (probably after ‘doing the numbers’). It’s doubtful the legislation will be introduced in the Senate this side of the next election.

The same week, regulations designed to cripple the ability of industry superannuation funds to own and operate firms that provide investment advice to the funds were also disallowed by the Senate. While Frydenberg made the regulations some time ago, they only came into effect three days earlier. Apparently the ‘for profit’ superannuation funds and the Institute of Company Directors were not impressed!

Morrison made a commitment in 2018 to create laws around religious freedom as well as laws to set up and operate a federal anti-corruption commission. There are claims Morrison apparently tried to also get anti-corruption commission legislation into Parliament in the same week as the religious ‘freedom’ legislation as a distraction to ameliorate the effects of the acknowledged flaws in the religious ‘freedom’ legislation. Not only was he rolled by his own Ministers, the action taken was leaked to the media with a number of commentators also asking why he left both pieces of legislation so late in the term of government.

So why would the Morrison Coalition Government choose to nail themselves to a cross (pun intended) on religious ‘freedom’ legislation that apparently not even all Coalition parliamentarians could agree on. As the ABC’s Brett Worthington suggests

The federal Coalition wants to wedge Labor, in the hope it can campaign against the opposition as being anti-religion in suburban electorates that will determine the election – a move that worked successfully in 2019.

But in order for a political wedge to work, you need everyone on your own side singing from the same hymn sheet.

The Liberal Party likes to describe itself as a broad church. Although, when five of your own cross the floor to join with the opposition and crossbench, you start to get the sense that on this issue, these Liberals come from a different denomination.

A week after the religious wedge failed miserably, Morrison and his family sat down with Karl Stefanovic on Channel 9’s 60 Minutes so we could all get to meet the ‘real Scott’. Probably unwisely, Morrison chose to demonstrate that he can’t sing by attempting to perform Dragon’s April Sun in Cuba on a ukulele. He’s also pretty crap at remembering the words to the chorus. The ABC’s Vera rated better than 60 Minutes that night. Morrison also finally found out how to ‘hold a hose’, at a media event in a hair dressing salon somewhere in Victoria. Yes, the obvious comparisons were made.

The sharks are circling in the Liberal Party. Both Frydenberg and Dutton can apparently see the writing on the wall and other MPs are either finding a spine or listening to their electorates on the proposed anti-corruption commission having some real legislative ability to prevent corruption. Morrison was asked at the National Press Club to comment on his former ‘valued colleague’, Gladys Berejiklian’s text to an unnamed current Federal Minister providing a free character assessment of Morrison as a “horrible person” who was untrustworthy.

With the election still a few months away, all Morrison has left is name calling, pork barrelling and inaccuracy. His recent claims that various members of the Opposition are supported by and behoved to China has been repudiated by the current and former heads of ASIO. His claims of the dangers of a Coalition Government (if it was between the ALP and Greens) are laughable – considering neither the Liberal Party or National Party have had enough MPs to form Government in their own right for decades. Sadly for Morrison, it seems that pork-barrelling isn’t a sure-fire winner either.

Simply put – February was a shocker. With Dutton and Frydenberg circling, will Morrison make it past Ihe ides of March?

What do you think?

This article was originally published on The Political Sword

For Facebook users, The Political Sword has a Facebook page:
Putting politicians and commentators to the verbal sword

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 Casualty

If truth is the first casualty of war, it is also under constant attack in the Morrison-Joyce regime’s love-in with spin enabled by Murdoch and a media oligarchy who help the Coalition demonise China and Russia, “shape the narrative” of foreign affairs, to distract us from its terminal, internal disunity and its own catastrophic incompetence.  

Emperor Morrison has no clothes, Paul Bongiorno says. And his policy cupboard is bare. Since Malcolm Fraser, our foreign policy has become “narrower, more inward-looking and mean” warns former ambassador to China, Geoff Raby, in his Fraser Oration in Melbourne recently. Abandoning those who helped us in Afghanistan is a serious lack of moral leadership. 

And empathy. If Ukrainians apply to come here, they will “go to the top of the pile”, Morrison beams ABC listeners a warm and fuzzy vibe without a skerrick of commitment.

Raby could also add insincerity, hypocrisy and venality, also superbly illustrated in its current rhetoric denouncing Putin, but keeping our $0.5bn trade with Russia in alumina and $100m live sheep under the table – lest our own party donor oligarchy take offence. 

Denouncing Putin as a bully is ironic, tokenistic and is not backed up by real action such as targeting elites enabling Putin. Russian diplomats could be expelled, tourism could be halted except for those with humanitarian visas. We could cease importing Russian oil and fertiliser and send home the thousand or so Russians who are studying here.

Above all there could be honesty, accuracy and independence in our government’s depiction of the situation in Ukraine, a state whose pro-western government was installed in 2014 by a US-backed coup.

US influence continued in 2019 with the election of former comedian and actor in a popular TV series, Servant of the People, who played the part of a teacher fed up with corrupt politicians who accidentally became president, 44-year-old Volodymyr Zelenskiy, promised peace with Russia but quickly got a phone call, July 25, 2019, from then President of the USA, Donald Trump. Trump wanted a political favour and was prepared to suspend US aid to Ukraine.

$400 million in military aid for Ukraine already approved by the U.S. Congress, was put briefly on hold by Trump who urged Zelenskiy to investigate the son of a political opponentDemocratic U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden.

Republican senators say that the funds were held up while the US checked whether the new candidate was pro-Western or pro-Russian. A month later, Trump released the funds, but his attempt to pressure Ukraine’s new president became the subject of a US Senate impeachment inquiry, September 24 2019, which failed on party lines. alleging disloyalty, Trump turned on senior officials. Lieut. Col. Alexander Vindman, Ukraine expert on the National Security Council, was fired, and the post of U.S. ambassador to Ukraine stayed vacant beyond the end of Trump’s term.

We can oppose the Putin government’s horrific invasion without capitulating to the prevailing MSM narrative of virtuous western democracy versus Russian tyranny. Caricatures of evil Putin merely recycle US propaganda. We deserve better. Refugees everywhere deserve better.

It takes neither courage, nor leadership, notes Raby, “to stoke fear of the other, to set the community on edge, to find threats and enemies at every turn”.

What Raby doesn’t say – or can’t -in a formal encomium – is that whilst Fraser may have (unsuccessfully) called for a sporting boycott of the Moscow Olympics, when the USSR invaded Afghanistan in 1980, yet he wouldn’t block our export of wool to the USSR, including wool from his own farm, nor would he join Carter’s wheat export embargo.

Boasting about its defence spending, however, simply draws attention to the Coalition’s submarine debacle, the scuttling of a contract in favour of a promise of nuclear subs we can neither service nor crew, via AUKUS, another acronym to embellish buying obsolete US ships and planes. We are now ludicrously ill-prepared. As Rex Patrick notes, the new subs will be beaut when we get them in 2040 – if they arrive with a time machine.

Ambushed by his own impotence in almost every arena, Morrison’s latest setback occurs at 10:00 pm Friday, when the PM is thwarted by Supreme Court Justice, Julie Ward, who rules against the legality of his cunning plan to declare the NSW branch of the Liberal Party in breach of its constitution, because it has not yet held an annual general meeting.

It will be harder now for him to draft his own servile candidates, Trent Zimmerman, Alex Hawke and Sussan Ley, instead of fussing with the fol-de-rol of a democratic plebiscite, an Abbott innovation. Or risking losing key toadies in the only battle Morrison is committed to, the fight to keep himself in the top job. And how good are yes-men and women? 

Friday’s outcome is bad for the PM’s increasingly tenuous grip on his leadership. NSW is revolting. Niki Savva reveals insider tips that senior NSW Liberals threaten to “bring the show down” if there is intervention in the state branch, or if Morrison attempts to impose his candidates without letting members vote in pre-selections, given his stooges are said to have stalled procedures to get their own way. 

Whilst the federal party can still overrule the NSW Liberals’ branch executive, Morrison spent much of his party’s federal executive meeting last week – called to resolve the NSW preselection fiasco – “yelling and thumping the table” to get his way, while reminding colleagues that he was the PM, Ms Savva reports. 

Perhaps like Nikita Khrushchev, in the 1960 UN General Assembly, he could take off a shoe to hammer home his waning authority. Or read the room.  

On the Sino-Russian Fronts, our lucky country is vastly cheered to hear our top bully say he will stand up to bullies, (keeping Xi in his sights as well as Putin). Thursday, he uses “bully” or a variation twenty times in two hours, notes The Monthly’s Rachel Withers. 

“This is about an autocratic, authoritarian government that is seeking to bully others,” he tells Sunrise. “There are consequences for this threatening and bullying and aggressive behaviour,” he claims on Today. But so far, our sanctions look lame. 

Reviled by his own party’s rump, the PM uses Putin’s invasion of the parts of Ukraine which are not already under Russian control to pose as a strongman who might shirtfront Vlad, as Tony Abbott failed to do, (he left it to Julie Bishop) but – as in When Harry met Sally, he’s having what Boris is having but without Johnson’s hint of military intervention. Has the man with the toddler haircut learned nothing from Afghanistan?

Our sanctions mirror the UK’s heavy breathing against some oligarchs and banks but at least Morrison is refreshingly upbeat, upfront and insightful about their impotence.

“I don’t necessarily expect it to deter an authoritarian, autocratic leader .. intent on taking [the] opportunity to pursue their own interests by violating another country’s sovereignty,” he says. Nor will the sanctions take effect until late March.

While tales of Vlad the Impaler of Ukraine add a Gothic touch to Liberal fearmongering,  China is the federal government’s arch nemesis. Not only will China buy wheat to help Putin’s war against neo-Nazism and genocide in Donbas, in The Shining, the PM turns to horror and science fiction to lure us into a sense of insecurity. It’s a spooky story.

A ghastly green shaft of laser light reveals the underbelly of an elderly Poseidon RAAF P-8A Maritime Patrol Aircraft, spy plane, a converted Boeing 737-800, burning 3409 litres of fuel an hour. Over its life-span, it will spew a million tonnes of CO2 into our global greenhouse gas trap, cooking the planet; causing freak weather disasters. 

While our fourteen P-8As and, indeed, our entire navy are but a drop in the ocean, tragically, given all the other nations burning fossil fuels and polluting in the name of keeping us safe, it all adds up. “If the US military were a country, its fuel usage alone would make it the 47th largest emitter of greenhouse gases in the world.” report researchers in the UK.  

Then there’s China’s vast war machine. Beijing rules the waves. And waives the rules. Or the rules-based order fantasy, US neocon cowboys expect of everyone but themselves. Marise Payne recites the phrase to chide Vlad, the bad actor on the world stage, but she never explains what it means. China is too big to have to explain itself. 

Put to sea anywhere and you’re bound to see a PLA-N ship or two. China will have 420 ships in 2025 and 460 in 2030, according to the US Congressional Research Service

But it’s not just the pollution taking place in the name of being tough on national security. So wedded is the world to hydrocarbon burning armies, navies and air forces that any serious attempt to curb fossil fuel usage faces stiff military opposition.

Yet to former party apparatchik, ScoMo, the glad-handed former tourism salesman, a man who reveres Trump, a fabulist who is more a fan of Captain Kirk than Cook, as Guy Rundle wryly notes – a PM facing a re-election while fighting a war to get the NSW candidates he wants, the story is all big bully China picking on plucky little Australia. 

It’s bizarre if not surreal. A sailor on a ship owned by our largest trading partner fires a shot across the bows of our starship, by shining a laser at one of our spy planes?   

Being a strong “middle power” doesn’t come cheap. We now have fourteen Poseidons at Edinburgh base in SA. Apart from being environmental hazards, they are expensive to fuel. Each takes 34 tonnes of Jet A1, currently priced at US$871.40 per tonne, or US$29627.60 a full refuel. Putin’s putsch can only increase the cost of a top-up.  

Boosting CO2 is only one way that the military makes our world a safer place, a mission statement seldom far from our federal government’s epic self promotion.  Today’s commercial Boeings will exude a million tonnes of CO2 over their twenty-year plus working life-span. Organophosphate esters (OPEs) are not just the mainstay of pesticides, they are sprayed out in unburned jet engine lubrication oil – a big part of aircraft emissions. And they don’t dissipate, they accumulate over time. 

Other costs are huge, such as depreciation over the P-8A’s twenty year life span; a new plane sets you back US $1,6 billion. Without them we’d have to use drones to spot refugees in leaky boats as well as spooking sailors with lasers all the way from China. Most prudent refugees and asylum-seekers, of course, pay for their own air tickets.

In the meantime, the cost of boat-stopper Morrison’s fleet is top secret because it’s on an on-water matter. And there are forty-six government agencies involved. Or as the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre notes, “transparency in budget reporting of related expenditures has deteriorated further. Published costs and arrival numbers are extremely limited and available information does not add up.” 

Yet profligacy is a badge of honour when it comes to military spending. Tony Abbott’s completely arbitrary stipulation, in 2012, that two percent of GDP be spent on Defence was just a cudgel to beat Gillard’s Labor crew which it accused of the lowest defence spending since 1938. None of this made sense then. Nor does it make sense now. 

But the canard is resurrected by Morrison who is desperate to paint Labor as being weak on national security. The lie gets stronger by repetition. An ABC’s Insiders’s panel nods sagely when the furphy of Labor’s under-spending on defence is regurgitated as established fact. Yet reason and empiricism have never been the Coalition’s strong suit and this campaign begins with another shrill, baseless slandering.

It’s boosted by a manufactured incident about China’s aggression towards one of our spy planes, a charge based largely on lies and wilful disinformation. And a single laser. 

All hell breaks loose amidst the feral roos and the asylum of loons in the nation’s Top Paddock over our Poseidon misadventure. Canberra rants fit to pop its bubble wrap. The ADF, on standby for senior services in the federal government’s criminal neglect of our elders held captive in gulags, cloaked in NewSpeak as aged-care residential facilities, claim the lasering is akin to firing a missile. Everybody knows that before you shoot down any aircraft, you bathe it in laser-light.  

Laser pointing could be “separated from firing a missile with hostile intent by a mere split second” ANU’s John Blaxland, a professor in international security, intelligence and freelance warmonger, helps the federal government fear campaign by noting China was flashing our chopper pilots in 2018, a topic on which Dr Graham is a world expert.

Dr Euan Graham, a hot-shot in maritime security at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in Singapore, is sure the laser is a flash on a bridge too far. 

“…this act has crossed a red line in terms of what Australia considers normal or acceptable and it’s decided to name and shame accordingly”. It’s “an extremely serious incident” that risks “injury or worse”.

Worse? Imagine the Chinese crew when the Poseidon retaliates. The Australian reports, “Defence confirms a RAAF P-8A maritime patrol aircraft dropped anti-submarine sonar buoys around two Chinese warships in the Arafura Sea last week to check for “subsurface contacts”. 

Only after China’s Defence Ministry releases, via The Global Times, the voice of the Chinese government, an image of an orange buoy, do the Morrison government’s accusations abate.   

The Poseidon’s patrolling the Arafura Sea between the NT and Papua, spying on a brace of Chinese ships, a Peoples’ Liberation Army’s Navy (PLA-N) Luyang-class destroyer and its comrade in arms, a Yuzhao-class amphibious transport dock, two of 355 vessels – and counting – in the biggest navy in the world, as they steam east across Australia’s Exclusive Economic Zone, (EEZ), a kleptocratic, grab for vast resources. 

Dangerous? Our spy-plane is four kilometres away when it is lit up by China’s laser sighting. Almost. A Chinese matelot points a laser at an Australian spy plane? Outrageous. Defence Minister and childcare millionaire Peter Dutton and current PM Scott Morrison, go off like a frog in a sock; or two bullfrogs vying for the same slimy rock atop a toxic swamp. 

Dutton packages the act for the few still watching Sky News in vain hope that it will improve. It’s “aggressive bullying” which can cause “the blindness of the crew, … damage of equipment,” Dutton bullshits in that contemptuous-of-his-audience’s intelligence, free-wheeling, fact-free way that is the Morrison government’s communications’ signature. 

Spud is spitting chips. And Our Prime Minstrel is fit to kill. If his murdering of a Dragon hit doesn’t do it, he will gong someone with his ukulele. He takes time out of his hard-hatting cosplay. Gives himself a flash from a welder when he lifts his auto-darkening visor but you can tell he’s not just some dork from central casting or a party apparatchik who’s never had a real job. Sunday we see images of him in a chopper over a flooded Brisbane River. Climate change is conspicuously absent from the commentary. 

“I can see it no other way than an act of intimidation, one that was unprovoked, unwarranted,” Morrison huffs and puffs, Media mavens helpfully spin one laser into “lasers” plural. Suddenly they become “military-grade”. Is this our own Gulf of Tonkin incident, the pretext for the US military’s illegal incursion into Vietnam in 1964?

“Australia will never accept such acts … It was a reckless and irresponsible act and it should not occur. We are raising those issues directly through the diplomatic and defence channels.”

Laser-gate provokes cries of outrage from our tough on national security border bouncers ScoMo and his rival Dutton, in an incident that evokes John Howard’s 2003 Babies Overboard lie, an excuse for demonising boat people to win votes.  

In reply to what the PM pretends are representations to Beijing through all official channels, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, Wang Wenbin, eventually accuses Australia of maliciously spreading disinformation, Tuesday. Lasers are part of modern range-finders, found on ships in navies all over the globe, including our own. He’s right.

In 2018 SAAB proudly announced that it will supply all twenty-five patrol boats once known as Armidale but soon to be re-named Arafura class with its state of the art lasers. “The Vidar advanced laser rangefinder … designed primarily for anti-aircraft operations as an integral part of a weapon system or surveillance system.”

Such rangefinders use a laser beam to measure the distance to the target.

But those who recall Dutts’ insistence, early in 2018, that Victorians were terrified of going out to eat because Melbourne was overrun with African gangs, which would follow diners home from restaurants, will understand that Morrison’s government, like that of Boris Johnson, or his mentor Trump, never lets fact get in the way of a fear campaign.

 A priceless 11 million square kilometres of ocean, our EEZ contains oil and gas fields, and shipping lanes. And creatures of the deep. The destroyer is in the Arafura Sea, one of the world’s richest fisheries, between the NT and Papua, on its way through the Torres Strait at the top end of Down Under, to a spot in the Coral Sea off the Queensland coast to watch our naval exercises.

It’s almost as entertaining as our Tongan volcano relief show. Our navy’s pride of the fleet, HMAS Adelaide runs out of power just at the moment when we’re keen to be seen as Tonga’s rich and powerful friend. China seems to have no such problems when two vessels turn up a week or so later bearing a cargo of aid.

What the skippers and their crews don’t realise is that they are cruising for a bruising. First, there’s the Morrison election campaign’s war of words; bagging China, bully-shaming Putin, and high-fiving Biden, as befits our role as US imperialist running dogs, a cringe-worthy toadying to Washington that earns us Beijing’s enmity, costs us dearly in trade and lowers our credibility in any international forum, let alone in the White House or the Pentagon.   

What it means to our relationship with Russia is less certain, but Murdoch media is keen to warn us that as “allies of Ukraine ” we face a crippling wave of cyber warfare.

This line of thought is quickly soft-pedalled. Perhaps advisers fear it might invite attacks. We mustn’t poke the bear too much. No-one mentions our trade surplus with Russia, although Crikey’s Bernard Keane notes that if Morrison had the ticker, he’d stop supplying Moscow with alumina and seize RUSAL’s twenty percent share in QAL, Rio Tinto’s Queensland alumina plant. They can take it. We could also halt our $100 million live animal exports.

World’s third-largest aluminium producer, Rusal, posted a profit of $2 billion in the first half of last year’s trading. World aluminium prices rose by thirty percent per tonne in the same period. 

But seizing RUSAL’s share in QAL could cost votes in rural seats and upset key party donors. And the Nationals love to pretend that the live sheep trade is worth a fortune, when it’s a dead loss – Pegasus Economics calculates that stopping the trade would cost $9 million a year for WA farmers. But it could also lead to 350 jobs at West Australian sheep-meat processors. Cruelty to animals intrinsic to the trade would cease.

Whatever happens, Putin’s Russia is cosying up to fellow extortionists oil producer Saudi Arabia, another despotic regime which likes to kill its critics when they are in other countries. They have us over a barrel – and they know it. The pair will help push up the price of fuel and inflate the cost of everything, a way of hastening a global economic recession, already imminent if the overheated stock market is any indication. 

More troubling is Dutton’s cheapjack sabre-rattling and the Coalition’s war on Labor, whom the three arch-rivals, Frydenberg, Dutton and Morrison, claim is joined at the hip with Beijing, weak on national security and unworthy of a vote in May or whenever an election is called.

Dutton politicises ASIO, a move which top spook Mike Burgess says is unhelpful. The Defence Minister claims the Chinese government had picked Albanese “as their candidate”. Worse, he says he bases Thursday’s inflammatory allegation – ruled by the Speaker to be out of order – on “open source and other intelligence”.

By Friday, after a top performance, the day before, from the PM in which Russia is denounced as a bully, the Morrison government’s talking-points revert to China because it’s harder to wedge Labor by railing against Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. 

China’s villainy increases when it offers to buy Russia’s wheat, a deal denounced by government spin as a “lifeline” to Putin, virtually enabling Russia to run amok in Ukraine. 

Under parliamentary privilege, Morrison dubs Richard Marles the “Manchurian Candidate”, a droll jibe, he withdraws, after the damage is done. Albanese, he jeers, is the nag China is backing. David Speers on ABC Insiders tries to get Penny Wong to look weak on bullies.  

In reality, Labor is in lock-step with the Coalition. 

Why be a big target on hot-button issues? Expect Russia to revert to its historical hegemony. The West helped it follow a traditional path – when the USSR’s communism, a state capitalism melted under Boris Yeltsin’s charms.

Yeltsin helped the new boyars – robber barons amass fabulous power, presiding over a crony capitalism which would make our own “can-do” capitalists blush. A few dodgy oligarchs became rich beyond belief while most of the population were driven into poverty. 

To close observers of inequality in Australia and Little Britain these are familiar trends.

Yeltsin’s “shock therapy” economic reforms, masterminded by Anatoly Chubais and supported by Washington in the early 90s, were radical, causing a collapse in living standards” which helped Putin to impose his strong man act as the only solution.

Following the debacle of defeat at the hands of his own party, over his religious bigotry bill- a stunt to wedge Labor, which ends up wedging only his own backbench, blind rage grips our ukulele-packing paterfamilias, Bunnings’ influencer and default PM. ScoMo can live with being called an absolute arsehole, and a menacing wallpaper.

Old news. Besides, insults are a badge of honour to any malignant narcissist.  But it hurts to hear his team now call him a fraud, a hypocrite, a liar, a horrible, horrible person in a new series of leaked SMS.

And as for “psycho”, that’s rich coming from any member of a party who assents to (and enables) the indefinite detention of children, deporting Kiwis caught jaywalking and any refugee who arrives by boat. Not to mention his obsession with secrecy. Besides, who doesn’t beg the producer to let you play the first verse of Dragon’s take me to the April Sun in Cuba in your own mockumentary, Meet the Morrisons? 

Observant viewers with the stomach to sit through the ScoMo propaganda segment of Nine’s 60 Minutes, ScoMo-ProMo note that neither resident grandmother is present at the family curry. Aged care is so politically sensitive these days. ScoMo’s mother and mother-in-law are probably watching cricket. Eating KFC. 

But it’s enough to make you choke on your chicken tikka. Not only is he publicly pilloried by anonymous assailants from his own cabinet, ScMo’s impotent. The PM, clearly, has less control over his party than over his ukulele. Things turn ugly.

Now five MPs have crossed the House of Reps floor, he’s lost control of the Senate and even Murdoch’s suggesting he’s toast, Morrison has blood-lust Dutton and “NFI” Frydenberg, all over his “comms” unit these days, like flies on an outback dunny. 

Too cute for words, these two smell the death of a salesman. They’re jockeying to depose Morrison, a dead man moon-walking-even as opposition leader after May. 

(His attack on Albo, the small-target, Opposition Leader coincides with The Lantern Festival and other celebrations of the Chinese lunar new year, The Year of The Tiger.)

Complicating matters is a report from Karen Middleton that “key Liberals” are plotting to block Dutton before he cherry-picks the leader’s job for himself. Ms Middleton regales Saturday Paper readers with the hilarious scenario of several feckless and ineffectual Morrison muppets brokering what is described as a Left-Right deal between “Dutts” as he is known and the “Kooyong Dolt”, as Joe Aston calls the feckless feather-brained Treasurer, to prevent a coup by the current Minister for Defence. 

Should Dutts take revenge on “Bonkers” Morrison, the incumbent psycho, all hell would break loose. Even with the $16bn which trusty Frydo stashes in a brown paper bag at his PM’s request in order to buy victory with pandemic relief handouts or tax-rebates or some other grubby scheme to court the majority who don’t follow politics with an appeal to self-interest. 

Hence the recent bottom-feeding frenzy in Question Time. Morrison slanders Albo to get below Dutton in the gutter.   

“Bonkers” Morrison howls the house down in question time; accusing Antony Albanese of being weak on national security, a cheap stunt from the Crosby-Textor playbook, while throwing a dead cat the size of China, on the national table, as Bernard Keane puts it. 

Now that five MPs defy him to vote down his signature legislation, his impotence as leader is revealed and he must muscle-up to compensate. What could possibly go wrong? 

Shout? You can hear him in Beijing. Or Kharkiv.  

No-one will ever teach Morrison that it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt. Not that he cares just how awful he is with his harangue of the Opposition Leader for “being a small target” “or just small”? 

But it won’t be his reducing of Question Time to howling abuse, that decides this election, nor will it be his despicable treatment of women, particularly his office backgrounding against Brittany Higgins and Grace Tame, although that could play a big part. 

It is unlikely that any of Morrison’s chest-beating posturing on foreign affairs, reciting US talking points, will convince anyone that a PM who can’t control his own party is a strong man who will keep the nation safe. Nor will the happy family man fantasy even begin to atone for the leaked texts which reveal how much he is reviled by his party including his deputy PM. 

The decider could be the sixteen billion dollar election war chest. Unless, of course, voters worry where the money’s coming from. Or have relatives in aged care. Or have a disability or care for someone who has. Or the PM puts his money where his mouth is and funds refugee to flee Ukraine, in the humanitarian crisis that is already on its way.  

 

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

 

Who will you vote for and why? Who would you trust to deliver good government?

Election diary No 14. Saturday, 26 February 2022.

Who will you vote for and why? You should remember why if you intend to vote for the Labor Party. What was your reason, or if there was more than one and you are a non-aligned voter, what are they?

If you cannot remember then, l can help you. Please be patient.

The latest polls show no indication of returning to the pro-conservative levels post-Christmas and what l call “The undressing of Morrison,” a period in which the public finally woke to the thought that they may have been wrong about the government and its lying leader.

You can fool the people for an extended period, some of the time, but never all of the time. Eventually, they wake from their extended mental hibernation and see the truth for what it is. You don’t need many reasons to be rid of arguably the worst, most corrupt governments in Australia’s history. However, if you need additional information to assist you in your decision-making processes, here is a categorised list of issues for your perusal. Who would you trust to deliver good government?

Government

1 A voice for our First Nations People.

2 Restoring trust in our political system.

3 International relations (see current Essential poll).

4 Reduce the influence of the far-right.

5 Disproportion of influence in the mainstream media.

6 Ministry for the future.

7 Levels of immigration/population. The reason for low job rates now is that there isn’t any immigration.

8 Become a republic.

9 Restore the public service instead of spending millions on consultants.

10 Stop AUKUS.

11 Ethics taught in primary to high schools.

12 Re-establish manufacturing to its former status.

13 Buy back all infrastructure and overseas-owned farms.

14 Primary industry and fix public housing.

15 End donations and lobbying.

16 Reconciliation (including Closing the Gap).

17 Fix Indigenous deaths in custody, land rights, etc.

18 Outlaw all avenues of political influence by church/religions, secular mandate enforcement.

19 Limit politicians’ pay, removing early retirement.

20 Access to pension rackets, super and banning/curtailment revolving door employment after political career.

21 Genuine taxing of all. Including individuals, and businesses, and multi-nationals.

22 Domestic/foreign corporations and securing honest royalties for Australia.

23 Elimination of government rorts like the Great Barrier Reef $444 million.

24 Species extension should also be considered.

25 Royal Commission into the bugging of the Timor Leste parliamentary offices.

26 Free the asylum seekers that are left on Nauru and Manus Island immediately, as well as those confined in onshore detention centres.

27 Stop the cashless welfare card.

28 Restoration of funding for all that the Coalition have defunded: The ABC, FOI, National Audit Office. etc.

29 Genuine real-time realistic taxing of all domestic/foreign corporations and securing honest royalties for Australia.

30 A world-class NBN (for business, research, health, education, science).

Mainstream Media

31 Media ownership laws are broken and adversely corrupt, as is the ability of citizens to become informed with truthful information. Social media pages also need attention. Stop giving public money to Murdoch.

Social Change

32 Urgently address inequality and equality of opportunity.

33 Reinforce empathy and compassion by using social media.

34 Legalise small amounts of cannabis for recreational use.

35 Address narcissism in the community through social media.

Housing Affordability

36 Take action on negative gearing and capital gains tax.

Health

37 Try taking action on illicit drugs with unpopular methods.

38 Address poverty and homelessness.

39 Add dental to Medicare.

40 Better quality aged care. Oversight of facilities run for the mega-profits of owners rather than the inmates.

Education

41 Ethics taught in primary to high schools.

42 Politics taught in years 11 and 12.

43 Free TAFE and tertiary education.

44 University funding and fees. Overseas students.

45 Early childhood education.

46 Genuine education funding levels for all public schools, free unis, and decrease/remove private school funding.

The Economy

47 Lower the retirement age to 60.

48 Reverse the cuts to research and development funding.

49 Payback government debt.

50 Scrap all subsidies to mining companies.

51 Scrap the tax-free status of all religions.

52 Scrap all tax advantages for the wealthy and privileged.

Women’s Issues

53 Address the gender pay gap.

54 Equal representation in Parliament.

55 Seriously address the problem of domestic violence.

The Environment

56 Fix the Murray Darling Water fraud.

57 Fix the Great Barrier Reef (if not too late)

58 Funding for natural disasters.

59 Meet all our global obligations.

Unemployment 

60 Address unemployment funding and all disability/aged pensions, with empathy and compassion.

And Finally:

61 Implement a Hawke style Cabinet where authority is delegated to the Minister.

62 Give the Public Service back the prominence and prestige it once had instead of outsourcing to consultants and advisors.

Conclusion

Should they lose the next election, the current government will have left a legacy of deceit and dishonesty that political historians will note as “The Luddite Period.”

As seen through the eyes of the left, the list of wrongs is so long that it would take one term (at least) to restore our democracy before addressing some of the more critical points.

The list is impossible to triage. All have worthiness to one degree or another.

For a government that has failed to deliver on so much from the above list – and more – it would be a travesty of significant proportion if they win the upcoming election.

My thought for the day

In times of national security fears, the propagandists have successfully promoted the LNP as being best able to handle those fears. Or have they?

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

What a complete waste of time the last nine years have been

Cast your mind back to 2013.

Unlike the rest of the world, Australia had come through the GFC without suffering a recession. At the end of August, net debt was a bit over $161 billion and monthly hours worked per employed person averaged 141.42.

After three terms of a Coalition government, we have endured our first recession in thirty years, net debt is $606 billion, and monthly hours worked per employed person have plummeted to 125.16. Wages are stagnant- adjusted for inflation, Australian wages actually declined in 2021 by 0.3% – the worst outcome in 7.5 years. Penalty rates have been abolished for many low paid workers, and casual and contract work is increasingly the norm.

In 2013, the rollout of the nation-building fibre to the premises national broadband network was underway. Then along came Tony Abbott who thought the interwebby thingy was an expensive white elephant only used for playing games and watching videos – and trashed it.

On Thursday, the Minister for the Digital Economy, the hapless Jane Hume, announced in an address to CEDA, “The Morrison Government has set a goal and is unrolling a plan for Australia to be a top 10 digital economy and society by 2030.”

Good luck with that – we currently rank 61st in the world for fixed broadband speeds.  (Though I hear Barnaby can organise something for those in the know – seems we are paying a lazy $520k to hook one of his mates up to FttP.)

In 2013, we had a price on carbon that was causing polluters to innovate to cut emissions, a renewable energy target that was driving investment, and we were considered a world leader in action against climate change.

Now we are known as the Colossal Fossil. Our arrogant disregard brings Pacific leaders to tears, literally. We pay people who promise not to cut down trees they were never going to cut down. We pay farmers not to run stock when they had cut herds anyway because of the drought. Polluters continue on their merry way making up numbers about emissions that bear no resemblance to the truth and electricity prices are higher than when we had carbon pricing.

Back in 2013, we had a car industry. But the Coalition hate unionised workplaces so they told them to piss off. They pretended it was about subsidies but that is obviously not the case as they find plenty to subsidise the fossil fuel, agriculture and armaments industries.

Imagine if we had retained that infrastructure and expertise to build the vehicles of the future so we weren’t so reliant on what happens elsewhere or our oil reserves that, for some obscure reason, Angus Taylor chose to store in the US.

We used to have a mining superprofits tax too which was just about to start paying dividends as mines moved from construction to production. Not only did we abolish that and all the redistributive measures attached to it, it seems many of the mining companies now get away with paying no tax at all.

In 2013 there was some optimism that we were on the path towards Reconciliation, that we were finally accepting some responsibility for causing the problems and listening about how to work towards fixing them. Until we were thrown brutally back into the world of terra nullius and Captain Cook and white supremacy.

We used to have a good reputation on the international stage. Now we are known as liars and our crazy Minister for Offence seems determined to start a war with China.

In 2013, we had a female Prime Minister and we subjected her to the very worst our misogynistic patriarchal society could offer for all the world to see. And the treatment of women has only gone downhill from there.

The only positive thing to come out of the Coalition’s term in office was when the voters dragged the government kicking and screaming to marriage equality and the conservatives have been looking for revenge ever since.

It’s time to call quits on what has been the most inept, most incompetent, most offensive, most dishonest, least intelligent, least compassionate, least prepared government this country has ever had the misfortune to endure.

 

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!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Bipartisan Consensus as Myth: The Manchurian Candidate in Australian Politics

A few dragons have been breathing fire of late, and these need to be slayed. One is the notion that Australia has had some miraculous sense of bipartisan understanding about national security, its politicians well briefed, cooperative and objective on the subject. The second is that politicising intelligence and national security are aberrations.

The Morrison government has made its own modest contribution to sinking these assumptions. It is, after all, an election year. There is a schoolboy simplicity to the effort: scream various words such as “appeasement” often enough, and it will take hold. Reiterate the term “Manchurian Candidate”, and hope it cakes opponents.

In the Australian Parliament, Prime Minister Scott Morrison demonstrated this month that accusation as politics without evidence governs his operating rationale. As he has done previously in attempting to paint the Labor opposition as stacked with pro-China stooges, he told the chamber that the Labor Deputy Opposition leader Richard Marles was a “Manchurian Candidate”.

Ever helpful, the Defence Minister Peter Dutton went one position higher with his claim that the Labor leader, Anthony Albanese, was well favoured in Beijing. “We now see evidence that the Chinese Communist Party, the Chinese government has also made a decision about who they will back in the next federal election, and that is open and obvious.”

Not exactly a masterpiece of literary narrative (a “wild, vigorous, curiously readable melange,” was a description offered by Frederic Morton), the 1959 novel by Richard Condon of that same name captured the Cold War zeitgeist of paranoia. It features the deeds of a sleeper agent, one Sergeant Raymond Shaw, who returns from service in the Korean War. With ten other men, Shaw served in an Intelligence and Reconnaissance patrol subsequently captured and brainwashed by the Chinese. On their release, they are convinced that Shaw saved them, bare two. The seed is laid.

The brainwashed Shaw becomes, in effect, a manipulable assassin, his mind able to be triggered by a game of solitaire and the queen of diamonds. The chief brainwasher explains the reason for picking this stepson of a US Senator. “Although the paranoiacs make the great leaders, it is the resenters who make their best instruments because the resenters, those men with cancer of the psyche, make the great assassins.”

Shaw also has the misfortune of being controlled by his devilishly scheming mother Eleanor Iselin, intent on seeing the US morph into an authoritarian state even as she pushes the vice-presidential aspirations of her husband, Shaw’s lacklustre stepfather.

John Frankenheimer’s 1962 film adaptation of the book, featuring Lawrence Harvey as Shaw, Frank Sinatra as Major Bennett Marco, with Angela Lansbury in the role of Eleanor Iselin, has been considered a classic despite failing at the box office. A preposterous plotline is rendered seductive through aesthetic sequences and visualisation. Film historian David Thomson saw the link between pulp and celluloid; Condon’s book was “written so that an idiot could film it.”

Even if most Australian politicians would have only a nodding acquaintance with the work and its filmography, the cultural, denigrative baggage of the term remains. Morrison’s resort to it even smoked out the chief of ASIO, the Australian domestic intelligence service. “I’ll leave the politics to the politicians,” Mike Burgess observed in his interview with the 7.30 Report, “but I am very clear with everyone that I need to be, that that is not helpful for us.”

Former senior diplomat and head of the Office of National Assessments, Allan Gyngell, is dismissive about any significant differences between the Labor opposition and the governing Coalition on China. “An effective wedge has to be made out of something more than wishful thinking,” he surmises. “The language will differ person to person, but on the key policy issues, which is what matters – the Quad, foreign interference, 5G – I think it’s clear.”

Gyngell arcs up at the use of the word “appeasement” in current debates, given that “it has a very specific meaning in international relations, and none in which it is being used here seem applicable.”

Former ASIO director-general Dennis Richardson, in reproaching any effort to create “artificial” differences between the Coalition and Labor on the issue of China, proceeds to claim an artificial construction of his own. “The tradition in Australia has been that governments seek to promote bipartisanship on critical national security issues.”

Constant airing of the view that Australian politics remains, at its centre, in agreement about security threats has been repeatedly shown to be fable and nonsense. Australia’s history of politicising intelligence and security threats is extensive and disturbingly remarkable. As Justin McPhee shows in his landmark study Spinning the Secrets of State, Australian politicians have been habitually addicted to politicising matters regarding intelligence to undermine causes and adversaries since the origins of the Commonwealth.

The number of instances McPhee notes are too numerous to mention here, but it is worth recalling the use of intelligence by the ruthlessly wily Prime Minister Billy Hughes during the conscription debates of 1916 and 1917 and the close links between ASIO and Conservative Coalition governments that kept progressive politics at bay for a generation. Hardly bipartisan.

And who can ever forget the glacial relationship between the intelligence services and the Labor government of Prime Minister Gough Whitlam, culminating in the police raid of ASIO headquarters on orders by the Attorney General Lionel Murphy? Murphy had suspected ASIO of being less than frank about a possible security threat to the invited Yugoslav Prime Minister Džemal Bijedić from disgruntled Croatian nationalists. Right wing nationalist movements were less interesting to ASIO than godless Soviet communism.

This inglorious record existed prior to the sexed-up dossiers of dubious intelligence that were the hallmark of justifying the unlawful invasion of Iraq in 2003. Such monstrously cooked accounts were based on the dubious premise that Saddam Hussein constituted a mortally grave threat to the interests of Canberra, Washington and London, and had intimate links with al-Qaeda. Yet Saddam is dead, and the likes of George W. Bush, Tony Blair and John Howard live with shameless vigour. To the politicising cadres go the electoral spoils, and Morrison is trying to down to that noxious legacy.

 

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!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Dear Lord

An email in reply – from Scotty to his God

From: ScoMoses (Scooter)

To: The Lord

Cc: Pastor Brian, Brother Stuie

Subject: Your email

Nǐ hǎo oh Lord,

(See what I did there? Phil Gaetjens suggested I leave that out but what’s wrong with a bit of levity between old friends?)

I trust this finds You well. How good’s God, eh? 👍👍

I got Jen to read Your email to me as soon as I got back from the ophthalmologists – my eyesight is still a tad blurry. I am writing in response to said email wherein Thou hasn’t suggested that Your arrangement with me as Your “Chosen One in the great southern land of the Holy Spirit” was in need of review.

I had picked up a vibe that Thou was not happy when my nightly solicitations went unanswered.

Strictly between You and me, I will admit there have been some errors of judgement. Welding that woman’s head to the flat-pack chook pen was a staffer’s idea, and it was my CoS who didn’t clear any of the slogans through your office first (to be blunt I’m not sure he believes You really exist). Don’t get me started on Greg Hunt’s stuff ups on vaccines and RAT kits. Most of the other problems are the Labor premiers’ fault. I have passed your issues on to Phil G for investigation. No, seriously.

I was wondering if perhaps Emmanuel Macron had been in Your ear. Don’t believe a word he says – he’s a bit fond of the Beaujolais if You follow my drift.

Based on the transactional nature of our relationship i feel there is room for negotiation.

We’ve got $16 billion stashed away for “discretionary” use and we look after our mates 😉. If You provide me with a coded spreadsheet of Your favoured wealthy institutions I will ensure the appropriate disbursements are made from what’s left after Angus and Barnaby have had access to it.

Rupert has confirmed he and his flying monkeys are still on board. They may be evil incarnate but as we both know that’s no barrier to doing business.

If we keep poking the godless Chinese it could keep my arse in the big, green chair or even bring on the great end times a bit earlier. It hits on some of our shared values – fear, war, mass death, racism.

Are we good?

Your humble servant and good friend,

ScoMo

PS: Is my Rapture gold pass still valid?

PPS: Jen says ‘hi’.

 

* * *

This article was originally published on Grumpy Geezer.

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!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Desperation manifests itself in many dangerous ways

Election diary No 13. Wednesday, 23 February 2022.

‘Desperation’ in team sports is different than in individual ones. We all react differently when under pressure. For those who see victory as the only outcome, how desperate you are is often the difference between winning or losing (collectively or individually)?

Desperation can be associated with many areas of life; sport, business, politics, or anything that requires a winning attitude. Therefore, it has been interesting to study Scott Morrison’s reaction to the somewhat unaccustomed pressure placed on him this year.

Desperation often brings out the best or worst in people. It can bring out a personal fear of losing – admirable qualities that bring victory or the use of unfair tactics. Morrison is desperate to maintain the power he has become accustomed to and chooses the worst of desperations qualities: Ruthlessness.

I see his personality in two parts. Firstly, his decision-making leaves a lot to be desired. Secondly, he needs to lie when he is in trouble or when being honest would be the better course. Both are, of course, in conflict with his faith and, as a consequence, prick his conscience. His religion tells him to believe his Bible literally; however, it is only the residue of things not understood and can never be a substitute for fact.

One and two combined are in direct conflict with his religion, and subsequently, this pricks at his conscience to the point that he becomes dangerously desperate. Imagine going against what your faith tells you to do so often. Indeed, the God he believes in and worships wouldn’t ask him to do the things he does.

I could enter a theological debate on that statement, but I would rather keep my argument simple.

But let’s get back to the sort of desperation he will most likely employ in the election campaign already underway. A few commentators have picked up on this aspect of Morrison’s demeanour in the past couple of weeks. Particularly when he attacks Albanese with this manner of desperation:

From 7 News:

“Billionaire businessman Andrew ‘Twiggy’ Forrest says ministers’ rhetoric on China has entered ‘reds under the bed’ scare campaign territory.

The prime minister and defence minister have been leading the charge against Labor, accusing the party of being soft on China and labelling opposition leader Anthony Albanese as the communist party’s preferred candidate.”

Then Rachael Withers writing for The Monthly, reported that when:

“… speaking to RN Breakfast, The AFR’s Phil Coorey said that recent statements on national security by some government MPs were ‘fairly out there’, noting these were ‘desperate times’.”

Rachael Withers, in the same piece, reported that:

“In yesterday’s party room meeting, the PM basically admitted how desperate he was.”

Although he stopped short of using that word himself, his comments were nevertheless so direct that they surprised long-time political journo Katharine Murphy.

Desperate times may call for desperate measures, but just how low is this Government willing to go?”

The Australian’s editor-at-large Paul Kelly wrote that:

“… the prime minister’s partisan tactics on China “reveal a strand of desperation from the government”.”

 

 

On this day in 2020, I wrote on Facebook that:

“At this time in the electoral cycle, why would Labor want its internal policy debates to distract from a government running from crisis to crisis – from Hawaii to sports rorts to coronavirus to robot debt?”

Who’s soft on national security?

The Government’s outrageous comments have drawn condemnation from former ASIO head Dennis Richardson, who said:

“… when it comes to national security issues – foreign affairs head, defence head, Asio head, ambassador to Washington, our most important ambassador – he has said it only serves the rhetoric of the government, only serves the interests of one country: China, not Australia.the Federal Government was ‘doing the work of China’ by eroding bipartisanship on national security.”

Anthony Albanese responded to all the damaging personal abuse by saying:

“What I want to do is unite the country. I want to unite the country because unity is strength. What Scott Morrison is trying to do as a desperate political measure is to divide the country. It’s not in Australia’s national interest to have a divided country based on fake news.

We know what his own colleagues think about his capacity to not tell the truth. The fact is, his deputy prime minister has said that over a long period of time he’s observed that Scott Morrison is a hypocrite and a liar.

I say when it comes to national security, he should listen to what the director general of ASIO said this week. He should listen to what no less than the former secretary of the department of foreign affairs, head of ASIO, ambassador to Washington, appointed by John Howard – that’s Dennis Richardson’s credentials and he’s made some very strong comments this week.”

Twiggy Forrest – again – pleaded the message that the Government ought to tone down or scrap its security concerns over China, saying the “rhetoric on China has entered “reds under the bed” scare campaign territory.”

In his usual boofhead squire from the shire manner, Morrison made a complete mess of the public relations. Recent events have woken the public to the lying, Trump fake news and trash-talking. Using statements like “Labor doesn’t measure up to the mark,” Labor is on the “side of criminals,” reds under the beds, and “Labor is weak on national security” are just part of a scare campaign by the Coalition.

The Governments who have lost control of their public standing become desperate when polling shows them in danger of losing their power. Every time Morrison fronts the media, you can witness the desperation on his face. His speech quickens, as does his eye blink rate.

Of course, the Defence Minister, Peter Dutton, who ought to know better, has joined Morrison’s circus to sing from the clown’s book of desperate hits. To suggest China had picked Anthony Albanese as its election candidate showed why this very unpopular politician (he is the only one who doesn’t realise it) should never be given the leadership of anything.

That Morrison was prepared to trash our long-standing bi-partisanship in this area shows the depth of his desperation and how using gutter politics is just like kicking with the wind to him.

Former Australian Diplomat Bruce Haigh, a staunch government critic in a piece published in the Chinese Communist party’s tabloid, the Global Times last Monday, made an elementary point. He said that Labor might reset relations with China simply by not being Morrison and his Government if they win the election. And do so without necessarily making a substantial policy change.

Then came the deadest of dead cats:

“We now see evidence, Mr Speaker, that the Chinese Communist party, the Chinese government, has also made a decision about who they’re going to back in the next federal election, Mr Speaker, and that is open and that is obvious, and they have picked this bloke as that candidate,” Dutton said.

The art of diplomacy is not in their bag of political know-how.

 

Cartoon by Alan Moir (moir.com.au)

 

I wrote in my 2019 Election diary when referring to the Tony Abbott years:

“We need to know that what you are telling us is the truth. We want you to reform the system so that it is transparent, honourable and reflects your interest is in us, not you.

We want no more of the same old same old. You need not only restore our democracy but improve it. Change has to come.

The past six years has been shameful. If you cannot demonstrate that you can do these things at this election, we will come at you with baseball bats.

Those of my vintage will well remember Robert Menzies’ “Reds under your beds” scare campaigns.

We are to be invaded by the red hordes from the north,” he shouted loud and clear in every election campaign he participated in.

I remember as a young boy seeing pictures on posters in trams, in the newspapers, and news shorts at the cinema with images depicting the communist hordes thrusting their way towards us. There were others with hundreds of Chinese rolling across Sydney Harbour Bridge in their rickshaws with guns and communist flags.

Both the Trade Unions and Labor were pursued with vigorous anti-communist slurs and scare campaigns for decades.

Yes, the Carbon Tax was going to wreck the Australian economy. An insinuated crisis around every corner every day. Pathetically so, without fact or reason.

ISIS is coming to get us. And you personally. His scare campaigns were relentless dirty gutter politics. He stopped at nothing to frighten the shit out of people. So desperate was he that he promoted fear like a legitimate political weapon and wielded it unapologetically. It was like being on a permanent war footing.”

Not much has changed, has it?

The Prime Minister cannot sustain this desperate attack on the character of the Opposition leader. After national security, what else is there to attack? If Albo intends to play tiny target, Morrison will become more desperate. Will he trip himself up in the process?

My thought for the day

In view of the rise of far-right Neo conservatism I am reviewing my thoughts.

 

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!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Remember the Warringah Motion? Neither do the Liberal Party!

This is a little piece I penned (and published) in 2018 when the Liberal Party in NSW were trying to make their pre-selection process more democratic. It was known as the Warringah Motion and was driven by Tony Abbott, and it was adopted. This meant that the pre-selection of candidates would be a matter for individual branches without federal interference or factional stacking.

That worked out well, didn’t it?

The Liberal Party is nothing if not democratic: perhaps it’s closer to being nothing after what happened over the Craig Kelly preselection for the NSW seat of Hughes.

Last year the Liberal party in NSW voted on what came to be known as the Warringah Motion sponsored by Tony Abbott and vigorously supported by temporary senator, Jim Molan.

The so-called Warringah motion was designed to reform the Liberal preselection process and ensure a members’ plebiscite to select candidates for state and federal seats in NSW. The motion passed 748 votes to 476 at a party convention in Sydney in July last year.

Tony Abbott emerged victorious from the NSW Liberal Party convention after his motion to give party members a greater say in selecting candidates was passed. “This, gives grassroots members more power in selecting candidates,” Abbott said. He went on to say that it would create a more democratic Liberal Party and end the potential for corruption: “It’s a clear road ahead to one member one vote preselections, a clear road ahead to a democratic political party which is controlled by its members not by lobbyists, not by factionists, not by strong pullers.”

“I think this is a great day for the NSW Liberal Party. And because it’s been a great day for the NSW Liberal Party, I think it will be good for our Government in Canberra and I think it will be very good for Australia” Abbott concluded.

So, a jubilant Tony Abbott must have been a bit non-plussed when this new era of democratic preselections was thrown under a bus at the first available opportunity, essentially to preserve a numpty by the name of Craig Kelly who is nominally the member for Hughes in the federal parliament. Nominally because he seems to spend more time waffling on the Sky-after-dark Muppet Show than he does making a useful contribution to our parliament.

When the preselectors in Hughes were showing signs of getting themselves a decent local member in the lead up to the 2019 election, Kelly made it known that if he was dumped by the grass roots membership, he would go to the cross-benches for the remainder of this parliamentary term and further erode the authority of this already lame minority government; perhaps even bring the government down.

Our prime minister acknowledging the power of the Right, in an act of desperation, capitulated and decided that expedience was the way to go and that preselections by the grass roots Liberal membership was all very well but only when they do as they are told. Clearly in Hughes they were not prepared to preselect Craig Kelly, so our action-man prime minister quite incredibly called on the NSW Liberal party executive to scrap all democratic processes and re-endorse all sitting members – including of course Kelly – without the need for the messy and inconvenient involvement of the party membership: and that’s just what they did.

Ironically, the Warringah Motion was promoted as broadening the democratic processes within the Liberal party which in turn it was thought would boost branch membership, a win win it was suggested.

The question is, when the executive of a political party is prepared to scrap their own democratic principles and processes to appease threats of blackmail from a person like Craig Kelly, is that the sort of party with which you would wish to associate yourself?

 

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!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button