4
   

Oz Election Thread #4 - Gillard's Labor

 
 
Dutchy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 01:07 am
@msolga,
On the news just now, another boat capsized near Christmas Island.!
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 02:12 am
Too much politics being played (particularly on the Liberal side at the moment ) in this debate. Too much time justifying the Howard government's position on asylum seekers. None of the Lib speakers appear to recall all the unnecessary suffering "the Pacific Solution" actually caused.
But, on the credit side, it's the first time I've heard any compassion from the LNP side at all recently ... At least Abbott & Morrison aren't the only (totally inflexible) voices we're hearing from the conservative side.

Live coverage of federal parliament/ asylum legislation proposal:
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/blogs/the-pulse/politics-live-june-27-2012-20120627-2118r.html
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 02:34 am
@msolga,
6.15pm: Mr Abbott is back now in the chamber, repeating what he's said at his press conference.

He's ready to offer the crossbenchers a deal to get workable legislation through the parliament.
Quote:

"I know there are many Members opposite deeply deeply unhappy with the Malaysia poeple swap.

I know there are people opposite who don't like offshore processing at all. I appeal to Members opposite, examine your consciences."


Mr Bowen counters Mr Abbott's kind offer.

He says the public has just witnessed an extraordinary press conference from Mr Abbott.

Mr Bowen tells parliament: I want more refugees: my resolution passed the Labor Party conference.

Quote:
It was welcomed by everyone except the opposition.

This is a desperate dash for the numbers.

"He knows support is not on their side of the chamber this evening.

It was welcomed by everyone except the opposition.

This is a desperate dash for the numbers.

He knows support is not on their side of the chamber this evening.



msolga
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 02:59 am
@msolga,
Quote:
6.46pm: The gag has been applied (73 to 72).

Now the proper vote.

On the Morrison amendment.

Stay tuned.


parliament live:
Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/blogs/the-pulse/politics-live-june-27-2012-20120627-2118r.html#ixzz1yyxp3Udd
Builder
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 03:01 am
The real cost of the Pacific Solution was never discussed by the coalition.

Here's the figures. Tone Rabbit needs to be slapped about the head with them.

Pacific solution cost $1B

Connie Levett Immigration Reporter
August 25, 2007


THE Federal Government's "Pacific solution" for asylum seekers, designed to discourage arrivals by processing them offshore, has cost more than $1 billion over five years, according to a new report.

The cost was high, the impact on the asylum seekers was negative and it did not discourage people from coming, says the report, A Price Too High: Australia's Approach to Asylum Seekers.

The report, prepared by Oxfam and A Just Australia, which oppose the offshore-processing scheme, calculated it cost more than $500,000 per person to process fewer than 1700 asylum seekers in Nauru, Manus and Christmas Island. By comparison, the cost of holding asylum seekers in a mainland centre, based on Department of Immigration estimates, was 3.5 per cent of the running costs of the Pacific solution.

The report found it cost $1830 a day to keep someone on Christmas Island compared with $238 a day at Sydney's Villawood detention centre.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/pacific-solution-cost-1b/2007/08/24/1187462523594.html


0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 03:08 am
@msolga,
Quote:
6.50pm: Mr Morrison's amendment has been defeated.

Adam Bandt, Rob Oakeshott, Bob Katter, Tony Windsor with the government.

Amendment negated 72 to 74.


Now Andrew Wilkie has an amendment....

Looks like being a long night.

Back later, but will keep listening ...

Politics live: June 27, 2012:
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/blogs/the-pulse/politics-live-june-27-2012-20120627-2118r.html#comments
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 04:35 am
@msolga,
Quote:
Asylum seeker laws pass lower house
by: By Paul Osborne, AAP Senior Political Writer
From: AAP June 27, 2012 8:23PM


Laws to remove legal uncertainty over offshore processing of asylum seekers have passed the lower house of federal parliament after an emotional debate and a last-minute amendment from an independent MP.

BUT the Australian Greens will block the bill in the Senate and want all parties to take part in a committee to find a long-term solution that respects human rights.

As 125 passengers from a second asylum seeker boat to sink in a week were rescued off Christmas Island, with one body recovered, Prime Minister Julia Gillard asked independent MP Rob Oakeshott on Wednesday to bring on his draft bill.

The bill was aimed at removing legal doubt, created by the High Court judgment, that Australia can enter into offshore processing deals with other countries, but ensures that any deal is in line with the Bali framework on refugees.

"We have seen too much tragedy and I can't and I don't believe other members of parliament can now sit here with the prospect of more tragedy to come," Ms Gillard told parliament at the start of the debate.

"Given all of the circumstances ... I, as a Labor leader, would want to walk from this place saying no-one won, no-one lost, we just got something done."

Independent MP Andrew Wilkie's amendment put just before 7pm, to put a 12-month sunset clause on the bill, and a subsequent change of heart by fellow independent Bob Katter were the turning points in the debate that helped deliver the government a narrow two-vote win.

Ms Gillard said the sunset clause would enable the public to see how the policy operated and gave more time to gather ideas for a long-term policy. .... <cont>


http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/lower-house-mps-back-asylum-seeker-bill/story-fn3dxiwe-1226410489592
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 05:12 am
Phew. That was a grueling few hours!
Let's see what happens next, in the senate.

Other news from today ....
Fairfax has refused to grant Gina Rinehart the seats on the board she was demanding ... (or else she'd wash her hands of them & walk away, shed said)
A prospect which cheered quite a few of us up for a minute! Wink

http://images.theage.com.au/2012/06/26/3406243/tandberg-letters-2706-200x0.jpg

Her demands have not been met.
But she hasn't walked, either. (damn!)
.... & she apparently has major objections to Fairfax media's support of Earth Hour.
Confused

Quote:
No seat for Rinehart, Fairfax chairman says
Kirsty Simpson
June 27, 2012 - 5:29PM/the AGE


Fairfax Media will not offer Gina Rinehart a seat on the board, chairman Roger Corbett says.

The company has just released a statement saying that an agreement had not been reached "on terms acceptable to the company. I regret that agreement has not been reached for Mrs Rinehart to join the Fairfax Media board of directors," Mr Corbett said.

"I hope that this might be possible in the future. However, key elements yet to be agreed include acceptance of the charter of editorial independence as it stands and the Fairfax board governance principles as agreed by all existing directors."

http://images.smh.com.au/2012/05/29/3335605/Gina-rinehart-art-420x0.jpg
Gina Rinehart is seeking 'sufficient seats to influence the Fairfax board'. Photo: Claire Martin

The statement follows remarks by Hancock Prospecting today.

In a statement released to the media, Hancock Prospecting chief development officer John Klepec said Fairfax - owner of this website - had an abysmal track record and declared two board seats were not enough to allow Hancock to make the company ‘‘sustainable’’. (Hancock is Mrs Rinehart’s private company, through which she owns 18.67 per cent of Fairfax.)


The statement, Mrs Rinehart’s first on editorial independence at Fairfax Media, said it ‘‘supports journalistic integrity and accuracy’’ but said the company had already repeatedly overridden the principle in the past by ordering journalists to support Earth Hour.

He adds that Hancock would be prepared to endorse an ‘‘effective’’ charter of independence ‘‘assuming one can be agreed’’.

Mr Klepec added that active consideration of content or a change in content was needed to attract more readers and advertising to the mastheads. ...<cont>

http://www.smh.com.au/business/media-and-marketing/no-seat-for-rinehart-fairfax-chairman-says-20120627-211x2.html
.
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Wed 27 Jun, 2012 04:44 pm
@msolga,
It looks like the asylum seeker bill, which was narrowly passed in the the lower house last night, is doomed to failure in the senate today, with the liberals & the Greens likely to vote against it. A very odd situation - the greens & the conservatives voting together!
I can understand the Greens objections to the bill, they have consistently opposed any solution which involves off-shore processing of asylum seekers. Not much help in the current circumstances, though. Sigh.
But I think the Liberal's new-found compassion & concern for the welfare of asylum seekers is hypocritical ... their insistence that they should be processed only in countries which are signatories to the UN refugee convention is strangely at odds with their current & previous position of "sending back the boats" to Indonesia.
Indonesia is not a signatory to the refugee convention. Same as Malaysia.
The Libs can't have it both ways, surely?

Me, I'm hoping for some less-than-perfect resolution, even, which will put an end to (or greatly minimise) the ever mounting number of deaths at sea. How many now? 500?

Quote:
Stalemate or Solution?
By chief political correspondent Simon Cullen, staff
Updated June 28, 2012 05:35:04/ABC News


Video: Boat disaster sparks Parliament into action
Related Story: Another asylum boat intercepted
Related Story: Another sinking brings asylum debate to a head
Related Story: Asylum seeker disaster north of Christmas Island
Related Story: Hints of progress in border protection standoff
Map: Australia

http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/4096578-3x4-340x453.jpg
Rob Oakeshott's bill to allow offshore processing of asylum seekers looks likely to be blocked when it goes to the Senate later today. (Photo: AAP/Lukas Coch) (Lateline)

A bill to allow offshore processing of asylum seekers will be considered in the Senate today, after six hours of emotional debate saw it pass the Lower House on Wednesday night.

Another deadly asylum seeker emergency on Wednesday morning prompted a marathon political debate aimed at breaking the political impasse over border protection policies.


Hours of heartfelt and sometimes heated debate ended at 8:00pm (AEST) on Wednesday when legislation to restore offshore processing, proposed by independent MP Rob Oakeshott, passed the House of Representatives.

But the laws appear doomed as neither the Opposition nor the Greens are likely to back them in the Senate.

Mr Oakeshott told Lateline on Wednesday night that he hoped senators would not be "obstructionist" when the bill comes before them.

"By all means negotiate, by all means amend, but do not block," he said.

"I think what people are seeing unfold on their televisions, the images north of Christmas Island and what has unfolded over the last decade of failure in this policy area needs to be addressed.

"And so I really urge the Senate tomorrow to rise above and to find the national interest outside and over those traditional entrenched political party lines."


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-27/asylum-seeker-debate-ends/4096570

.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Thu 28 Jun, 2012 01:26 am
@msolga,
The bill has been defeated in the senate: 29 votes to 39.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sat 30 Jun, 2012 01:56 am
@msolga,
http://images.theage.com.au/2012/06/29/3415272/Tandberg-Drowning-29-June-600x400.gif
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Jul, 2012 06:18 pm
@msolga,
http://images.theage.com.au/2012/06/30/3418318/Tandberg-Parl-30-Jun-600x400.jpg
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Jul, 2012 06:21 pm
@msolga,
http://images.theage.com.au/2012/06/29/3414201/MOR--wilcox-boat-20120629102405167094-620x0.jpg
0 Replies
 
msolga
 
  2  
Reply Sun 1 Jul, 2012 06:48 pm
The carbon tax came into effect yesterday.:

Quote:
Support for carbon tax dives as politicians brawl
By Naomi Woodley, staff/ABC News
Updated July 02, 2012 09:25:35


Video: Winsome Denyer reports on the carbon tax campaign (ABC News)
Related Story: Controversial carbon tax takes effect
Related Story: Annabel Crabb: Carbon tax talk about the cash, not the climate
Map: Australia

A new poll says support for the carbon tax has fallen to a record low as the political campaign about the scheme goes into overdrive.

The Nielsen poll, published in today's Fairfax papers, says two thirds of Australians do not support the tax, which came into effect on Sunday.


Government and Opposition MPs will spend the next fortnight pushing their points of view around the country as both parties move to a virtual campaign footing.

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott will today begin a high-profile campaign against the tax, criss-crossing the country for about two weeks.

Mr Abbott has pledged that a Coalition government would repeal the tax, which he says "will hit every Australian family's cost of living."
Audio: Carbon campaigning begins (AM)

But Prime Minister Julia Gillard is insisting the Opposition's "fear campaign" will not succeed.

"Australians will be able to judge for themselves, rather than listening to the politicians," she said.

Anti-carbon tax ads will be splashed across billboards and television as Coalition frontbenchers fan out across the country, but the message from the Federal Government is one of reassurance.

"This is a reform that is perfectly manageable, one that is a responsible thing to do," Climate Change Minister Greg Combet said.

"It'll see Australia play its fair part in international efforts to tackle climate change and we’re doing it in a way that millions of households would be better off." ....<cont>


http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-07-02/politicians-begin-cross-country-carbon-tax-campaign/4103704
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Jul, 2012 06:55 pm
@msolga,
http://images.theage.com.au/2012/07/01/3420352/port-Untitled-1-600x400.jpg
0 Replies
 
Dutchy
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Jul, 2012 11:48 pm
@msolga,
Why didn't the PM listen to the People? Proves she is unfit to be a PM, (not even taking into account that she lied) with that decision she signed her own death warrant. Labour will be wiped off the map comes next election, mark my words. I don't like Abbott but he'll bolt in.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Jul, 2012 01:46 am
@Dutchy,
I guess it depends on what you mean by "listening to the people", Danny.
We have been talking about reducing carbon pollution for around 20 years now.
And until very recently (the last election) both sides of politics & also the Australian voters agreed that we needed to take action:
Quote:
In the election year of 2007, both the Liberal-led Coalition government and the Labor opposition promised to introduce carbon trading. Opposition leader Rudd commissioned the Garnaut Climate Change Review on 30 April 2007, while Prime Minister John Howard announced his own plan for a carbon trading scheme on 4 June 2007,[3][4] after the final report of the Prime Ministerial Task Group on Emissions Trading. Labor won the election on 24 November.


Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_Pollution_Reduction_Scheme


Following that election (& the previous Labor government putting it's existing policy on hold... & also the narrow defeat of Malcolm Turnbull as Liberal leader by Tony Abbott) things got considerably messier.

Yes, Julia Gillard changed her mind after forming a minority government with the support of the Greens & independents ....
As apparently Tony Abbott would have,too, if you believe Tony Windsor's account of his discussions with Abbott prior to choosing to support Labor over the LNP:
Quote:
Mr Windsor, who was instrumental in getting the Government's ETS through parliament, said he had discussed climate change with Mr Abbott during talks on forming minority government after last August's election.

Mr Windsor said he got the impression the Coalition leader would have supported a carbon price if the policy was put to him during these talks.

"He actually begged for the job... (he said) 'I will do anything to get this job'," Mr Windsor said.

But Mr Abbott told reporters that at no stage did he offer to back an ETS.


Turnbull backs 'efficient' emissions trading:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-02-28/turnbull-backs-efficient-emissions-trading/1961170

So I guess if you believe Windsor's account (I do), then we might be calling Tony Abbott a "liar" now & not Julia Gillard? Neutral

But more important, I think, is the change in the public's attitude toward government action to reduce carbon pollution.
What has cause that to occur?
I think the relentless, negative "big new tax" campaign by Abbott & co ... with the strong support of the mainstream (especially the Murdoch) media.
So what is Abbott suggesting should be done instead? Well that's not exactly clear, apart from planting lots & lots of trees!
Also almost Abbott's entire focus has been a scare campaign based on costs to voters.
And he certainly has had success with that!
The way I see things, I'm glad that after 20 years of talk we have finally taken action. Like quite a number of other countries have, too.
Whether Labor's legislation is the best of the options available, I'm not certain ... but I am prepared, at least, give it a go & see what happens.
We will just have to see if the sky falls in or not! Wink

Dutchy
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Jul, 2012 02:41 am
@msolga,
You put up a very good argument msolga, I will just sit back and see how it all unfolds.
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Jul, 2012 02:54 am
@Dutchy,
Fasten your seat belt, Danny!
It's going to be a rough ol ride, with lots of shrill talk from Abbott & co of "big taxes", "incompetent government", etc, etc, etc!
They are on a mission! Wink
The Mad Monk is talking about "blood oaths" (meaning the removal of the legislation) when he is elected!
How he's going to do that while undoing all the tax changes, while removing the mining tax is anyone's guess!
I don't think it's possible with all his promised tax cuts ..... unless he sacks 2/3rds of the public service ..... Neutral
msolga
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Jul, 2012 05:36 pm
@msolga,
Look out, Oz!
It's the end of civilization as we've known it!
We'll all be runed! Razz

http://images.theage.com.au/2012/07/03/3424330/648159413a-600x400.jpg
 

Related Topics

Beached As Bro - Discussion by dadpad
Oz election thread #3 - Rudd's Labour - Discussion by msolga
Australian music - Discussion by Wilso
Oz Election Thread #6 - Abbott's LNP - Discussion by hingehead
AUstralian Philosophers - Discussion by dadpad
Australia voting system - Discussion by fbaezer
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 11/22/2024 at 09:50:55