The NEXT coming Oz election thread!

Morning, rjb

Ah, Mr Ruddock sort of leaves himself open to this sort of scrutiny. Anything he touches sort of turns to dubious sludge. :wink:

What are your concerns about David Kay? I'd be interested to know.

I think we've "moved on" since our election, too. This is pretty much a thread for monitoring current Oz political happenings of concern, these days. Naturally the lasting effects of the directions taken during the previous parliamentary term tend to linger! And of course, the re-building of the Labor Party (ALP) following it's disastrous defeat is critical to what happens next in this country. With the Liberals gaining control of the upper AND lower houses of federal parliament in June, thing are going to get very hot indeed! Some very dubious "reforms" are already being muted.

hi, msolga, The election in Oz was fun to watch, but the aftermath is probably not going to be pretty.
My German immigrant grandmother talked about how you would never want to see how bratwurst was actually made.
Mr Kay served us well, putting the brakes on the WMD notion and exposing the prisoner abuse. But, and perhaps its the onset of old age in johnboy, there is a certain cyncism setting in about him with me. I can't point to any particular statement but I think his ego may be getting ahead of the facts.
-rjb-

rjb

Hey, I can cope with the ego stuff ... so long as he gets the facts straight! There is precious little of that around in these days of spin, spin, spin ... Give me a facts person any day!

"My German immigrant grandmother talked about how you would never want to see how bratwurst was actually made."

Indeed! A wise woman! Ugly process!

The aftermath of the last election has NOT been pretty. One Labor leader down, in record time .... NEXT!
BUT, ever the eternal optimist, I predict that if a government tells enough outright lies, that sooner or later, eventually it will catch up with them. It's the waiting for that to happen & hoping that the opposition will say & do the right things in the meantime that's hard .... <sigh>

I'm still getting over the positive spin on Abbott's adopted child. Bet if it had have happened to Latham they'd be screaming 'Teen sex'! 'Refusal to accept responsibility' et al. I get the feeling Rupert M and Kerry P prefer Abbott as the next PM, Sorry peter.

Oh, and just the mention of Ruddock's name makes my face go all catsbum.

Damn. Yall have a new plot twist everyday! Abbott (health minister?) gets his tie straightened each morning by someone who turns out to be his son?! Oz: fact or fiction?

BASTARDS! When will they leave poor old Auntie alone?

ABC board appointment sparks controversy
February 24, 2005 - 9:10PM/the AGE

One of the ABC's harshest critics, newspaper columnist and former lawyer Janet Albrechtsen, is about to join the national broadcaster's board.

Ms Albrechtsen's five-year appointment outraged Labor and former ABC presenter David Marr, who was locked in a public battle over plagiarism with the columnist two years ago.

But Communications Minister Helen Coonan defended the appointment, saying she had personally suggested the columnist's name to cabinet and believed Ms Albrechtsen would bring a variety of skills and diversity to the ABC.

Ms Albrechtsen publicly attacked the ABC just two years ago after the Media Watch program, hosted by Mr Marr, questioned whether she was guilty of plagiarism in some of her columns about Islamic gang rape problems in Sydney.

Media Watch accused Ms Albrechtsen of using and twisting the words of French and Danish experts to support her claims that the rapes were a result of Islamic values.

In turn, Ms Albrechtsen accused the program of using "reprehensible means to shut down debate and smear the reputations of those with opinions it dislikes".

"It is a parody of upholding journalistic standards," she wrote in 2002.

Ms Albrechtsen was also the subject of notorious comments by former opposition leader Mark Latham, who used parliamentary privilege to call her a "skanky ho" - an American slang term meaning "smelly whore".

Former Media Watch host David Marr described Ms Albrechtsen's appointment as baffling, saying she had never apologised over the issues Media Watch raised in 2002.

"Whatever the skills are that she is supposed to bring to the ABC they don't include good research or good ideas," he told AAP.

"I have never detected in her work the slightest interest in public broadcasting, except to attack it for doing its job."

Opposition communications spokesman Stephen Conroy said Ms Albrechtsen's appointment showed the government stacking the ABC with its political mates.

"Labor believes that there should be an open and transparent process for making appointments to the ABC board," he said.

"Vacancies should be advertised and there should be clear merit-based selection criteria."

Senator Coonan said Ms Albrechtsen's battle with Media Watch had nothing to do with her new board role.

"There's certainly no agenda on the part of the government and I would think there's no agenda on her part or she would have hardly accepted the appointment," Senator Coonan told ABC radio.

"She's one of a number of directors and I've formed the view that she'll make a very valuable contribution."

Ms Albrechtsen said she could make a valuable contribution to the board, such as her interest in current affairs and issues she had written about.

"And they're issues I think of relevance to a national broadcaster," she told ABC TV.

Before joining The Australian, Ms Albrechtsen worked for Fairfax newspapers, including The Australian Financial Review and The Sydney Morning Herald and Quadrant magazine.

She was also a solicitor with Freehill, Hollingdale and Page where she specialised in banking, finance, corporate and securities law.

Senator Coonan has also reappointed current ABC board member, barrister John Gallagher, for another three years.

Lobby group Friends of the ABC accused the Howard government of stacking the broadcaster's board with political sympathisers.

"Without exception, this government's appointees to the board have come from the conservative side of politics," Friends of the ABC (Vic) spokeswoman Glenys Stradijot said.

"Only the staff-elected director has extensive public broadcasting experience.

"The government is abusing its responsibility to the community by stacking the board of the national broadcaster with political sympathisers."

Ms Stradijot said the government had shown "disdain" for the national broadcaster by appointing one of its most strident critics.

"It appears the government's criteria for appointment to the ABC board is opposition to the broadcaster's healthy operation," she said.

I find it hard to believe that ANYONE could consider the mad monk a vote winner, hinge, no matter how much the conservatives might fancy his agenda.

As for the famous reunion with the long lost son ... Oh, Please!

Yep, it's true: More Oz troops for Iraq! <sigh>

They hate the ABC - and have been attempting to gut it by means both public and secret since they came to office.

Seems they have now grabbed one of the "Anything non-PC is good" people to assist in this process.

You would think a commitment to public broadcasting, and decent journalism, would be a pre-requisite for the Board, no?

Latham's comments from "coward's castle" were disgusting too, though.

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrr.........

Man, I am grumpy these last few days.

Thought the young fella was a camera or sound operator???


Small world, certainly!

It got saturation coverage for a few days here. Talk about a slow news week.

Funnily enough the guys friends say it was straight after the election he decided to find his birh parents - why then, he's 27, thought that would have come to him a bit earlier. I smell antichoice conspiracy. But I am a true lefty.

And Deb and Olga, I share your pain over the ABC stuff, it goes to such pains to be balanced (unlike the Packer/Murdoch owned media) and still the Libs hate it because it presents them in a bad light. Well if an objective reading says you smell, then you smell.

I'm sure Albrechtsen will push for more repeats of old british comedies - it's about all they can afford now. There's always the Beeb world service, I guess.

Anne Summers & an intriguing insight into the heart-warming reunion between the mad monk & his laid-back son:

How the media adopted Abbott's feel-good spin
February 25, 2005/the AGE

There is a less flattering side to the story of Tony Abbott meeting his son, writes Anne Summers.

Has Health Minister Tony Abbott's media manipulation of the story of his reunion with the son he gave up for adoption 27 years ago irrevocably altered the terms of the debate on abortion?

Judging by the comments I have been hearing all week, a lot of people think so. And many of them are angry and dispirited by what they see as the cynical exploitation for political gain of matters that ought best to have remained private.

Abbott claims the first words his son said to him were: "Thanks for having me." For someone who has spent months successfully putting abortion back onto the political agenda such words must have seemed heaven-sent. "It was a great relief," Abbott writes in The Bulletin this week, "that my son's attitude was not resentment at being given up for adoption but gratitude at being given his chance at life."

The minister is now able to claim the moral high ground on abortion in a way that was not possible previously. This is not ideology, he can now argue, this is a life saved. By implication, everyone can do what he did. How much has this increased the degree of difficulty for pro-choicers who want to maintain the status quo?

Recently I attended a screening of Vera Drake, the moving Mike Leigh film about the backyard abortionist with a heart of gold who is ultimately imprisoned for "helping" women in trouble. As the film ended, there was the sound of sobs and snuffles but there was something else too: a discernible anger that we might be forced to return to the days of illegal and dangerous abortion. As the lights came up, you could hear Tony Abbott's name reverberate around the cinema. People, mostly women, were cursing him.

But this week Tony Abbott has become a sympathetic figure. He has confessed to being an inadequate partner to his pregnant girlfriend. He has traipsed through the TV channels, self-deprecatingly shrugging his shoulders, charmingly admitting that he was "callow" and expressing gratitude that he now has a second chance to do the fatherly thing for his adult son.

The subtext in all this of course is that none of this would be happening if Tony Abbott and his girlfriend, Kathy Donnelly, had chosen abortion back in 1977 instead of giving the baby up for adoption. And, of course, who would not agree when we look at lovely, laid-back Daniel?

But this is not the point. Not all adoption stories have such seemingly happy endings. The real story of the week was how Abbott managed the media to ensure the story got out with a spin that made him look good. And gave a big leg-up to his mission to end abortion in Australia.

Tony Abbott has characterised what happened back in 1977 as being the mutual choice of a couple of Catholic teenagers too immature to marry. The reality was different. Abbott has admitted he was "callow" (I think he meant "callous") in going on a planned holiday just after they learned Kathy was pregnant. What he has not said was that Kathy Donnelly wanted him to marry her, that he refused and, as a result, even though she was seven months pregnant, she dumped him.

The whole story is recounted in considerable depth and with a great deal of sensitivity to all parties in this week's Bulletin magazine. Journalist Julie-Anne Davies got a tip some weeks ago about the Health Minister being reunited with his son. She approached Abbott, who confirmed it but asked her to hold off publishing the story to give him time to talk to relevant people. The magazine could have run the story last week but agreed to the minister's request. He then betrayed them.

Last Sunday afternoon, just after Davies had filed her story, Tony Abbott rang his good friend Piers Akerman, rabid columnist for The Daily Telegraph and alerted him to the fact that The Bulletin was running with the story on Wednesday. Late that afternoon Kathy Donnelly rang Davies, extremely upset, to say she had had a call from Akerman. Abbott has told The Bulletin that he had no idea that Akerman would run with the story the next day; he was reminded by The Bulletin of the deal they had and claims to have rung Akerman a second time and also to have spoken to his editor and asked them not to publish.

Once The Bulletin realised they were being gazumped, they gave stablemate Channel Nine a heads-up and dropped enough of Davies' story onto the magazine's website to be able to claim it as their scoop.

The next morning readers of News Ltd papers around the country enjoyed the unusual treat of a folksy front-page story by Piers Akerman - his first cover story since 2001 - the spin on which immediately set the tone for the radio and television frenzy that followed. The story stressed the "thank you for having me", the supposedly mutual decision to adopt and the extraordinary coincidence of Abbott's son working in Parliament House. It was a heart-warming and feel-good rendition of a story that was told with somewhat more complexity in The Bulletin.

But on Monday, while The Bulletin was still writing headlines and laying out its package of stories, Tony Abbott was doing the media rounds transforming himself in the public eye from political head-kicker into father of the year.

The minister pleaded for people not to use his son in the abortion debate, thus making the link himself. He did not have to say this. He did not have to say anything. He could have claimed it was a private matter and refused to talk to the media. He did not.

Author Anne Summers was an adviser on women's policy in the Hawke and Keating governments.

~

"Thanks for having me."!?
More like: "Thanks for exploiting me for your own ends."!

I heard Janet Albrechtsen talking on AM this morning. When asked what she expected from the ABC news & current affairs programs she replied "fair & balanced" coverage of politics. Like Fox in the US, maybe? Isn't that Fox's claim to fame?

Crikey! on Janet A & her ABC Board venture:

Oh Janet, what have you done?

Poor Janet Albrechtsen is probably already regretting her decision to accept John Howard's ill-considered offer of a seat on the ABC board.

The free-wheeling columnist is now gagged and can no longer say anything publicly about the ABC, a favourite target of her attacks. Apart from the cash, she won't get much else as one director has little power, especially in such a workers' collective like the ABC.

The former corporate lawyer will now be under much greater public scrutiny and will be regularly attacked for being a government stooge. Similarly, those serious plagiarism charges levelled by Media Watch will be raked over time and time again.

For instance, John Fahey's former chief of staff Greg Barns has gone on the attack with the following email to Crikey:

Janet Albrechtsen's husband, lawyer John O'Sullivan, has also been the recipient of the Howard government's largesse. O'Sullivan was the government's legal adviser in Telstra 1 when he was partner at Freehills.

I recall attending a lunch with O'Sullivan in 1999 when I was running the republic campaign - a nice French restaurant opposite MLC Tower in Sydney. When I launched into an attack on Howard's destructive tactics in interfering in the republic campaign he jumped to the PM's defence with some vehemence.

Unusual I thought, given my previous dealings with O'Sullivan revealed a mild-mannered innocous chap. But then he is obviously fuelled by the barracking of his wife for Australia's most conservative PM in history.

Workers' pay to be slashed, say states
By Nick O'Malley, Louise Dodson and Gerard Noonan
February 26, 2005/the SMH

The Labor states have vowed to fight the Federal Government's planned workplace changes all the way to High Court, saying they will create a bleak industrial future in which Australians rely on tips for a living wage.

Replying to a speech by the federal Workplace Relations Minister, Kevin Andrews, on plans to strip the powers of the Australian Industrial Relations Commission and set up a single national system, a war council of state ministers said they would fight not only in the High Court but in the "court of public opinion".

The ACTU president, Sharan Burrow, promised a year-long campaign against the changes.

"Many of the policy changes, the radical changes suggested by minister Andrews, would horrify the typical Australian family," the NSW Industrial Relations Minister, John Della Bosca, said. "We intend to win first and foremost in the court of public opinion."

In his speech to the Committee for the Economic Development of Australia yesterday, Mr Andrews said the changes would:  Bring 85 to 90 per cent of workers into a single national regime;  Use the corporations power of the constitution to take over state industrial relations systems;  Change how the minimum wage is set;  Reduce the role of third parties, including unions and the Industrial Relations Commission;  Increase mediation between employees and employers; and  Cut award working conditions.

"Responsible government is about making the necessary reform so that in a world of relentless competition, with a rapidly ageing population and looming demographic challenges, generations to come will have jobs and a high standard of living," he said.

The states have received contradictory advice on how they might challenge Canberra, but they have not conceded it can take over state systems under the corporations power.

Queensland's Industrial Relations Minister, Tom Barton, said: "We run the very real risk of having an American-style minimum wage - which is currently about $US7 an hour - where people, especially in hospitality and tourism, rely on tips to feed their families."

The NSW Premier, Bob Carr, went further, warning of wages as low as $3 an hour. Victoria supports a single national system but its minister, Rob Hulls, warned Mr Andrews: "He is mad if he thinks he can mount a hostile takeover."

Federal Labor's industrial relations spokesman, Stephen Smith, warned of a return to "balaclavas and alsatians". The Business Council of Australia supported Mr Andrews but still wants a big reduction - and eventual abolition - of awards.

Ms Burrow said: "It seems incredible that we would see a hundred years of a fair system that has underpinned one of the richest economies in the world [changed] because business says it doesn't have enough power. I don't think any Australian is going to accept that."

More on that "recent" request (& decision) to send 450 more Australian troops to Iraq :


Govt already aware of troop need: claim
February 26, 2005 - 11:44AM/the AGE

The federal government was aware in December of a possible call for more Australian troops to be sent to Iraq, the commander of Australian forces in Iraq said.

Prime Minister John Howard last week announced 450 Australian troops would replace Dutch troops protecting Japanese engineers in southern Iraq from May.

Mr Howard has maintained that he had not decided on the troop deployment until late January when the government saw how well the Iraq elections had gone and received an invitation from the British and Japanese governments.

Air Commodore Greg Evans said Australian officers based at the British divisional headquarters in Basra had heard talk about Australia being invited to send more troops as early as November last year.

"I started to hear around perhaps late November-early December that there was a bit of concern that the Netherlands would really be leaving when they said they'd leave (in March)," Air Commodore Evans told ABC radio.

"Our British colleagues started talking about it, we overheard that and around December we started hearing speculation from the Brits that perhaps Australia might be able to increase its commitment and come and give a hand down there.

"And I think government was first approached shortly after Senator Hill was over here (in December).

"So we saw a series of graduated approaches from local staff contact up to eventually, I understand, the two prime ministers (of Britain and Australia) spoke about it."

Air Commodore Evans said Senator Hill was aware of a possible request from the British when he visited London in January.

"At these sorts of diplomatic meetings it's always best to know what is going to be discussed and to be able to think about it beforehand ... he certainly was appreciative of us telling him that this might come up," he said.

Air Commodore Evans said Australia's task in southern Iraq would differ to its work around Baghdad.

"It will be quite different because it will be with the purpose of specifically handing over a province to Iraqi security control when we leave," he said.

He said the task would not be as dangerous either.

"Baghdad is quite dangerous. Baghdad has seen 7,300 serious attacks - mortars, rockets, bombs, car bombs ... in the same period the Al Muthanna province has seen just over 40," he said.

He said it would be foolish to say there were no risks, however the troops would be very well protected.

An Australian reconnaissance team will travel to Iraq in the next few weeks to pave the way for the main contingent.

I couldn't agree more with this letter to the editor in today's paper. Would Howard say NO to Bush in response to ANY request? :

Follow France's lead

As a nation we have rolled over to George Bush every time he looks in our direction. The war in Iraq, snubbing the UN, refusing to back Kyoto, the free trade agreement, etc. And now more troops to defend the Japanese.

Our sole reason for following the US into the war was to show our obedience. To disagree with the Americans would be to lose them as a "friend" and ally.

France, by contrast, told them where to go in no uncertain terms; and where was George Bush this week? In France, throwing a lavish dinner for its president and carefully choosing his language so as to not upset the French. He doesn't have to worry about upsetting the Aussies, just "here boy" will do. Sometimes you do yourself more harm by playing the dependable lap-dog than standing up for your nation's interests.