Favourite Prime Minister (2 Viewers)

[Korn]

More money would result in more officers to review more applications. Spending more money can result in greater efficiency and speed. However no one cares anyways because its refuegees who need speedy justice. No one cares about refugees.

Are you totally adverse to spending money where it may be needed? Or does your mind only go in one direction?

Thats bs if no one cared about refugees, what are u debating about

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Yes and I disagree with the government on that.

 

[Korn]

Most senate reviews see government departments as underfunded. It's a common call cry from carious departments. When they have less staff to deal with cases those cases simply get allocated to the people who are left.

Running an office of 20 lawyers will get more work done than an office of 5 lawyers running. It's pretty bloody simple.

Would running a law firm with 6 lawyers instead of 5 make much of a difference in output, as it would increase wages expense considerably (it is the same arguement for increase in funding to illegal immigrants)

 

[Generator]

I would say as long as it takes to prove their background and security risk level

For what it's worth, not all people arriving in Australia may be able to be identified in a Western sense (i.e., through official government records). Admittedly they are 'illegal' immigrants, but are other avenues of entry available to such people? I agree with the idea that there must be a period in which officials should do all that they can to determine a person's identity, yet there comes a time when enough is enough (be it to deport the person if that's practical and 'right', or to take a more humane approach with community detention of some sort).

Believe it or not, but we aren't likely to be innundated with boat people and the terrorist threat may well be overstated... A 'softer' approach will hardly hurt anyone, let alone those out in the bible belt of north west sydney.

 

[Korn]

For what it's worth, not all people arriving in Australia may be able to be identified in a Western sense (i.e., through official government records). Admittedly they are 'illegal' immigrants, but are other avenues of entry available to such people? I agree with the idea that there must be a period in which officials should do all that they can to determine a person's identity, yet there comes a time when enough is enough (and not necessarily in a 'ship the bastard out' sense).

Believe it or not, but we aren't likely to be innundated with boat people and the terrorist threat may well be overstated... A 'softer' approach will hardly hurt anyone, let alone those out in the bible belt of north west sydney.

I tend to agree that terrorists would not use that form of transport to get here, they would more likely use planes like in the US, its under less Suspicion that way

 

[Not-That-Bright]

I think it's easy for a terrorist to get through anyway, and more than likely a softer approach wouldn't hurt anyone.

 

[Generator]

I tend to agree that terrorists would not use that form of transport to get here, they would more likely use planes like in the US, its under less Suspicion that way

That wasn't my point... I was referring to the terrorist threat in general.

 

[Korn]

That wasn't my point... I was referring to the terrorist threat in general.

The terrorist threat although could be overstated, it is good reasons for us to be alert, as we are close friends with the US, and are close to other countries (well not really, but maybe....im tired, therefore not thinking best) that hate the US, and they have terrorist cells in those nations

 

[Vahl]

Vahl, labor policy is closer to the liberals than the greens.
If you believe that the greens are a better alternative than the current government, then you must believe that the greens are a better alternative than labor.
If so, why does it appear that you are a staunch labor supporter?

He is probably playing some sterotype that anyone is better then the current govt, that way it averts actually having to think

No, more like below:

The left faction in the ALP would be closer to the Greens than the Liberal party.

Julia gillard - Albanese - Carmen Lawence

Whilst the Greens are my preferred party, they are a fringe party. It is better to convince the major left party to rediscover itself than encourage conflict. ie change from within is better than change imposed from without.

 

[Vahl]

Mainstream Australia does not loose sleep over the refugee problem. We are exceptional in that we are actually HERE debating and discussing the issue. By doing so you have raised yourself above about 90% of the population in political knowledge and interest.

I survey taken indicated that less than half of the Australian population knew we had a written constitution. Also most people nominated the Supreme Court as above the HC. Only 18% of people had a basic understanding of the constitution.

Civic and political education is very very very poor in Australia. Australian's know nothing about politics. That does not boad well for democracy when we do not have the knowledge or interest to exercise our vote wisely.

Yes, in nations which have felt the realities of war, dictatorship etc the population are much more politically aware and active. In Germany, learning about government, and arguing politics are A RIGHT, ie, people DEMAND to debate and know about their legal system. It is a shame that Australian's do not get taught about our government structure etc.

I agree with Asquithian, in a democracy it is essential that people are politically aware. If this was the case then the current Federal Government would never have gotten away with all its lies, deceit, bullying of the public service etc. Worse, the flow of information around our democracy is likely to be further damaged as an unaware, uncaring public has granted Howard control of the senate and it is likely that media ownership laws will be amended to allow moguls almost complete control of the information that most people access.

 

[braindrainedAsh]

Fav Prime Minister was Gough Whitlam.... he made some radical changes for the better that we could still possibly be arguing for today....

In terms of government/legal education etc, I agree, I think it needs to be taught more in schools. I mean, I am doing a media law subject now and I am only just now getting to know about some of the stuff in the constitution and the structure of courts in Australia.... I had a vague idea about it before, mostly because I studied a commerce elective in yr 10 where we learnt a bit about law, but I think it is important stuff that should really be taught at school. People will never be interested in the government if they don't understand it.

As for the media ownership laws, eeeekkkk I know. If they are passed it will allow the rich and powerful more dominance over the mainstream media... plus you also have to remember that the ABC is facing funding cuts all the time.... this could lead to the "Fox News"-isation of Australia...... plus the less independent media owners there are, the less jobs there are for journalists, because one story can be used in like 5 different papers and online etc if they are all owned by the same company. Thus there may be less diverse voices being heard in the Australian media.

Not to mention the privatization of telstra...... ekkkkkkk

 

[Vahl]

typo signing*

the biggest gripes I have with the Liberal government is it's total disrespect for liberal democracy. Its total push towards removal democratic checks on power. It's push to limit federalism and the power of the states. It's TOTAL disregard for rights and welfare. It's ability to totally ignore minorities (governments by duty have to do there best to lesgislate for EVERYONE). It's disgusting method of processing refurgees (yeah 6 years!).

Oh and also arguing before the High Court that it should be able to use the races power in the Constitution to legislate to take away the rights of particular races - this is perhaps one of the most distasteful ventures of the Howard government.

Hmm, some other aspects of John Howards regime that are of concern for our 'democracy':
The Public Funding Rip-off

The lack of Federal Government Accountability
ie: avoiding answering legitimate questions from other representatives during question time, showing no respect for those not of the Liberal party.

Destroying our civil rights
ie: pushing for an erosion of the power of the senate, which has a tradition of protecting individual civil rights from the state(eg ASIO and counter terrorism law debates, Australia card etc)

Implanting a Liberal speaker when he had previously promised an independant one

Using question time to talk up the 'achievements' of the government ie questions from government backbenchers used to further avoid non-government questions

Attempting to dismantle senate estimates, the only system we have for forcing the government to have some accountability

Exercising excesses of power that cannot be corrected despite the balance intended for federal government through lies and avoiding answering questions, or shielding behind protecting 'corporate partners' etc.

etc etc. EASTER FRIDAY!

 

[Vahl]

In response to Asquithian and Ash I think that worse than the cross media laws are the reduction in the independance of the ABC, ie: encouraging it to become more commercial(therefore interested in profit and therefore right wing) and government appointing directors etc.

Furthermore in regards to personal freedoms is the reduction in the rights to free speech. eg Jack Roche and other 'terrorist' supporters etc. Not to mention Australia card proposals, Ruddock holding people without charge for long periods, ASIO being able to tap suspected 'deviants' phone and internet etc. Christ, we're becoming an Autocratic state.

 

[Vahl]

But it is good news to see that the viewing rates of ABC and SBS news have gone up. Mainly because channel 7 and channel 9 news is total trash. FFS channel 9 has started having 'issues' news whereby they discuss the days issues (opportunity to insert editorial bias)

Indeed, did you see Kerry Anne during the election campaign. She had a 'board' of people talking about how 'bad' the greens were. There was no attempt to hide the bias and no evidence was given as to why the greens were a bad party. The conversation was really like the below.

Kerry-Anne "Those greens are bad"

Person 1 " Oh yes, it would be terrible to vote for the greens"

Person 2 " There policies are bad"

Kerry-Anne "Yes there policies are bad"

Person 1 "Yes there policies are terrible"

Person 2 " I won't be voting for the greens"

Kerry-Anne " I won't be voting for the greens"


etc. etc. I couldn't believe it. If this is the future then we are in trouble.

In relation to the ABC and SBS. They are also being forced to support private enterprises. eg Showing the cricket etc on their NEWS programs and using corporate names in their news reports (ie advertising for companies). eg during the Sydney to Hobart the ABC and SBS reported that 'Scandia' this and 'Nicorette' that. They should screen this material out. Australian tax dollars should NOT go into the pockets of rich multinationals!

 

[Vahl]

In relation to John Howard promising an independent speaker read this:

An Independent Speaker: The PM's Comments
February 11, 2002
This is the text of a Media Statement from Simon Crean, Leader of the Opposition:
In 1996 when John Howard was elected Prime Minister, he said:

* You will never have a completely independent Speaker in this country unless the Opposition is prepared to come halfway and commit itself to not opposing the Speaker at a subsequent election.
(John Howard, ABC AM, Tuesday 2nd April 1996)

Prior to the election, he promised:

* I will have an independent Speaker, and the great weakness in Parliament over the last few years is that we have not had an effectively independent Speaker. You have had a Speaker who has not been truly independent of the Labor Party and if I become Prime Minister, I will adopt a system of having a completely independent Speaker who can be just as tough on me and my Ministers.
(John Howard, The Great Debate, Tuesday 25th February 1996)

Last week I wrote to the Prime Minister proposing a range of reforms to the Parliament, including a truly independent Speaker, drawn alternately from Labor and the Coalition regardless of who is in power. The Speaker would by agreement hold the position for two terms of the Parliament.

I look forward to working with the Prime Minister to help restore community confidence in our Federal Parliament.