Oceania The *OFFICIAL* Political Discussion Thread

Telstra MAKES money. How is that a burden that should be offloaded?

If services are bad, then do you expect a private company to make the necessary capital investments? Not if it makes the bottom line look bad.
At least a public company isnt so concerned with profit.

What was required a few years back was a Telstra practices REFORM, not sale.

 

If it's making money then there is no reason in my opinion why it shouldnt be sold off. If it's able to sustain itself, sure. We just need regulation.

Australia Post, on the other hand, is an example of a public asset that shouldnt be sold off, because it is basically on its own in its 'market', plus it runs at a loss.

 

Liberal - of all the parties, I would have to vote with these guys if there was an election tomorrow. I do think Howard is getting a bit long in the tooth (he's pretty much one of the last 'old thinking' politicians in Parliament now). I'm not sure I'm too keen on Costello though (I HATE his smug smile - uggh). But overall I think the other parties are a lot worse.

Labor - last year if you had asked me what I would have thought of Crean as leader I would have considered it a sick joke, but now I'm starting to come around. He might not be the most charismatic leader but his attempts at some reform within the party are a good step forward. However the opposing factiosn within the party badly need to be rectified before I would even consider voting for them.

National - on a Federal level, these guys should just merge with the Liberals IMHO. As a country voter I have lost all faith in the party - even the Liberals seem to be in tune with 'the bush' than these guys who supposedly are meant to represent 'the bush'. Their dropping numbers in Parliament (the Liberals helped themselves to a few National seats in the last election) are making them less and less relevant in the federal scene - only the Coalition agreement keeps them in any real power.

Democrats - diddled and dawdled for 20 years until Meg Less came in. She did a few things (good and bad, depending on your point of view) then got kicked out in favour of yet another leader who seems to diddle and dawdle. I have to agree with some previous comments in regards to Natasha - she's no leader I'm afraid (though she is pretty cute for a politician ).

Greens - if they would tone down some of their more radical ideas (at the moment the Greens would have us all using horse-drawn carts if they got their way) they would make a good alternative party, but it's too early yet to make any good assumptions. Their better than expected election result seems to be more the result of backlash against Labor than actual increased support for the Greens, but we'll have to wait and see.

One Nation - these guys still around? They had the opportunity to take the political arena by storm but infighting within the party as well as extreme media criticism brought them down, as well as all the court injunctions brought against them. I think the real problem lay in that they attracted every free radical and thinker within the country and in the end they just couldn't work together. Still had some interesting ideas though, as well as revealed some dirty tactics used by the major parties (like the Liberal/Labor backdoor deal of making preferential voting compulsory to favor themselves).

Anything else?

 

Crean's new "let's not take islands out of the migration zone" scheme is going to seriously backfire on him. His reasoning is that migrants will now head straight for Australia. That's true, but we've got a better chance of catching them then if we didn't take certain islands out of the zone. He also claims that he's going to block the legislation (the Democrats and Greens, of course, agree). Probably lost himself an election right there

Speaking of blocking bills, does anyone know what happened with their plans to block parts of the budget? hmph

 

I think i will bring balance to this political topic.

Lefty here. two party preffered, if there were to be an election tommorow, i would have to (well, firstly, grow a couple of years) vote ALP. they are falling apart, but i would rather castrate myself than vote liberal.

i am actually quite extreme left wing. you guys do not know the benifits of socialism.

 

Should we bring up the Tampa processing results debate in here?

Less than 10% of the 400+ asylum seekers that came in on the Tampa, have been granted asylum. And that's from the UN investigations.

Sounds like the ALP and Liberal stance at the last election was justified.

 

you guys do not know the benifits of socialism.

That's because it doesn't work.

 

Uh oh...we're going to have our own little Cold War in here, aren't we?

 

Less than 10% of the 400+ asylum seekers that came in on the Tampa, have been granted asylum. And that's from the UN investigations.

These people left their country (specifically in reference to Afghanistan) prior to the war on terrorism. Now that the Taliban is out of power and foreign troops are present, Afghanistan is considered safe.

Therefore, this result does not necessarily mean that the remainder of asylum seekers were not legitimate, merely that they are not considered refugees now.

 

That's what the Human Rights Observers are trotting out, but the truth of the matter is that 10% is about the same number of genuine refugees as any other asylum seekers that arrived here over the years.

 

personally I edon't give a crap what the UN says.

They are a bunch of unelected bureaucrats, and they should have no place what soever in the determination of our immigration policy.

If they want to do something, they should go and annoy some other country whose criticism is warranted.

 

but the truth of the matter is that 10% is about the same number of genuine refugees as any other asylum seekers that arrived here over the years.

True. I still think it's dangerous to assume that all of the remainder are terrorists or people who couldn't be bothered to wait in line. We don't know the specifics.

They are a bunch of unelected bureaucrats, and they should have no place what soever in the determination of our immigration policy.

Unelected, yes, but they are still representatives of other countries. International diplomacy is important considering how much we trade. They shouldn't determine our imigration policy, but we still have to live up to the treaties we have signed and we do have a reputation to uphold if we want international trade and a say in security matters.

 

To be very frank, I think that in comparison to other nations, Australia takes VERY good care of our refugees.

There are so many more refugees in other countries. But we dont see the UN demanding that Iran give it's refugees school vouchers and permanent welfare etc.

 

"All I have to say is this: I am all for a revolution. I'd love to see our government overthrown and a replaced with a freely elected democracy."

- Bill Hicks.

 

There is little point in having immigration policy if you'll make exceptions here and there.
As for the UN, NO ONE IS ABOVE JUDGEMENT! The UN member and bureaucrats, as well as NPO's like Amnesty, try for a standard, which the West thinks it's above. That is why I'm hopping mad that that idiot dimwit bozo ex-cokehead President Bush won't commit to the war crimes tribunal, and thus we won't. 'Cause he's scared of the International Community prosecuting American troops? **** you Bush, you commit War Crimes you ARE a War Criminal. Simple as that. (Watch his furrowed brow and beady little eyes as he attempts to comprehend last statement... and fails).
Back to the Refugee issue, why the hell are we so taken aback if our human rights record is questioned? Same as the USA, when Amnesty condemned capital punishment. We are not above human rights abuses, be it with indigenous peoples or refugees. China may have human rights abuses, but how can we damn them? Until we're perfect, it's only hypocrisy. I'm not saying I'm 100% pro-refugee, I'm not. As I said, why have a policy if it's goings to be selective?

As for the ALP/Liberal parties, their stances, their leaders who possess the collective charisma of a house fern, to hell with them. I'm proudly Democrat-ic!

E_S

 

China may have human rights abuses, but how can we damn them? Until we're perfect, it's only hypocrisy.

How you can compare a restrictive immigration policy to a government (no, a dictatorship) which oppresses its citizens daily is beyond me.

 

Well he just did

 

Because Refugee rights are almost always linked to Human Rights. In fact, they are always. Refugees are either fleeing widespread human rights abuses, or are suffering human rights abuses when they arrive in a country - and I don't mean here - and it's narrow-minded to assume human rights abuses are the thing of nations like China. Until we can be totally sure of the refugee situation - without a biased media or lying government - we can't ever criticise other nations.

So there!

E_S

 

^ So what is your opinion on out current policy?

 

There are so many more refugees in other countries. But we dont see the UN demanding that Iran give it's refugees school vouchers and permanent welfare etc.

All UN treaties are voluntary. Iran has not ratified two of the five main human rights treaties and is therefore under no obligation to live up to their standards. Australia has ratified all human rights treaties, and we therefore are required to, unless we withdraw our agreement.

 

For over a week I thought I had killed this thread.

Anyways ...

I still think it's dangerous to assume that all of the remainder are terrorists or people who couldn't be bothered to wait in line. We don't know the specifics.

I have to agree with imzadi on this point. It should be remembered that whilst these people may have been rejected the UN Human Rights comminssion has stated that most still have the right to appeal, which (to me at least) suggests their status isn't necessarily as black and white as a lot of critics like to paint it.

 

I still think it's dangerous to assume that all of the remainder are terrorists

Who does?

or people who couldn't be bothered to wait in line.

The wait in "line" is very similar to the amount of time it takes for a family to save up for the trip on the boat over here.

 

I still think it's dangerous to assume that all of the remainder are terrorists

Who does?

No one here specifically. But there is a belief that refugees from the Middle East could very well be terrorists and therefore the collective whole of Middle Eastern refugees are regarded suspisciously. Again, I'm not referring to anyone specifically.

or people who couldn't be bothered to wait in line.

The wait in "line" is very similar to the amount of time it takes for a family to save up for the trip on the boat over here.

I hadn't heard that. It's a wonder then.

 

How is this for a joke: Labor in Victoria!!!! The socialist faction has become the largest, and given Crean the ass heh heh heh

Doesn't Victoria have an election coming up?

 

I hope so

Tay