Now back to the dyke on a bike, puffing up the nooks and crannies at the bottom end of the nation.”

One of my pet peeves is the way that some people in the public eye are lacking in any sense of humour and how they almost go out of their way to be offended when someone takes the piss out of them, even when that ribbing is is entirely without animus. This is even worse in a country like my homeland where the politically correct have manged to have some of their wacky ideas enshrined in law.
Over here during the Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras a highlight of the parade is the “dikes on bikes” where lesbian bikers show of their machines and themselves. The epithet “Dyke” certainly does not have to be construed as being a pejorative. So imaging how stupid it sounds that an openly lesbian TV presenter should take offence at being described as a “Dyke on a Bike” in relation to a TV program where she is cycling around Britain?

Clare Balding in north Devon in episode 1 of her new BBC show Britain by Bike Photograph: Bbc

Balding, who is gay, complained to the newspaper’s editor, John Witherow, about the tone of the article. But, she said, she was then even more horrified by his response.

Gill had written: “Some time ago, I made a cheap and frankly unnecessary joke about Clare Balding looking like a big lesbian. And afterwards somebody tugged my sleeve to point out that she is a big lesbian.”

After a mock apology, he continued: “Now back to the dyke on a bike, puffing up the nooks and crannies at the bottom end of the nation.”

Balding complained to Witherow. She was then “appalled” to receive a reply stating: “In my view some members of the gay community need to stop regarding themselves as having a special victim status and behave like any other sensible group that is accepted by society.

“Not having a privileged status means, of course, one must accept occasionally being the butt of jokes. A person’s sexuality should not give them a protected status.

I hope that this signals an end to the trepidation and fear that has greeted such spurious complaints in the past because as any sensible person knows it is never just the words that use that matter as much as the intention of the speaker. I am reminded of the importance having a sense of humour and frankly those who lack such a thing should avoid any sort of life in the limelight until they can find the good grace to appreciate that they will be mocked even more if they take self righteous  umbridge   at some good humoured and affectionate piss taking.

Cheers Comrades

The sound of the half time whistle and the gnashing of teeth from Saint Kilda fans, or the turning of the tide

As I lay under the blankets contemplating a new day I heard two things on my bedside radio the first is that the coalition has taken the lead in an opinion poll and I invite my readers who support the reelection of the Labor government to read it:

In a stunning reversal of fortunes for the Coalition after a disastrous week for the government, support for both the Prime Minister and Labor has plummeted; the Coalition now leads Labor on a two-party-preferred basis by 52 per cent to 48 per cent.

This represents a 6 percentage point two-party swing against the government since the last Herald poll a week ago, and a 4.7 point two-party swing against the government since the last election.

If the result were replicated uniformly in the election on August 21, the Coalition would pick up 28 seats; 11 more than it needs to form government in its own right.

The poll shows Labor’s primary vote has gone into freefall, plunging six points in a week to 36 per cent while the Coalition’s primary vote rose four points to 45 per cent. The Greens remained steady at 12 per cent.

These numbers are similar to the levels of early June which precipitated the move against Kevin Rudd’s leadership.

The 58 per cent to 42 per cent lead that Ms Gillard enjoyed over Mr Abbott among women voters only a week ago has disappeared and the female vote for Labor and the Coalition is now statistically even at 49-51.

Ms Gillard’s approval rating slumped five points to 51 per cent and her disapproval rating rose six points to 39 per cent. Mr Abbott’s approval rose six points to 49 per cent and his disapproval fell six points to 45 per cent.

Ms Gillard’s 21-point lead as preferred prime minister was slashed by 13 points to 49-41. Her rating fell six points and Mr Abbott’s rose seven points.

The only good news for the government was that 69 per cent expect it will win the election -

The second thing I read was that Essendon thrashed the Saints Now I know the later result probably upsets some true believers more that the election polling because there has been no full time siren for the election but it seems that one thing can be taken from this and that is the simple fact that when a government is on the nose it does not matter how much money their party spends on advertising, It does not matter how much they get their friends in the union movement try to try to reanimate the corpse of WorkChoices(which is dead buried and cremated) the Australian voters will trust their noses. we are getting close to half time now and with the man on the bike nudging ahead we can only expect that things will get very down and dirty in the second half.

Cheers Comrades

And one final thought for the day I wonder If Keven realizes that the nature of the ailment that has found him spending a weekend in hospital has a certain poetic justice?

She’s back for more but who would want it?

Sex party names its latest Senate candidate?

Thank Christ for this – I needed the larfs. 

Cheryl Kernot – the flip-flop Democrats traitor and Gareth Evans humper - has stuck her hand up for another crack at the limelight and is standing as an independent senator for New South Wales.

Ms Kernot says she decided to make another run for politics after being encouraged to do so by members of the public:

A statement released by Ms Kernot today says she plans to run under the banner “Change politics” on a joint ticket with former Manly councillor Simon Cant.

Yeah right. WTF could Chezza change, someone’s bedsheets? Give me a break.

Tony worships outside his normal faith in the church of the four stick goal

Well I think I have worked out just why my friend Ray is so concerned about the possibility that Tony Abbott might get the keys to the lodge. It has nothing to do with his politics But it has every thing to do with the leader of the opposition’s religious affiliation. You see what it boils down to is that Tony, like your’s truly ,is not a devotee of the Faith that requires four goal posts at each end of the footy pitch.

Tony Abbott tries to show off his Australian football skills. Picture: Ray Strange Source: The Australian

It was a brave spectacle that ended in predictable disaster, causing even the well-behaved Essendon players to roar out laughing as a red-faced Abbott moaned “this is not my sport”.

The stated reason for Abbott’s visit to Windy Hill — in the Labor heartland of Maribyrnong in Melbourne’s northwest — was that he wanted to learn more about the club’s innovative programs to mentor and develop indigenous players from around Australia.

He asked questions about the program as he toured the club’s hall of fame and met some of the club’s indigenous players.

He marvelled at how high they jumped and asked questions about their boots and anything else he could think of, while all the time reminding club officials that he harked from rugby stock.

His AFL knowledge was rusty at best. “What games do you still play here?” he asked club chief executive Ian Robson, despite the fact that Essendon stopped playing its games at Windy Hill a decade ago.

He may not be a follower of the “right” faith Ray but he is obviously trying to show it the proper respect so maybe you could soften your objections just a little?
Then again I have some vague notion that there is no love lost between the devotees of the Essendon sect and those of the Saint Kilda tribe so Tony’s efforts may be in vain when it comes to  a particular AFL enthusiast  after all.
Cheers Comrades

“If he can’t have it, no one else will,” Mr Latham said. “There’s also a cowardice to it.”

I seems that I am not the only one to point the finger at Kevin Rudd and suggest that he is the source of Laurie Oakes’ leak, Mark Latham is as well:

And he said Mr Rudd was humiliated by being left on the back bench by Ms Gillard.

“If he can’t have it, no one else will,” Mr Latham said. “There’s also a cowardice to it.”

He said an angry Mr Rudd had clearly “got on the blower to Laurie Oakes” with his allegations.

Mr Latham said he’d been critical of his opponents, “but at least I’m putting my name to it”.

He said he was convinced Mr Rudd had leaked sensitive information. “It’s the snake’s way,” he said. “It’s unmanly and beneath an Aussie bloke to act this way.”

Mr Latham said it would have been much better for Labor to have made Mr Rudd foreign minister or defence minister and sent him to Afghanistan.

On climate change, Mr Latham said Ms Gillard’s plan for a people’s assembly was a cop-out and a political tactic that came from former Bob Carr staffers.

Such assemblies had their place but not on an issue as important as climate change, he said.

But Mr Latham said Labor could still win the election, and voters would give a first-time Labor government a second chance.

He believed the government would be returned with about the same majority: “Labor hasn’t got a lot to worry about.”

There really is no other (former) cabinet member who would have both the knowledge and the motivation to do the dirty on their party like Kevin. But  I do think that Latham’s  claim about Labor deserving  a second chance is an attempt to “put lippy on a turd” and one that won’t be shared by the voting public.

Cheers Comrades

Labor can’t stop the leaks and they can’t stop the boats either.

As I said in a comment yesterday the issue of leaks from a highly placed source within the Labor party is one that just won’t go away. Perusing the major news sources today see’s that it has not faded at all ,the Fairfax press has a piece about Wayne Swan conceding that the party can’t stop the leaks:

Who is the shadowy figure whose damaging leaks are derailing Julia Gillard's campaign? Graphic: Liam Phillips

Hours after Prime Minister Julia Gillard gave a spirited response to leaked claims that she opposed paid parental leave and questioned a pension increase, Mr Swan admitted last night that ”we can’t control leaks and I certainly can’t predict where they’re coming from.

”But I’ve learnt one thing in politics: I don’t always follow the obvious explanation and/or the conspiracy theory.”

Of course no one really believes that there are not party peons madly trying to find some proof of who Laurie Oakes’ deep throat actually is. But Blind Freddy who has only the most rudimentary detective skills will be pointing the finger at Kevin Rudd. Who else has any motivation to so undermine Gillard? Even if one of those smoking guns were to be found then what? The party can only lose by any sort of public blood letting at this stage of the campaign and the Deep Throat must know this gives him an invulnerability of a sort. And of course if it is Rudd himself he also knows that he has absolutely nothing  left to lose.

The Labor party has almost since its inception been deeply divided and prone to the most vicious infighting which it has occasionally managed to rise above. I think that the leaks are indicative a of a party where the unreconciled internal conflicts have got out of hand. A party where far to many of  its people have lost sight of the fact that they currently have  a more important task than settling internal squabbles and that is governing the country with skill and competence. they have been utterly woeful at it as the schmozzle over  the unending stream of boats conclusively proves.

Way back in the early days of this government I recognized the folly  of Rudd changing the ground rules for boat people Anyone who checks the post I link will see a couple of compassionate lefties in denial of what was to come precisely as I predicted .We now have a very substantial problem and one which the current government is entirely unable to stop. Greg Sheridan gets to the heart of the matter with his piece in the OZ he succinctly points out that although Gillard has moved closer to the successful and effective plan first enunciated by the Howard government and revived by Abbott. Gillard just does not go far enough to provide an effective scheme to deal with this problem.

But the respective plans of the government and opposition are worlds apart. And here it is the opposition that has the infinitely more realistic plan, the credibility and will to implement it, and the broad internal unity to pursue the plan in government. The Labor Party, though quiescent in Gillard’s present symbolic toughness, is deeply divided over the issue and lacks a realistic plan.

Should the Gillard government be re-elected, the boatpeople issue will continue to plague it and Labor’s internal divisions will come much more strongly to the fore.

There is no equivalence between Gillard’s proposed regional processing centre in East Timor and Abbott’s proposed centre on Nauru. For a start, the geography is radically different. No one will intentionally sail to Nauru. It’s just too far away. Secondly, its purpose is designed to prevent people-smugglers from being able to achieve for their clients the ultimate prize: permanent residency in Australia. It is only about solving the Australian problem. Illegal immigrants would be sent there and processed. They would be treated humanely and all their human rights observed. They would be free to go to any country that would have them, or free at any time to go home. Of course there is a small element of semi-bluff. If the boats stopped absolutely, then a future Abbott government might decide, as the Howard government did, to exercise a special act of generosity and allow some of the people to come to Australia. But that would only be after some years, and after the boats had absolutely stopped.

At the same time, an Abbott government would institute temporary protection visas without family reunion rights. Despite the braying and self-regarding protests of the Malcolm Frasers and Julian Burnsides and others in their camp, TPVs are completely consistent with the 1951 Refugee Convention. According to a recent speech by UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, there are about 16 million refugees today. The vast majority of these will not be resettled anywhere, but will ultimately go home. Temporary protection is the norm.

This is not a question of compassion. This column has always supported a big immigration program, bigger than either of the main parties now supports, including a substantial refugee component. But it also supports an orderly program in which Australia chooses who gets to live here. The government’s soft policies on boatpeople, and its formerly high rate of acceptance of boatpeople as genuine refugees, has encouraged many thousands to get into boats. According to the opposition, perhaps 170 people have drowned in the process. That’s not compassionate.

The Labor party is in disaray it does not have enough unity of purpose to maintain cabinet confidentiality and it does not have enough unity of purpose to effectively deal with the unending armada of boats with their sad cargo of illegal immigrants posing as refugees. As Sheridan points out they have tried to be all things to the divergent opinions within their own ranks this and ended up with the inevitable dogs breakfast of a policy. So what the Australian people who are concerned about this issue have to do is decide if they want the grand gesture and spin that labor offers or do they want an effective policy that truly deals with the “pull factors”. If it is the later that they want then there is no choice but to vote for the coalition.

Likewise if voters value good government then they have to look to the coalition  because having a “rat in the ranks” and being unable or unwilling to plug the leak demonstrates a  divided party that is unable to govern itself let alone govern the country.

Cheers Comrades

My bold in the quote

PS Note for Ray: not a sausage about Tony’s travel in today’s headlines

‘PM, you know this information didn’t come from the Liberals. You’ll need to look a lot closer to home.”

28th July timetable

I was feeling a bit flat yesterday which is why I was rather absent from the comment threads for most of the day, But this little story is one that looks like it will keep giving as it is revealed that Julia Gillard is some what less than caring about the plight of our pensioners and (surprise surprise!) rather indifferent to those women who do the right thing for the country and make the next generation of Aussies.

She allegedly argued that it was wrong to think the scheme, due to start on January 1, would be an electoral winner because it would be resented by people beyond child-bearing age and stay-at-home mothers.

It is also claimed she questioned the size of last year’s $14 billion age pension boost – which delivered an extra $30 a week in the single base rate – commenting that the elderly didn’t vote Labor.

Ms Gillard did not deny the claims last night. ”I was very pleased to be a member of the Labor team that delivered these two historic achievements. Pensioners and families deserve more support, and this government has given them that support,” she said. ”Cabinet discussions are confidential.”

The claim that she opposed paid parental leave in cabinet emerged just two days after she used Sunday’s televised leaders’ debate to talk up the government’s scheme, which will offer primary carers 18 weeks’ paid leave at the minimum wage of about $570 a week.

Her allegedly negative stance on the pension boost was also at odds with her positive reference to it during the leaders’ debate, which elicited a positive movement in the ”worm” meter that tracked TV studio audience responses. ”We did a major increase in the pension to help older Australians,” she said.

Cabinet sources could not recall that Ms Gillard had made the reported comments on parental leave and pensions in cabinet. But the key decisions were often taken in the ”kitchen cabinet” of Kevin Rudd, Treasurer Wayne Swan, Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner and Ms Gillard.

Oakes, who was also the recipient of the leak about an alleged leadership deal on the night before Ms Gillard deposed Mr Rudd, identified his source last night as Labor.

When Ms Gillard responded that if the Liberals had allegations to make, they should put their names to them, Oakes said: ”PM, you know this information didn’t come from the Liberals. You’ll need to look a lot closer to home.”

I must admit that I just love the fact that even though he is dead to the Labor party that Brother Number One or one of his supporters is doing their darnedest to ensure that the woman who struck the killing blow will be reminded of the unwashable blood that is on her assassin’s hands. I bet that Gillard wishes that she could bug Laurie Oakes’ Phone and email accounts so that she could find out just who his source is.
It is no surprise though that Gillard would argue against maternity leave though and like a lot of socialists she actually does not care about pensioners, preferring to spend the money that the rise in their stipends costs on schemes for which she could have her name put to like building that shiney new school hall project… Hmm if only so many of the “Labor mates” had not had their noses so deeply in the trough of government largess then she would not have to contend with stories like this one in today’s OZ:

In Victoria, BER projects were run by the state Education Department for greater efficiency.

School principals and parent councils were not given financial details of projects or control over construction.

However, a major building company hired to carry out works on 33 schools told the inquiry that construction costs were inflated and the building permit fees were “considerably higher than we normally pay”.

BDH Constructions managing director Henry Bongers said: “The designs of most of the templates would be some of the most expensive we have been involved with on a square-metre basis mainly due to the shapes and structural design.”

He also said that building permits took too long and, as a result, many sites that had been set up and fenced “lay dormant” for up to four months.

“I believe that with better planning and more consultation with building industry representatives, the whole process would have been more organised, streamlined and had much better value for money,” Mr Bongers wrote in his submission.

Another builder, Vaughan Constructions, described as “rorting” the practice of bundling individual projects into a single, large contract to enable workers to be paid an additional hourly site allowance.

Vaughan Constructions general manager Andrew Noble said the practice, which was endorsed earlier this year by the Victorian Building Industry Disputes Panel, “has major consequences to the cost of the BER program”.

Horsham Rural City Council raised doubts about the limited use of local builders in the BER process and “the minimal economic benefits” to the local economy.

“This appears to be very evident in Horsham and Wimmera, a region which has been impacted by the long-term drought and, more recently, the Black Saturday bushfires,” said Tony Bawden, economic development general manager. “To our knowledge, the bulk of tenders let in our region have been to builders from outside the region.”

The Masters Builders Association of Victoria also expressed concerns about the cost of building permits, which it says blew out to four times greater than normal in Western Victoria.

Several schools complained about not getting value for money or being disadvantaged by being a government school and having the Victorian department run the BER program. Bannockburn Primary School council president Les Rowe wrote in his school’s submission: “Our building is to be the same size as a school portable yet is costed at least three times this amount.”

Fish Creek and District Primary School principal Robin Smith told the inquiry he did “not believe the timeliness, the transparency, or the final product delivers best value to our community”.

Mr Diment, whose Ocean Grove Primary School falls in Labor’s marginally held seat of Corangamite, said he still did not know when his school’s BER project was going to be completed.

click for the Courier Mail story

The final layer of this rather putrid cake is the revelation that the rail line to Redcliffe just won’t happen unless the  Bligh government can find the necessary 300 million to provide the rolling stock and other necessities to actually make the trains run. Now this is a very big ask for the woman who leads a government which has been mad keen to sell off the most profitable parts of the rail net work( the Coal trains) and other infrastructure assets so that she can balance her budget the reality is that the often promised Redcliffe rail line will be a huge impost of the Queensland budget and there is every chance that despite these promises the only trains that will run in Redcliffe any time soon will be those built by the local model railway  club.

So lets see what new developments are revealed in today’s exiting journey in the Omnibus and I know that I have concentrated on the woes of the Government here today but I fully expect that Ray will pipe up and enunciate the foibles of the opposition in the comemnts

Cheers Comrades

Update

I am watching Gillard’s news conference about the Leak to Laurie and she looks rather rattled the tone of her voice is very clearly angry. This is a rather clear difference to the more measured and spin stained efforts earlier in this campaign. For the first time she is being asked the hard questions and its very clear that she doesn’t like it one bit !

Tune in to ABS news24 now!

Cheers Comrades

Election Omnibus July 27 edition

27th July timetable

We  are into the second week of the campaign and things have begun to get a little more interesting one most amusing side issue has been sparked by Penny Wong who is entirely open about being lesbian and living with her partner has come out and endorsed the position of both major parties that marriage is something that has to be between a man and a woman. This has of course upset the other prominent homosexual of Aussie politics Bob Brown who is having something of a hissy fit that any Gay should dare to disagree with the  idea that same sex marriage is a good thing for this country. Of course the Gay  latte sippers over at this thread to a post about Gay marriage were horrified when I pointed out Wong’s statement. and they very nicely demonstrate just how keen that tiny Gay tail is to wag the much larger heterosexual dog so that we will dance to their tune on this issue.

The Coalition has not been having any kind of dream run because the selection of the rather obnoxious candidate, David Barker,  for a Safe Labor seat (with a 20% majority ) has hit the news. This man it a total idiot who managed to fly under the party radar quite simply  because it is very hard to get anyone to wave  the flag in unwinable seats. The purpose of such candidates just has to be to get votes for the senate, The party has of course done the right thing and disendorsed the man who looks like he would not last through the campaign let alone a term in parliament.

While some people want to insist that Tony is less attractive to women voters it seems that The Anointed One does not do it for some men at all:

The Seven Network’s blue worm, controlled by male voters, gave the Prime Minister a consistently lower score than did the red worm, controlled by female voters, raising speculation Ms Gillard has a “man problem”.

Ms Gillard said yesterday she did not believe Mr Abbott’s focus on talking about his wife and family was a swipe at her during Sunday night’s debate.

But she refused to answer questions about male voters, saying she would continue to put her case to both men and women.

And she will do so without her own man by her side, saying Mr Mathieson would not be travelling on the campaign trail to assist her.

“Obviously for my partner, Tim, his job is being supportive of me,” Ms Gillard said.

“He is not a Labor Party official, he’s not a candidate or a minister, so you won’t see him out on the campaign trail.”

Since becoming Prime Minister, Ms Gillard, has moved to polish her image, wearing more colourful clothes and portraying a more confident, feminine look. She will be on the cover of the Australian Women’s Weekly magazine this week.

Curiosity about the nation’s new leader is such that more than 1100 people had signed up by last night to one of the Facebook sites dedicated to the Prime Minister’s earlobes.

But it seems men are not necessarily impressed with the more substantial aspects of the Prime Minister’s performance.

A breakdown of figures from the latest Newspoll taken on July 23-25 shows a nine-point gap between male and female dissatisfaction on Ms Gillard.

They show 42 per cent of men are dissatisfied with her performance compared with 33 per cent of women, while 38 per cent of men are satisfied with her performance as leader compared with 44 per cent of women.

Of course the flash clothes and careful grooming are part of her plan  to convince the people that she is worthy of being PM but it may well be that The Anointed One’s electoral ” man trouble” will cancel out Abbott’s perceived problem with women . The Labor party has a much bigger problem and that is simply that no one* believes that they are capable of any sort of decent follow through even when they make grand promises on much needed infrastructure like the Redcliffe rail link announcement that is expected today. The cynic in me suspects that all this will do is make housing in the area served by this line more expensive as the urban trendies buy up the housing stock there and elbow out the working class people who own or rent there now. The commuter congestion will just be moved around rather than actually eliminated.

Anyway lets see what today brings forth and no matter which way you swing (in the voting sense ) lets enjoy the process because as serious as deciding the government of our country is we can find some amusement in the process, this is after all no different to any big league sporting contest and its all to play for.

Cheers Comrades

* except for Lynot who thinks that The Anointed One can do no wrong

“Furthermore, Tony Abbott has narrowed the leadership gap on Julia Gillard.”

Despite my wife and kids not being interested I monopolized the TV last night so that I could watch the debate and really by the end I was convinced that both protagonists had done a very workman like job with Gillard delivering a more slick and fluent effort  but that Abbott delivered a slightly more convincing and substantive effort. This was entirely consistent with what we have seen so far in the Campaign Gillard has been all about spin but Abbott has been all about hammering this government on its appalling incompetence.

Last week some ALP supporters were incredibly buoyed by the jump in the Polls that gave Julia a large lead , personally I did not buy that result as a genuine and widespread rise in the popularity of The Anointed One or her policy proposals. The latest poll reported in the OZ showing the gap once again reduced to the width of a knife blade is more believable .

THE election campaign has become a tight contest, with the Coalition back in front on primary votes.

Furthermore, Tony Abbott has narrowed the leadership gap on Julia Gillard.

The latest Newspoll, conducted exclusively for The Australian, reveals voters have turned against Labor’s proposal for a citizens assembly on climate change and that the women’s vote advantage for Australia’s first female Prime Minister has disappeared.

Labor’s 10-point lead on a two-party-preferred basis at the start of the election campaign has been reduced to a knife-edge 52 per cent to 48 per cent over the weekend, while the Coalition’s primary vote jumped four points to 42 per cent, compared with Labor’s 40 per cent, down from 42 per cent.

The two-party-preferred vote, based on preference flows at the 2007 election, is now the same as it was the weekend before Labor dumped Kevin Rudd as prime minister and put Ms Gillard into the job – only three weeks before she called the election.

All that Tony had to do to benefit from last night’s debate was to do a little better than a draw, he achieved that with ease Gillard on the other hand needed to land some substantive blows which she really failed to manage. I may be biased but I just did not feel that she was being at all genuine and if I were judging the two leaders on their performance I would say that Gillard gave us her line on cue with the appropriate expression of emotion but that Tony was being more Stanislavskyian and even though his lines were not as slickly delivered there was more heart in his time on the press club stage.

Overall as I said in my opening I give the debate to Abbott by the slimiest of margins
Cheers Comrades

These were very serious offences and two years is simply not enough to meet the gravity of what this person did.

There is a cancer in our legal system and it is evident in a probation service which is far to reluctant to breach the probation (or licence) or miscreants who breach the terms of their conditional freedom with impunity as the case of John Venables demonstrates:

'Not enough': Mrs Fergus attacked the short sentence outside the Old Bailey

The sentence handed out to Venables yesterday was criticised by James’s mother Denise Fergus as ‘simply not enough’.

Her spokesman said: ‘Once again we have had to sit through proceedings where justice has not been done.

‘These were very serious offences and two years is simply not enough to meet the gravity of what this person did.

‘We are surprised and concerned that he was not recalled under the terms of his parole licence when he committed an offence in 2008.’

Venables and his friend Robert Thompson were ten when they abducted two-year-old James from a shopping centre in Bootle, Merseyside, tortured and murdered him.

They were given life sentences for the 1993 crime but were released on licence in 2001 with new identities, to a huge public outcry.

Nothing further was known about their lives until the police investigation into the images hoarded by Venables.

The first offence involved downloading 57 pornographic pictures of youngsters on to his computer between February last year and February this year.

The second involved distributing indecent photographs of children in February this year, while a third involved distributing 42 images in February 2008.

Louis Mably, prosecuting, said the computer’s history of websites visited and searches made had ‘indicated the defendant had an extensive history of searching for and downloading indecent images of children’.

The court heard about brushes with the law since his controversial release on licence.

In September 2008 he was arrested on suspicion of affray after he and another man were involved in a drunken street fight.

He was given a formal warning by the Probation Service about breaching the good behaviour expected of him as a condition of his licence.

Later the same year he was cautioned for possession of cocaine after he was found with a small amount of the class A drug, which was said to be for personal use.

That he will serve time for the child porn offences is a good thing but the tariff he has received is by no stretch of the imagination adequate. That is incidental that to the fact that he so clearly breached the terms of his licence not once but several times and he was still allowed to remain at liberty. Call me hard but when someone has committed a crime as the vile as the one that saw Venables imprisoned in the first place “second ” chances should just not be on offer. He has blown the one chance that he has been given to live a good and righteous life so there really are only two adequate choices  for his future  and both of them entail  permanent confinement in a  box of either stone or wood.

Cheers Comrades

Moderation in all things

Well I think that the big Australia enthusiasts are now sure to be disappointed if the coalition wins on the twenty-first. As Tony Abbott announces that the coalition will apply the brakes to our immigration programs.

The cuts will focus on family and student visa programs, while skilled migration will largely be quarantined.

Under the Coalition’s policy, Queensland, Western Australia and small business would be given priority treatment for skilled migrants.

Although rejecting the idea of a “Big Australia”, Prime Minister Julia Gillard has denied the population debate is an immigration debate.

Mr Abbott said a “fair dinkum” debate on population could not avoid immigration.

While the Coalition doesn’t put a figure on it, the policy would put Australia on track for a population in 2050 of well below the 36 million forecast in Treasury’s most recent intergenerational report.

Opposition Immigration spokesman Scott Morrison said rapid population growth must not rob future generations of the “quality of life and opportunities we enjoy”.

“We believe Australians are looking for payment up front on infrastructure and services before they will support a higher rate of population growth,” he said.

The Coalition policy announcement today will also commit the Government to population growth rates being set by a renamed Productivity Commission, which will be called the Productivity and Sustainability Commission, based on delivery of improved infrastructure and services.

Two thirds of the permanent migration program (which totals about 180,000 a year) will be reserved for skilled migration.

Sponsored skilled work visas and temporary skilled work visas (known as 457 visas) would be quarantined at existing levels, and the humanitarian intake would also stay the same.

As I was suggesting in my earlier post even if you think that a bigger Australia is a better Australia then you have to be bonkers if you think that we should rush to get there.  The policy announced will keep both our population and our economy growing but at a more moderate rate which will take some of the pressure off the need to build expensive infrastructure in  a hurry. This country has a damn fine record for accepting successive waves of immigrants but I think that success has been predicated on not asking the community to absorb too many new comers at any one time . The more moderate rate proposed by the coalition will help in this respect and don’t even the “big Australia” enthusiasts want a big happy nation rather than a big and disturbed one?

Cheers Comrades

The Great ‘Green Dream’ and how voting for the ALP will put Abbott in (by … you guessed it)

It does not get any clearer below

Some times you just need to let something speak for itself.

As they say “stupidity is its own parody”.

I bring you Jeremys take on “how to vote” :

How voting ALP could help Abbott

You may have heard me say that it’s impossible for your progressive vote to end up helping the conservatives. Turns out I was wrong. There is a scenario in which your voting ALP or Green could inadvertently end up helping the Liberals.

I know you’ll be expecting this to be long and complicated, but it’s actually quite easy to explain.

How it “could” happen

In amongst both the Green and ALP first preference votes, are some people who preference the Liberals ahead of the alternative progressive party. ALP voters who put the Liberals above the Greens; Greens voters who put the Liberals above the ALP.

As long as that party is not eliminated, those Coalition votes stay locked in for the “left” side of politics (for the sake of this discussion, I’m going to pretend that the ALP counts as “left”).

But, when that party is eliminated, that subset of their votes would flow straight back to the Coalition and, in a very unlikely set of circumstances, could conceivably see the conservative candidate elected over the remaining “left” one.

How to avoid it happening

So – if you want to keep the Coalition out, and are worried about this tiny possibility of inadvertently helping them, then how should you vote? Well, you should vote to keep in for as long as possible the “left” party with the higher proportion of conservative votes hidden within it.

As it happens, the vast majority of ALP voters simply follow the ALP ticket, which – like the Greens one – usually puts the Coalition down the bottom. In contrast, Greens voters are much more independent-minded and less likely to follow such cards or tickets and – even according to the recent ALP campaign against them – that includes some 20% of so who have come from the Coalition wanting change. I’m not sure what those probably small l liberal Coalition voters expect from the Greens – other than opposition to the unworkable internet filter, government out of people’s bedrooms and a realistic approach to climate change – but the fact is, there are probably more, in proportion, Coalition votes locked up in the Greens’ vote than the ALP’s.

Which means that if you vote ALP instead of Greens, and the Greens are eliminated, and some of those votes flow back to the Coalition, you could find that your ALP vote in fact inadvertently helps elect a Liberal. That’s more likely than the “a vote for the Greens helps the Liberals scenario”, in which your Green vote gets the ALP eliminated first and frees the proportionally fewer* ALP/Coalition votes to go to the Liberals.

A silly thing to worry about

Of course, in reality the likelihood of the small number of Coalition preferences hidden in Greens and ALP votes actually electing a Liberal is tiny – particularly given that far more of those votes will flow straight to the other “left” party. To allow it to influence your vote is taking tactical voting to a ludicrous and unnecessary extreme, particularly when your first preference has a much, much bigger influence on what happens than where its preferences go. (If you vote ALP, you vote for nothing to change; if you vote Green, you pull the ALP and the parliament back to the left. Also, voting Green gives them the funding for your vote instead of the thoroughly undeserving ALP, helping them grow and become an even better alternative.)

*You might say aha, but the ALP votes are more than the Greens, so the raw number of Coalition preferences is higher. But the only scenario in which this matters is where the number of ALP and Greens votes are similar, so the proportion equates to more of those locked-away votes.

But if this issue bothers you – the answer is clear anyway. The best way of defeating the Liberals is, again, to vote Green and preference the ALP.

Review: Thanks for clearing that up Jeremy. I like a drink too (and so does Laura) and I reckon there’s nothing wrong with a night on the tiles. But one thing I have learnt from my time on the blog is NOT to write a post when I am still pissed or hung over. At least wait until the Nurofen kicks in. And the same goes for commenters whose comment consists of nothing more than this: Tl:dr

Go figure!

(PS for Craygees benefit: this is what is called ‘fair review & criticism’)

Just a short post this morning about a personal observation of the election campaign.

Yesterday when I was out doing my shopping at Westfield  Strathpine  I happened across my local member Peter Dutton doing a little very low key campaigning, basically he was just chatting with constituents when I noticed a man and a woman   in Blue tee shirts with Anti-Dutton slogans printed on them (they were so obvioulsy ALP people). Their purpose was obviously to harass and heckle our local member. After the ALP idiot staffer in the red bathers heckling Tony Abbott  and the Warminista who tried to harass Julia Gillard yesterday this may well end up being the election campaign  of the heckler.

It is surely a sign of desperation from the incumbent party that they feel the need to do such things but what can you expect from the party that  the most ardent supporters are making every excuse for even though they know that they are serving nothing but spin.

ALP supporters are definitely running on an “the ends justify the means ” mindset so they will swallow any shit that is served up by way of policy even though they know that is  precisely what it is that Julia is serving up to them.

I am actually very much reminded of the tactics used by the ALP way back in 1975 when they were desperate to try to get Gough back into the Lodge, Fortunately it did not work then and surely sensible people have to be hoping that it does not work this time either.

Cheers Comrades

”We need consensus among political parties, but we need consensus in the community even more,”

The Anointed One has no real policy on Climate change other than the vague promise to revisit the issue in 2013but clearly she will need one if she is going to have any chance of clawing back the voters who have abandoned her party for the Loopy Greens. It is with some sad amusement that I note that instead of actually announcing an effective, or even just a viable policy what she has decided to do is to create another bloody committee. You all remember Brother Number One’s 2020 Summit don’t you? Well wasn’t that a great success?

Launching the first details of the government’s revamped climate change policy, Julia Gillard will commit to vigorously arguing in public and in the Parliament for cutting greenhouse gas emissions through a carbon trading scheme.

But she will emphasise the need to build community consensus first, and flag the possibility of further delay if the citizens’ assembly is not convinced of the need to act.

The speech will dash hopes the government would re-consider its decision to shelve emissions trading until at least 2013 – an about-face that was backed by Ms Gillard and played a central role in Kevin Rudd’s downfall.

It will also end recent speculation that the government may consider bringing in an interim carbon tax, an option canvassed by Labor’s former climate adviser, economist Ross Garnaut, and backed by the Greens.

Speaking at the University of Queensland, Ms Gillard will stick to the timeline of reviewing the government’s position in 2012. Before then, she will promise to reward businesses that take early action by guaranteeing them the full compensation planned under the existing trading scheme model, even if their emissions fall significantly before then.

Ms Gillard will compare the need to build consensus on a carbon price with that developed over Medicare, saying it eventually won such strong community support that people would now vote out a party that tried to unwind it.

”We need consensus among political parties, but we need consensus in the community even more,” she will say. ”It is vital to be clear what I mean by that community consensus – I do not mean that government can take no action until every member of the community is fully convinced.”

I think it is a lack of any personal vision that is in play here because these mechanisms never really achieve anything. Then again if you view the Climate change issue in its true context as a religious movement it absolutely makes sense to hold revival meetings, travelling tent-show where people can have their faith in the Warminista liturgy revitalised by some very slick preaching and the affirmation of the faithful sold to a disbelieving public as “consensus”. This is all about having the appearance of doing something about the issue rather than actually addressing anything.
Personally I think that the way to address this issue is to make our use of energy as efficient as possible and to hold our fire on any of the pointless gestures that are so beloved to the Warministas. The trouble is that the Labor party is all about the high and mighty gesture rather than showing any good sense on this issue.
Cheers Comrades

Bad news for Laura but good news for me

You would all remember Laura Hall the first person ever to be banned from buying or drinking alcohol anywhere in England.

In case you dont here is a pictorial reminder:

1. Laura likes a drink:

 

2. Well actually Laura likes a lot of drink:

3. A hell of a lot of drink:

So what is the news?

Well Laura has been staying with me at BlueGums in exchange for some um …. favours while she waits out her ban from boozing at home in the UKE (United Kingdom of England).

But this news will hit her like a ton of Bundy & coke:

BRITAIN will ditch its controversial 24-hour drinking laws under new government plans that aim to tackle the country’s chronic binge boozing problem.

The legislation for late licensing, introduced by the previous Labour government in 2005, was meant to usher in a so-called “cafe culture” and encourage more moderate drinking habits.

But critics claim it has instead led to an increase in alcohol-related violence and done little to temper the heavy drinking that makes some British town centres no-go zones on Friday and Saturday nights.

[...]

Authorities would be given powers to introduce a ban on drinking after midnight in entire streets or towns. And some pubs and clubs that do stay open later will be made to pay a levy to cover the extra cost of policing.

“When these proposals are implemented, this will be the death knell for 24-hour drinking,” a government source told the Telegraph.

Shes stuffed!

And Laura might as well stay stuffed.

Here.

With me:

I will break this news to her gently over a slab of B&C.

You lot can have a debate in the comments about binge drinking and whether we should do what Britain is doing.

I am busy.