Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Posts tagged 'Robert McClelland'

Tag Archives: Robert McClelland

Chris Evans and Nicola Roxon jump ship


You have got to love it when something you write is so quickly proven to be correct. When I wrote my post the other day suggesting that Robert McClelland  was the first rat to notice that the SS Labor was taking on water,  little did I know that two big names would  so soon follow him into the life boats eager to escape being entangled in the Sargasso sea of endless opposition. The question is just how many will jump ship before Sept 14? Quite a few would be my call.

Cheers Comrades

Chris Evans and , Nicola Roxon

Chris Evans and  Nicola Roxon

Robert McClelland ready to swim for it.

Did you all miss me while I spent the last few days in the wet no man’s land disconnected from the world with no power Phone or internet?  well I missed youse all!

Anyway Today’s  little snippet is the story of  the retirement of Robert McClelland from a safe seat no less :

click for source

click for source

Naturally I can’t help thinking that this will be the first of many “retirement” announcements from labor’s ranks as those members who have known the, err, “pleasures” of life in her majesty’s loyal opposition dread returning to that role after the coming election, Robert McClelland was a Rudd man and that must have had something to do with it as well now that our dear Brother Number One will never attain the primacy again, unless it is in the despair of a devastated post election ALP. Dare I suggest that like all smart rats Robert McClelland knows when the ship is taking on water?

The election dance begins
Cheers Comrades



Ask not for whom the bell tolls Julia, it tolls for thee

Ah another day and another report of Labor disunity in the face of the increasingly incompetent Gillard Government.

click for source

Really who could blame any ALP MP for thinking of their personal political salvation with Labor’s fortunes sinking by the second under Gillard’s rule?
Of course the real problem for Labor is that if they use the same knives that they dispatched Rudd with then there is a very real chance that Gillard would just resign and bring down the government anyway. Such are the woes of minority government where remaining in office relies upon a nutty coalition of self serving independents, a disgraced ex Labor man and lets not forget the verdant  religious zealotry of Adam Bandt as well. I suspect that Only Kevin Rudd is really eager to sip from the poisoned chalice and you know what?  He may even save some of the furniture but we know that the nation will not be well governed again until we do away with this government at a proper election and then Labor can spend the time it needs to find itself while it sojourns in the political  wilderness.

Cheers Comrades

Juliar’s Carr Crash

I have to say that after the last week in Australian politics I really did not think  things could get worse, but of course as we are talking about the ALP I was totally wrong:

Click for source

Sorry dear readers but the chorus of this song came immediately to mind:

Can you tell that I am enjoying yet another instance of a Labor stuff up?

Surely they can’t get worse?

Well maybe they can!

Cheers Comrades

More pointless symbolism from Brother Number One

There is no political party in any of the Australian states or territories who are even vaguely hinting that they they would like to see a return of the rope as an option for our courts. Not a single one. Even though I have personally argued on a number of occasions that there is a reasonable rationale for a capital sanction in specific circumstances and when an even higher burden of proof has been met than is usual in other criminal trials. I can’t for the life of me see what is to be gained by this sort of symbolic mumbo jumbo.

The new laws would probably be enacted under the external affairs power in the constitution, though the Government could also pass the laws through a referral of powers by the states.

Both options are being considered and the Government plans to consult states and territories about the issue.

If passed, states and territories would be banned from reintroducing the death penalty, which they can do now. While the Whitlam government outlawed the death penalty for federal offences in 1973, the last state to abolish it was NSW in 1985.

In 2003, after the September 11 attacks on the US and the 2002 terrorist attacks in Bali, the then prime minister, John Howard, suggested state Liberal opposition parties could raise the reintroduction of the death penalty as an election issue.

A number of concerned Labor backbenchers, including the NSW MP Chris Hayes, and the West Australian MP Melissa Parke, met the Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, on Tuesday to discuss the issue.

Mr Hayes, the member for Werriwa, told the Herald: “I thought Robert has a very good understanding of the position we are adopting, particularly where we say there is an overwhelming need to bring down domestic legislation prohibiting the reintroduction of the death penalty in states and territories [as] an indication of our overwhelming position of being an abolitionist country.”

This sort of thing will not make a scrap of difference to those fatally stupid Australians who await an appointment with a post and the firing squad in Indonesia, and it risks alienating state governments to boot, and for what? More empty symbolism?

More and more this government of Brother Number One is looking like a Oncer, instead of knuckling down and doing the job it claims a mandate for, it goes off on to these sorts of cavorts. The death penalty in this country is for all intents and purposes a dead issue because having decided long ago that we will incarcerate or scum-bags rather than stopping them stealing oxygen there is no mood for a return of the rope by our politicians. And even those who argue for it as I do understands this.
Anyway as an exercise I’m creating a poll to gauge the mood of the people (well at least those who read this blog).

Cheers Comrades

International Women’s day and Abortion

March 6 is International Women's Day and it's being celebrated in Brisbane with a lunch at the Convention Centre.

March 6 is International Women's Day and it's being celebrated in Brisbane with a lunch at the Convention Centre.

There are probably  a whole swag of Femnazi’s out there who are seething with anger that “International Women’s day” now raises barely a ripple in the nations collective consciousness. But Maybe that is not such a bad thing after all.  Despite the whining from the usual suspects the reality is that we now have a society where our daughters can reasonably expect that they can shape their lives just about any way they please in terms of their career choice, their education and all of the thing s that matter.

That is not of course to say that things are perfect for women, (or men) in every aspect of our lives. Life is a journey, not a destination, and the road is far from smooth for anyone what we all have to do is decide just what matters . Feminism does deserve some acknowledgement  for highlighting some social inequities but it has also made a fundamental error in assuming that the female way of understanding the world is superior to the male understanding. Neither is better than the other, they are just different, not because of the way that girls and boys are socialised but different because our brains are “hard wired” to be different.

As a society we need to think beyond the male female dichotomy, beyond the rabid imaginings about patriarchal dominance and think about why there is differences between men and women and why it is that those differences are complementary attributes of that which is our collective humanity. Perhaps the time has come to move beyond a day for women to a day for gender equity where the roles and qualities of both genders can be appreciated .

Equality between the genders is of course the last thing that Feminists would acknowledge when it comes the issue of abortion and I wonder just how this story will be seen in the context of IWD?

At issue is a clause in the new legislation that forces doctors who oppose abortion to declare their belief and refer patients seeking terminations to specialists who are willing to provide the procedure.

Queen’s Counsel Neil Young, a former Federal Court judge, and barrister Peter Willis, a former adviser to the attorney-general’s office, who examined the legislation on behalf of Catholic Health Australia, say that Australia will fail to meet its international obligations unless the clause is removed.

Catholic Health chief executive Martin Laverty told The Sunday Age that the group had been advised the contentious clause breached the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, a treaty ratified by Australia and overseen by the United Nations.

He said staff at the state’s 15 Catholic hospitals would not be expected to take any part in the abortion process — including referring women to other doctors — and Catholic Health was ready to challenge the law in court if anyone were to be prosecuted for refusing to provide a referral.

He called on Attorney-General Robert McClelland to use his powers under constitutional law to remove the clause. Several senators within Mr McClelland’s own party have also urged him to overhaul the law, including Tasmanian Senator Helen Polley, who wrote to him on the matter.

“If you have very strong religious convictions on abortion you should not have to be participating in any form in the process, including referring women,” Senator Polley told The Sunday Age.

“There are real concerns that the only way to test this law will be for someone to be prosecuted.”

In feminist theory personal autonomy is seen as being the most important thing of all but under the  feminist inspired legislation in Victoria the personal autonomy of doctors and other health professionals to act according to their conscience (by having NO part in the baby killing process) is entirely proscribed and if this is struck out of the legislation because of our being a signatory to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights it will be a real blow to my latte sipping friends who obviously think that personal autonomy is only valid when  it suits their agenda.

And on that note I will leave you all to think about how we can make a society that builds upon the strengths of both genders without unduly privileging either. After all isn’t that what we should be working towards?

Cheers Comrades


%d bloggers like this: