ABC is Political

[SirRumpole]

There's no need to get grumpy Rumpy. I did read what you said. You said;



I would never sling mud at you Rumpy. I was merely enquiring as you what is your agenda along with the other Labor/Green/ABC whiners.
Do you prefer open borders to border protection? All this whining about Morrison not telling you and the people smugglers his plans in advance, is just nonsense.

As I said, I agree with the end result of the Coalition policy, but does the end justify the means in all cases ? There are reports that Tamil asylum seekers were handed over to the Sri Lankan navy, ie the people they were running away from originally. That would violate the "non refoulment" clause of the Refugee treaty which we have agreed to. The fact that the government has not commented on whether this has happened indicates it might be true. A government which is prepared to cover up on one issue can't be trusted on others. They are blotting their copybook very badly.

As for "telling plans in advance", they won't tell us the results "in retreat". That's suspicious in my book.

 

[sydboy007]

As I said, I agree with the end result of the Coalition policy, but does the end justify the means in all cases ? There are reports that Tamil asylum seekers were handed over to the Sri Lankan navy, ie the people they were running away from originally. That would violate the "non refoulment" clause of the Refugee treaty which we have agreed to. The fact that the government has not commented on whether this has happened indicates it might be true. A government which is prepared to cover up on one issue can't be trusted on others. They are blotting their copybook very badly.

As for "telling plans in advance", they won't tell us the results "in retreat". That's suspicious in my book.

Makes me worry we'll end up with more cases like Haneef where the Government hand picks the judge and jury to determine guilt or lack thereof.

The L+NP criticised Labor for their lack of transparency in Govt, but then all oppositions do that we're lucky if they don't try to reduce the level of information flowing to the public when next in power.

Now we have the current Govt doing it's best to make FOI about as effective as mammary glands on a bull. It's ridiculous that tax payer funded reports are, at best, released heavily redacted. The more that's hidden the greater the chance of poor decisions being made.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/25/australias-right-to-know-is-under-assault

The details are still unclear, but this is what we know so far. The Office of the Australian Commissioner (OAIC), designed to be a champion of open government, will be abolished. Complaints will be heard by the commonwealth ombudsman, although there will be given no additional resources to deal with them.

Reviews of FOI decisions will go the administrative appeals tribunal, which will likely cost more than $800. It is anticipated the government may also seek to reintroduce some kind of application fee to the FOI process.

None of this bodes well for access to government information.

A classic example of the system’s shortcomings was provided by Fairfax’s Chris Vedelago, who while trying to ascertain information on the level of foreign purchases of Australian real estate, was led down a farcical path by the Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB). Three FOI requests later and the best Vedelago could come up with is a stack of blanked-out and redacted pages from FIRB.

As noted by Vedelago, it should really be know as the “Freedom From Information Act”, and the Coalition’s reforms are only likely to make transparency even worse.

 

[Calliope]

Surely that's no reason for you to once again attribute to him a disagreement about border protection?
It's something you do constantly and imho contributes nothing constructive to the discussion.

If you care to read Rumpy's latest post, he does have a disagreement about Border Protection, particularly in the handling of the Tamil illegals. But this is the wrong thread. You can read more about Border Protection constructive discussions on the relevant thread.

 

[SirRumpole]

If you care to read Rumpy's latest post, he does have a disagreement about Border Protection, particularly in the handling of the Tamil illegals. But this is the wrong thread. You can read more about Border Protection constructive discussions on the relevant thread.

The fact is that Rudd in his dying days as PM announced that no asylum seeker who came here by boat without our permission would be settled in Australia.

I don't know why people are not happy with that. All this military chest beating sovereign border stuff is pure show, something to be different from Labor and designed to appeal to people like you even if it does not achieve anything more than Labor's Manus island policy, but costs a lot more taxpayers money.

 

[Calliope]

The fact is that Rudd in his dying days as PM announced that no asylum seeker who came here by boat without our permission would be settled in Australia.

I don't know why people are not happy with that. All this military chest beating sovereign border stuff is pure show, something to be different from Labor and designed to appeal to people like you even if it does not achieve anything more than Labor's Manus island policy, but costs a lot more taxpayers money.

I will reply to you Rumpy on the appropriate thread when I get around to it.

 

[SirRumpole]

I will reply to you Rumpy on the appropriate thread when I get around to it.

I'm pulling my eyelids out waiting for your response

 

[banco]

The fact is that Rudd in his dying days as PM announced that no asylum seeker who came here by boat without our permission would be settled in Australia.

I don't know why people are not happy with that. All this military chest beating sovereign border stuff is pure show, something to be different from Labor and designed to appeal to people like you even if it does not achieve anything more than Labor's Manus island policy, but costs a lot more taxpayers money.

I'm sorry but Rudd said a lot of stuff. For good or ill I can't imagine a Labor Government going to the lengths that Morrision etc. has been willing to go to. To take but one example the handover of the Sri Lankans to the Sri Lankan navy is almost certainly a breach of Australia's treaty obligations (assuming it goes ahead).

 

[drsmith]

To the last, the ABC defends Labor's carbon tax.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-...nvestment-killed-by-government-policy/5575262

 

[overhang]

To the last, the ABC defends Labor's carbon tax.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-...nvestment-killed-by-government-policy/5575262

I don't see how that article is defending Labors 'carbon tax lie' but merely pointing out that the coalitions stance is hindering the renewable energy industry that will cause a loss of jobs and investment in Australia. The coalition have long claimed we are open for business which is certainly the case if you're a coal miner. So whilst jobs and investment will be saved in that area it will be lost in others as pointed out in this article.

 

[drsmith]

I don't see how that article is defending Labors 'carbon tax lie' but merely pointing out that the coalitions stance is hindering the renewable energy industry that will cause a loss of jobs and investment in Australia..

Perhaps some of this investment was driven by misguided government policy and subsidy. Another historical example that comes to mind here was forestry.

For the ABC though, the broader context is about the carbon tax.

The coalition have long claimed we are open for business which is certainly the case if you're a coal miner. So whilst jobs and investment will be saved in that area it will be lost in others as pointed out in this article.

While specific sectors may benefit, there is a net detriment to business and the economy overall with an increased cost of energy.

 

[overhang]

Perhaps some of this investment was driven by misguided government policy and subsidy. Another historical example that comes to mind here was forestry

I wouldn't say misguided, the policy was in place however it was always risky when the opposition at the time vowed to remove Labors efforts at lowering our dependency on coal due to strong lobbying from that industry.

For the ABC though, the broader context is about the carbon tax.

I have no idea how you can take that from that article that hardly mentions the carbon tax. Like I say its important to inform the public that the coalitions policy is having a negative impact on some industry's and jobs because the Government or News corp certainly wont.

While specific sectors may benefit, there is a net detriment to business and the economy overall with an increased cost of energy.

This is probably true.

 

[noco]

The ABC is out of control......It is in full swing supporting the Alarmists of Global Warming.......With reporting like this, full of lies and exaggeration, what chance has the Government got all this crap they preach?


Andrew Bolt
July 08 2014 (7:53am)


Record sea ice around Antarctica this year:

image

As for ice on Antarctica itself, even if you believe the calculations of the warmist US National Climate Assessment the loss is actually minimal:

Antarctica is losing about 0.0045% of its ice per decade””about 4.5/10,000ths of a percent per year.

But here is how the ABC’s Lateline last night reported on Antarctica, omitting both the above critical facts:

EMMA ALBERICI, PRESENTER: There’s more research tonight pointing to dramatic changes underway in Antarctica. Australian researchers have identified how warm water is increasingly pushing out cold water around the white continent, prompting more ice to melt and further sea level rises.

Reader Lachie spent last night watching an ABC entirely captured by the Left:

It started with The Drum full of glee at Palmer blocking $8 Billion of savings of the budget and had refugee advocate Allan on arguing how Australia was in all manner of human rights breaches over the Tamil return, ably assisted by the host.

The news was full of the same, making the Abbott Government look terrible and Clive Palmer look powerful. More condemnation of the Australian government over human rights abuses and the High Court decision to prevent the Sri Lankan handover. Showed Jenny Macklin demanding that they keep the schoolkids bonus.

The 7:30 programme went into full inner city latte mode with the following:

- Sabra Lane highlighting Abbott’s difficulties and the fawning over the PUP party power in the new Senate

- An interview with lawyer David Manne over Australia’s terrible human rights abuses of the current Sri Lankan boat people.

- A pro-Palestinian piece focussing mostly on the dead Palestinian youth and how the Israeli settlers are occupying more land in the settlements. (Just your typical left wing bias glossing over the barbaric Palestinian behaviours.)

Four Corners then had a Steven Long piece only interviewing global warming alarmists and solar/wind carpet baggers [plus Environment Minister Greg Hunt] about how Australia was being completely left behind by not rushing out to pour even more borrowed billions to throw at renewable energy. There was no contrary viewpoint put about their inefficiency or the huge cost to power consumers.


Media Watch‘s Paul Barry had a huge whinge about the two new appointments to the panel appointing ABC board members, attacking their lack of impartiality and their inability to not be biased. The great irony is that Barry asked for impartial appointees, without observing the total Left wing bias of the whole ABC organisation.

Q&A was the usual four-against-one panel with poor Judith Sloan battling against a panel and an audience just wanting full-on spend-spend Keynesian economics and saying there was absolutely no budget emergency. The banner along the bottom was meanwhile running the headline with excited glee about the High Court stopping the refugee transfers. Q&A tonight was supposed to be only about economics but unsurprisingly a questioner still managed to ask a question about our refugee policy and whether Australians should be ashamed of our government and ridiculously likened it to late 1930s sending Jews back to Nazi Germany.

Lateline ran with glee the lead story of how the High Court has halted the Sri Lankan transfer and their guest for the evening was - surprise surprise - a refugee advocate. The political headlines were again about Clive Palmer’s success at punching an $8 Billion hole in Tony Abbott’s budget. Next was an global warming alarmist piece about how Antarctica is warming much quicker because they have now found warmer water is melting the ice at a much faster rate and will lead to tenths of metre rise increases over the next century (as in cm’s but it sounds much scarier said in tenths of metres).

How the ABC can continue to serve up this blatant leftist bias whilst violating their charter constantly? They must be feeling they are under no pressure to comply.

For this to just be an average night’s viewing on this public behemoth is quite scary and I hope someone in the government takes up this issue - starting with the replacement of Malcolm Turnbull who is absolutely useless on the issue.

The ABC is out of control.

 

[DocK]

I did enjoy Australian Story though - really like Megan Washington - voice of an angel.

 

[basilio]

I also saw the ABC 4 Corners program last night. Appropriately called Power to the people

Amazing wasn't it to see the range of US states going full bore for solar and wind energy. Democrats and Republicans alike.

Great to see how the technology of storing solar and wind power is now mature and operational. To see how Apple is running its huge servers solely off renewables not simply because it is cleaner but because it is reliable and they ran it.

Fascinating to see how the old boy treasurer from the Orange Bowls club installed 136 solar panels to tackle their huge power bill. Payback time is 3 years

And underlying all of this change is the simple fact that renewable energy is infinite and, after establishment, far and away cheaper and more reliable than fossil fuels.

Yep coal fired energy stations will fold - much like the horse and cart. And if you had actually bothered to note it Noco the program did look at the increases in electricity costs and everyone agreed the largest component was deliberate gold plating of poles and wires infrastructure.

Naturally this was a ABC program Noco. We would expect nothing less.

http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/four-corners/NC1404H023S00

 

[drsmith]

Fascinating to see how the old boy treasurer from the Orange Bowls club installed 136 solar panels to tackle their huge power bill. Payback time is 3 years

The payback for the solar panels on the roof of my house was under 3-years but that was due to the huge government subsidies on offer, both at the state and federal level.

Gold plating of electricity infrastructure is a separate issue and doesn't change the merit (or otherwise) of government favouring a particular industry or technology through subsidy and/or policy that increases the absolute cost of the alternatives.

Fossil fuel in my view is a stepping stone towards harnessing greater forms of energy. Renewable energy in the present context is not infinite. It is limited by what the sun can shine on the earth and from that, what we can harness.

 

[basilio]

The payback for the solar panels on the roof of my house was under 3-years but that was due to the huge government subsidies on offer, both at the state and federal level.

Gold plating of electricity infrastructure is a separate issue and doesn't change the merit (or otherwise) of government favouring a particular industry or technology through subsidy and/or policy that increases the absolute cost of the alternatives.

Fossil fuel in my view is a stepping stone towards harnessing greater forms of energy. Renewable energy in the present context is not infinite. It is limited by what the sun can shine on the earth and from that, what we can harness.

Few points
1) The gold plating of electricity infrastructure is part of the explicit subsidy for current centralised power systems. Interestingly enough a very good reason for encouraging people to have solar panels was to ensure the power industry didn't have to provide expensive extra peak load generation. Teh solar panels did that quite nicely.

2) The fossil fuel industry is already massively subsidised by governments. Paying of industry infrastructure, other subsidies. Check out the billion dollar list below.

3) I think you are being cute with saying renewable energy is not infinite. My meaning (and the accepted meaning) is that unlike fossil fuel resources the sun, wind and waves will always provide energy. The amount available will also be on a scale sufficient to power human activity.

Lets agree that fossil fuels have been a stepping stone for civilization and that now is the time to move forward to cleaner renewable energy sources before we actually run out of a polluting non renewable energy

http://environmentvictoria.org.au/fossilfuelsubsidies#.U7tWNkDNyyM

 

[Knobby22]

Agree Basilio. Made Australia look a bit backward compared to the USA.
The Republican state Texas is actually one of the most forward states in using alternative energy.

With regard to the news, what does Andrew Bolt want? "Look away, look away, nothing happening here?"

 

[Calliope]

It is strange basilio that you are now pushing your climate change hysteria stuff on The ABC is Political thread.:screwy:

 

[Julia]

It is strange basilio that you are now pushing your climate change hysteria stuff on The ABC is Political thread.:screwy:

Any thread will do. Basilio isn't too discriminating about taking every opportunity to go on about climate change.

For once I agree with Andrew Bolt. Last night's ABCTV's program seemed in its entirety to be designed for maximum attempt to influence the PUP senators before the vote on the carbon tax is taken.

The ABC has no compunction in ignoring any notion of balance when it comes to pushing their own agenda.

 

[basilio]

And exactly who mentioned 'climate change' folks ? I certainly didn't do so in any way.

Neither did the 4 Corners program.

And perhaps remember I was responding to Noco's trashing of a particularly good ABC examination of the direction of Australia's energy future.

The reasons for moving from non renewable polluting energy sources like coal/oil/gas to renewable cleaner processes include:

1) Longer term energy savings
2) National energy security
3) Heading off (or trying to) the risk of complete societal collapse when current energy sources turn down (Peak oil/coal )
4) Local energy control
5) Reduction in carbon pollutants. (The most obvious of these are carbon particulates but obviously you can include CO2 emissions.)

And Andrew Bolt's comments ? Well he is never, ever, ever going to support a renewable energy future and the non-government parties over the coal industry and the the Liberal government is he ?

No matter how much sense there is in facts...