This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Australian Politics General...

Jump to new

Did you read the analysis or not Logique? It was very good analysis of the effect over consumption of sugar has on health and the effective way a sugar tax can reduce consumption and help health.
The example of taxing cigarettes and grog is obvious.
Well worth a read and think.
 
Yesterday Richard Di Natale was thrown out of the Senate for refusing to retract his comment that Senator Barry O' Sullivan was a pig.
Senator Di Natale came back into the House today and opened up a debate on the need for respect in Parliament and in particular the deliberate lack of respect by some members towards women in Parliament. Interestingly the targets of his comments refused to stay and listen.

Well worth a read.

Di Natale calls three senators who walked out 'cowards'
Richard Di Natale:

It is not my intention to disrespect the Senate or its processes. I have great respect for this institution. It is one of the honours of my life to be standing here representing the people of my home state and leading the Australian Greens. It is a privilege and an honour to do it, and I reflect on that every day.

This is a place where all of us can help shape the nature of our society. Indeed, we can be a force for good. Mr President, that’s why I couldn’t withdraw my statement yesterday, because the repeated shaming and innuendo directed and not just across at this side of the chamber but directed right across the Senate is reinforcing a culture of workplace harassment and the open harassment of women in our society.

Australia does have a deep and disturbing problem of violence against women. I remember Malcolm Turnbull, the former prime minister, saying that not all disrespect towards women leads to violence but that’s where all the violence against women starts.

https://www.theguardian.com/austral...b04e8ca091e40b#b-5bfdcffde4b04e8ca091e40b
 
Conservative senators walk out as Greens leader slams their treatment of women

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11...ns-leader-calls-out-sexist-behaviour/10561496

So how should one respond when a Senator Barry O Sullavin says..

"Parliament descended into ugly scenes on Tuesday afternoon after Senator O'Sullivan said Senator Hanson-Young had "a bit of [Nick] Xenophon in her — and I don't mean that to be a double reference"."
 
Another hit for the Liberal Party onb their treatment of women.

Julia Banks dropped a bombshell on Scott Morrison's Liberals, with precision

Julia Banks' extraordinary decision to resign as a Liberal MP and plunge the Morrison Government further into minority sends a devastating message to voters that the Liberal Party is hostile to women.

It's the message she wanted to send.

The narrative that the conservative side of politics has become anti-women has been bolstered by a range of female voices both on and off the record who have been agitating for change.

Until now we have heard strong words, but little action from those who have spoken out against bullying, intimidation and a broader culture problem inside the governing party. Ms Banks' move to the crossbench sends a signal that the crisis she identifies inside the Liberal Party — including the actions and ideas of the so called "reactionaries" — is so profound she is prepared to be accused of being a traitor and a political rat to deliver her point.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11...banks-australian-parliament-liberals/10560914

 
Been some very quick action in the Senate after the uproar over Senator Barry O'Sullovan latest slur to Sarah Hansen Young Greens and Richard Di Natales white hot, head on response which ended up involving all political parties.

Final result ? Changing Senate procedures to deny Senators a free sledging kick.

Senate changes procedures after O'Sullivan comment
In the fastest I have seen the Senate work since I stepped into this place two and a bit years ago, the procedures committee have come back after Scott Ryan suggested changes to how formal business motions are dealt with this morning, and came back with a resounding, yes, do that.

So now, during formal business, when motions get moved, senators will no longer be able to debate before attempting to suspend standing orders, to bring the debate on.

What we are talking about here are some of the crazy motions we have seen put forward in recent months. ‘Formality is denied’ – ie, the Senate says no, but then the Senator can move to suspend standing orders. During that procedure, we have increasingly seen the suspend standing order debates being used as a sledging fest. And it’s all been getting a bit gross. The senators know that the motions have no chance of getting up, that standing orders won’t be suspended, so they use the time as a slanging match.

And a cohort of senators, the collective of which is known as a “Jurassic”, have been using that to go nuts.

But no more.

Now, for at least the duration of this parliament, when someone wants to suspend standing orders, there will be no debate – just a division.

Which takes a way one of the main forums for some of the, shall we say grotesque unpleasantness we have seen in the Senate over the last couple of months.
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...rison-dutton-shorten-australian-politics-live
 
Can someone explain why O'Sullivans comments were sexist? I must have wagged school that day. I don't get it.
 
What was happening in the Senate

For many months now O'Sullivan, Anning, and the Liberal Democrat creep have trying to mind - xuck Sarah Hansen-Young.

The process is simple. They make nasty, sexist, slanderous comments at the back of the room which can't be picked up by the microphones but are heard and intended to be heard by Sarah Hansen Young.

They are intended to belittle and intimidate her. Because they are not made out loud they aren't able to be challenged because they are not on tape. If Sarah does make a challenge they can just deny it and grin. If she just swallows it they have got in another little mind-xuck.

I recognise it well because it is the one of the oldest and most lethal tactics students use in a classroom to undermine a teacher - particulaly if it's a female.

Other people knew it of course but coming out in defense if the person is always a challenge. Yesterday Barry O'Sullivan came out with his snide little jibe about Sarah Hansen-Young "having a bit of (Nick) Xenophen in her ". Senator Di Natale decided to go full throttle on the comment itself but also all the nasty, sexist jibes made in the past few months. He was determined to shame them all and effectively demand that the Senate take action to stop this corrosive behaviour. No surprise to hear Sullivan and co just walked out of the chamber.

To date the most immediate outcome has been changes to the Senate procedures that will deny O'Sullivan and co the opportunity to make these "sotte voce" comments. But interestingly representatives from all parties acknowledged that this was serious stuff and damaged the integrity of the Parliament.
 
wayneL said:
Can someone explain why O'Sullivans comments were sexist? I must have wagged school that day. I don't get it.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing the phrase "there was a bit of Nick Xenophon in" SHY suggests that in a past life norty Nick might have inserted his 5¼ inch floppy disk and pressed any key to continue..

Apart from that.. no idea.
 
PZ99 said:
I'm guessing the phrase "there was a bit of Nick Xenophon in" SHY suggests that in a past life norty Nick might have inserted his 5¼ inch floppy disk and pressed any key to continue..

Apart from that.. no idea.
Click to expand...

Certainly not the meaning when the full quote is seen. He is referring to Xenephon calling for committees to be established and then failing to attend those committees. It is only offensive, IMO, if you deliberately choose to be offended and assume the meaning that he deliberately ruled out.

I have often heard the expression "there is a bit of so-and-so in him/her" and it has always been taken to mean that he or she exhibits similar characteristics as so-and-so.

The fact that SHY keeps referring to herself as a slut is something that only she can vouch for.

Just my take.

 
He did qualify before he said the comment, what he was meaning by the reference, so it wouldn't be misconstrued.
I don't watch Government on tv, it is bad enough living with the outcomes, but it looked as though the Greens jumped on it and ran with it.
 
Bellenuit, the reference by Barry O'Sullivian to a "a bit of Xenepohen in her " was a a crafty line intended to to portray Sarah Hansen Young as a sex partner of Xen and was quickly and completely understood by the rest of the house. This was because of Barrys long history of snide comments to SHY mostly made "sotte voce". In this case he managed to "slip it in" and then "retract" it - but of course he had still made his jab.

I outlined the history of what has happened in the Senate. If you care to look you'll see that the conservative Libs in particular have decided to attack the Greens but SHY in particular and decided that personal attacks are just far more effective than debating policies. In her case she is an outspoken woman.
Think Julia Gillard with a few less brains and a bit less class.
 
Well it is a bit like saying their is a bit of Julia Gillard, in Sarah Hanson Young, some would say she is playing the same game.
I personally thought Gillard, from my limited viewing of the incident, basically verbally abused Abbott.
It seems as though abuse is becoming a one way street, I read the other day, that over 80 teachers in W.A have compo claims totaling over $1million for physical assault by students.

https://www.watoday.com.au/national...-school-assaults-in-2017-20171211-h02s3j.html

https://www.couriermail.com.au/news...s/news-story/6b8546968d57203b5ca35cb5cb4985f1

It would appear that abuse isn't gender and or age specific.
 
basilio said:
Bellenuit, the reference by Barry O'Sullivian to a "a bit of Xenepohen in her " was a a crafty line intended to to portray Sarah Hansen Young as a sex partner of Xen and was quickly and completely understood by the rest of the house.
Click to expand...

Bas, then they all got it wrong as he clearly ruled that out in the same sentence and explained exactly what he was referring to. It is the Greens foul outburst that made offence out of non-offence.
 
If Barry O'Sullivian wanted to compare SHY to Nick Xenephon he could have quite easily said something like "it seems similiar to what Nick Xenephon was doing". That would have worked quite well without the (snide) ambiguity he introduced with his "a bit of Xen in her"

No misunderstandings here folks. Everyone understood the jab. The over the top response was for everything that had been said and to date got away with. When you read the response of the Speaker he quickly acknowledges the history of gratuitous sledging which he believes should be stopped if the Senate is to regain it's dignity.
 
basilio said:
That would have worked quite well without the (snide) ambiguity he introduced with his "a bit of Xen in her"
Click to expand...

But Bas it wasn't in the least bit ambiguous. He clearly stated the meaning of what he said. The Greens deliberately chose to take the meaning he had specifically ruled out. They wanted to take offence and wanted to ascribe that offence to something that wasn't said.

Of course he could have worded it differently. But that is a common expression and if anyone wanted to take offence with it then they would likely take offence with any other way he might say it.

Not only did he reject any double entendre within the same sentence, he then clearly stated why SHY was acting like Xenephon.

IMO the Left have a history of looking for offence where there isn't. Look at the "Ditch the witch" remarks against Abbott while the very same people were running around singing "Ho Ho the Witch is dead" when Margaret Thatcher died. And what was the other great crime Gillard referenced? Oh yes, Abbott looked at his watch when she was talking.
 
wayneL said:
Can someone explain why O'Sullivans comments were sexist? I must have wagged school that day. I don't get it.
Click to expand...

We normally disagree Banjo boy but on this one I'm still unaware of what happened. Theres SHY exposing cleavage in the House whilst crying sexism. You reckon she didn't wear that on purpose to bait a reaction.
 
Darc Knight said:
We normally disagree Banjo boy but on this one I'm still unaware of what happened. Theres SHY exposing cleavage in the House whilst crying sexism. You reckon she didn't wear that on purpose to bait a reaction.
Click to expand...

A lot of stupid bickering going on about fairly trivial behaviour.

Sarah is no shrinking violet and de Natalie's reaction was over the top.

I wish they would start discussing things that affect the rest of us, not just them.
 
I was fairly hopeful of some sensibility from the Greens whwn Di Natalie became leader. He seemed pretty level headed at the time.

He seems to becoming more and more unhinged aling the rest of the Greens.

As much as I really strongly disagree with current Labor policy, they have got it together. It will be a bloody disaster fiscally and culturally, but in terms of discipline, they are the only part that deserve goverment.

...unfortunately
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Effects of the US election on the Australian economy and politics
Replies
2
Views
483
SirRumpole
Election 2025 + Preferential Voting
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
JohnDe
Australian of The Year 2025
Replies
0
Views
269
farmerge
US Election 2024 : Stock and Economic Comment
7 8 9
Replies
171
Views
11K
divs4ever
Health Issues
2 3 4
Replies
69
Views
3K
frugal.rock
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...