Australian Politics General...

[sptrawler]

What is it with the main stream parties that despite all the flak they have copped over the years, they still want to instal their captains picks in a vacant parliamentary seat.
Local members are treated as serfs, expected to front up at election time and do the leg work for the party, organise fund raisers etc, but they should never think themselves so uppity that they get to choose their own candidate.
This time its the the libs at fed level, namely the PM, who have "chosen" a failed state parliamentary hack to run in a federal seat, overiding whatever wishes the local members may have.
How many times do they think they can get away with it?
They wonder why so many disaffected potential candidates end up running as independents.
I hope that constance loses to a popular local person.
Mick

That happens at all levels of Government IMO, there is a big branch stacking investigation going on somewhere at the moment, the chances of a local hard working member getting pre selected, would be similar odds to lotto. ?
There is more likelyhood of them getting the job, of being a mattress, for a member being parachuted in.

The other classic, is the father/son rule, oh sorry that's AFL.

Parliamentary relations: political families in the Commonwealth Parliament

.js table tbody .even th, .js table tbody .even td, table thead th, table thead td { background: inherit;} Updated 9 November 2015 PDF version [323 KB] Hannah Gobbett and Martin Lumb Politics and Public Administration Section This paper is an update of Martin Lumb’s P

www.aph.gov.au

 

[sptrawler]

A couple of articles, which probably highlight why Turnbull was chucked out, one is Turnbull explaining that the Nationals are climate deniers and the other Barnaby Joyce explaining why he has an obligation to represent those who voted for him.

Malcolm Turnbull: Oct 18 2021

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

Barnaby Joyce: Oct 18 2021

Hon. Barnaby Joyce MP. Interview with Michael Rowland, ABC News Breakfast Monday, 18 October 2021

Interview with Michael Rowland, ABC News BreakfastMonday, 18 October 2021TOPICS: Net zeroEO&E…MICHAEL ROWLAND: The Prime Minister may now be heading

www.miragenews.com

 

[mullokintyre]

explaining why he has an obligation to represent those who voted for him.

who does he think he is?
Representing the people who voted for him!.
Thats not how democracy works, it is supposed to be the power elites telling the plebs whats good for them.
Mick

 

[SirRumpole]

A couple of articles, which probably highlight why Turnbull was chucked out, one is Turnbull explaining that the Nationals are climate deniers and the other Barnaby Joyce explaining why he has an obligation to represent those who voted for him.

Malcolm Turnbull: Oct 18 2021

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

Barnaby Joyce: Oct 18 2021

Hon. Barnaby Joyce MP. Interview with Michael Rowland, ABC News Breakfast Monday, 18 October 2021

Interview with Michael Rowland, ABC News BreakfastMonday, 18 October 2021TOPICS: Net zeroEO&E…MICHAEL ROWLAND: The Prime Minister may now be heading

www.miragenews.com

If Morrison really wanted a 2050 target then he should put the legislation to the Labor Party and if Labor agreed the Nats would be irrelevant.

I doubt if Morrison has the guts for that though.

 

[sptrawler]

If Morrison really wanted a 2050 target then he should put the legislation to the Labor Party and if Labor agreed the Nats would be irrelevant.

I doubt if Morrison has the guts for that though.

There is no point in having a coalition, if you only give a $hit about what your side has to say, that was Turnbull and Rudds problem they only gave a $hit what they had to say.
Right or wrong, Joyce is representing his constituents, they have the same rights to be heard as anyone else, it is no different to cancelling Hanson.
It is up to Morrison to convince the Nats it is in their and their constituents best interest to work out a workable way to adopt the desired outcome, not just find a way to shut them up and put a knife in their backs.
If he can't do that then they will probably get creamed by the media and the electorate, if Morrison sides with labor to defeat his own coalition partners he deserves to go the way of Turnbull IMO.

I see Turnbull was made head of the NSW climate board for about one week, obviously he put paid to that plan when he called for a moratorium on new coalmines and mine expansions within a short period of appointment, but hey lets blame Murdoch. My guess is one dose of Malcolm was enough for everyone who attended.

Turnbull blames 'rightwing media' for dumping from NSW climate change board

Former PM claims NSW Coalition government was influenced by News Corp when it reversed his appointment to new Net Zero Emissions and Clean Economy board

www.theguardian.com

 

[Knobby22]

who does he think he is?
Representing the people who voted for him!.
Thats not how democracy works, it is supposed to be the power elites telling the plebs whats good for them.
Mick

Yea, I wonder if it is more representing who is donating to the party.
The farmers are scared the EU are going to put in tariffs, farmers federation is for action, they and also want the deals so they can get cash for their bit contributing to a greener economy. They can get credits for the land but at present only the government gets it.

Australian Farmers | Discover the story of Australian agriculture

Australian Farmers provides a window into Australia's vibrant farm sector. Uncover the stories of the people behind your food and fibre, and access facts and resources to improve your knowledge of one of Australia's most important industries.

farmers.org.au

Australia can't afford to get this wrong - National Farmers' Federation

The bright and prosperous future of farmers and regional Australians depends on the Government getting its climate change commitments right. An important part of this is to provide a just and supported transition. “Right now, is a moment in time in which we can change for the better how, as...

nff.org.au

I think they are representing coal interests as that is where they are getting their election funding.

 

[mullokintyre]

Yea, I wonder if it is more representing who is donating to the party.

Well, if one takes that attitude, one needs to apply it to all parties, not just the nats.
So you would need to look at all positions and utterances through the prism of donations.

Mick

 

[Knobby22]

Well, if one takes that attitude, one needs to apply it to all parties, not just the nats.
So you would need to look at all positions and utterances through the prism of donations.

Mick

100% true. The Libs are influenced but less so.
Labor has to obey the Unions. State parties have been proven to be influenced by the gambling lobby, I will give points to NSW for pushing back, Victoria is just hopeless.

But the NATs need the farmers on side. They had better be careful.
Their southern seats have nothing to do with coal.

 

[sptrawler]

Yea, I wonder if it is more representing who is donating to the party.
The farmers are scared the EU are going to put in tariffs, farmers federation is for action, they and also want the deals so they can get cash for their bit contributing to a greener economy. They can get credits for the land but at present only the government gets it.

Australian Farmers | Discover the story of Australian agriculture

Australian Farmers provides a window into Australia's vibrant farm sector. Uncover the stories of the people behind your food and fibre, and access facts and resources to improve your knowledge of one of Australia's most important industries.

farmers.org.au

Australia can't afford to get this wrong - National Farmers' Federation

The bright and prosperous future of farmers and regional Australians depends on the Government getting its climate change commitments right. An important part of this is to provide a just and supported transition. “Right now, is a moment in time in which we can change for the better how, as...

nff.org.au

I think they are representing coal interests as that is where they are getting their election funding.

That is what the media would have you believe, but if you lived in an area with your family, that relied on you having a job I'm sure you would be concerned.
If you live in a city as I do and am retired I don't give a rats, but when in my early years I did work in a coal area and the whole community was dependent on it, without it there wouldn't be a community.
That is fine for the young who just move elsewhere, but for those with limited options, it means the value of their house goes, their earning potential goes, their whole world implodes.
It is very easy to just make them a faceless group that morph into one person, then ignore their plight, but they are a taxpayer same as everyone else and they are voters same as everyone else, so they have just as much right to voice their concerns as others have to ignore them.
We as a society are becoming very good, at ignoring those, who appear to getting in the way of our own beliefs.

Maybe the media could do a piece on what the Nationals actually want and what options are available, rather than just demonising them as getting in the way of net zero by being bloody minded?

 

[sptrawler]

I just read this article, it sounds as though Barnaby has decided he has received enough coverage for his point of view and is falling into line behind the P.M. The recent photo's of him, don't bode well for his health IMO.

Barnaby Joyce says Scott Morrison has a mandate on climate

The Deputy Prime Minister defended his party for dragging out talks on the emissions target but conceded the Prime Minister had the “prerogative” to decide the policy.

www.theage.com.au

 

[basilio]

That is what the media would have you believe, but if you lived in an area with your family, that relied on you having a job I'm sure you would be concerned.
If you live in a city as I do and am retired I don't give a rats, but when in my early years I did work in a coal area and the whole community was dependent on it, without it there wouldn't be a community.
That is fine for the young who just move elsewhere, but for those with limited options, it means the value of their house goes, their earning potential goes, their whole world implodes.
It is very easy to just make them a faceless group that morph into one person, then ignore their plight, but they are a taxpayer same as everyone else and they are voters same as everyone else, so they have just as much right to voice their concerns as others have to ignore them.
We as a society are becoming very good, at ignoring those, who appear to getting in the way of our own beliefs.

Maybe the media could do a piece on what the Nationals actually want and what options are available, rather than just demonising them as getting in the way of net zero by being bloody minded?

Critical point SP. The move to renewable energy has to provide opportunities for people and communities previously dependent on coal. That can be done and is being done. But simply saying we will ignore the issue of global warming and keep producing coal is a disastrous decision.

The Nationals have a farming community who recogise the reality, the challenges and the opportunities around responding to global warming. The business community has also come on board and wants to change direction and develop the new industries required to deal with CC. The coal companies are one of the few groups who , because of self interest alone, refuse to recognise how critical it is to stop mining coal.

 

[sptrawler]

. The coal companies are one of the few groups who , because of self interest alone, refuse to recognise how critical it is to stop mining coal.

You are trying to make out, the people who own and run coal companies are stupid, that IMO is a ridiculous conclusion.

They are as smart, as people who own and run other companies, they know that the time for coal is in decline, but they also have to keep mining and selling it because we need it to make steel, Indonesia needs it to run their power stations and China needs it.
You can't shut down an industry that supports so many other people, just because you don't like it, that is a simplistic childish stance to take.
It will be gradual, that is a given and until a replacement is found in some processes it probably can't be replaced ATM.

 

[SirRumpole]

Right or wrong, Joyce is representing his constituents, they have the same rights to be heard as anyone else, it is no different to cancelling Hanson.

But is he ?

Maybe he hasn't read the National Farmers Federation's attitutude to climate change .

https://nff.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/2020.08.06_Policy_NRM_Climate_Change.pdf

 

[sptrawler]

But is he ?

Maybe he hasn't read the National Farmers Federation's attitutude to climate change .

https://nff.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/2020.08.06_Policy_NRM_Climate_Change.pdf

Maybe his constituents aren't all farmers?
It's a bit like saying Labor should only represent what the elite's want, because they vote for Labor and want climate action.
Or that workers shouldn't be represented by the Coalition, because it is a business based party.
Just all stereotypical nonsense that gets pedalled, to undermine baseless assumptions and arguments.
Like I said all constituents have a right to be heard, not just those who the member, the media or the vocal sector of the public agree with.

 

[basilio]

You are trying to make out, the people who own and run coal companies are stupid, that IMO is a ridiculous conclusion.

They are as smart, as people who own and run other companies, they know that the time for coal is in decline, but they also have to keep mining and selling it because we need it to make steel, Indonesia needs it to run their power stations and China needs it.
You can't shut down an industry that supports so many other people, just because you don't like it, that is a simplistic childish stance to take.
It will be gradual, that is a given and until a replacement is found in some processes it probably can't be replaced ATM.

SP, scientists have been absolutely certain about the reality of CC for at least 30 years now. The fossil fuel industry privately agreed with that science in the 1980's and early 90's. That is on the record. At every point from 1989 onwards the argument around dealing with CC was a measured but clear move out of fossil fuel energy to clean sources of energy. At that stage no one was talking about immediate or even near term closing down of fossil fuels. The understanding was that a 30-40 year wind down and re engineering was a huge job but do able. And the outcome seemed fairly promising.

The response from the coal and oil companies however was unremitting lies and the sowing of doubt around a scientific issue they themselves understood and agreed was true.

Since then these industries have continuously expanded their exploitation of fossil fuels and poisoned the political and social landscape around how deadly the the consequences would be. 30 years later we have absolutely no wriggle room left if we are to avoid the worst consequences of global warming. The sad part is that the last 30 years has made 1.5 -2C degree increase in world temperature a certainty. It will take a mammoth effort to hold the situation at that point - if we move at warp speed. We could have avoided all that if we had started realistic changes in 1990.

I realise that you appear pretty "meh" about CC. Many others posters on ASF are still sure it is hoax, not happening or just a lefty lie. But this isn't going to stop the ice caps melting and flooding our cities or higher world wide temperatures making human survival precarious in Indonesia China and Australia. So maybe we should be realistic about the situation?

 

[sptrawler]

@basilio whether climate change is true or false is no longer the issue, it has been acknowledged and is being acted on.

The problem is the loonies haven't moved on and they don't realise it can't be fixed with the flick of a switch, but go on endlessly like demented beings, driving everyone nuts.

 

[moXJO]

Good luck with coal bringing in top dollar at the moment.

 

[sptrawler]

Well at least now with the coalition agreeing on net zero by 2050, we should have a good election issue to differentiate the parties, with them all being on the same page looking for the the same goal it should make for an interesting campaign period.

 

[wayneL]

Thoughts on Dan's Enabling Act?

 

[sptrawler]

Thoughts on Dan's Enabling Act?

Can you post a link?