You Am I posted:

The Murdoch press still trying to make a story out of that. Jeez

Palmersaurus posted:

Read them in a David McGhan/Micallef voice and they end up being pretty funny.

I'm not convinced that they're completely sincere.

Mithranderp posted:

What's worse is that it pales in comparison to the amount of American money that funds the LNP.

Gough Suppressant posted:

Yeah but that's different because... y'know...

Mills posted:

Wait. Did this guy really put his three year old on a boat, send it out into the ocean, and then hand responsibility for it to someone else?

"I don't know where my daughter is." Of course you don't. You put her on a sinking boat.

Hypation posted:

So I go off on holidays wondering if liberals have returned to run the Liberal Party......

And first thing I see nearly is that Scott Morrison gently caress off and die death camp video. Watching that is like the definition of ambivalence - sure its not exactly good, but it means that all hope is not lost, because with poo poo like that it won't take long for MT & Co to the bastards.

open24hours posted:

Trading guaranteed death for possible death seems like a pretty good deal.

quote:

Rundle: a buzz of black and yellow as newbies take their seats

Carbon tax rushed to burial, Clive Palmer setting the policy agenda, and Erica Betz told to "piss off" by crossbenchers on the floor of the upper house ... days don’t get much more lively in Canberra than yesterday, the first day of the new Senate. The Coalition got its first rude lesson in how not to handle the crossbench, with a failed attempt to bully and berate the Palmer United Party senators into voting a bundled carbon tax repeal bill forward. That was voted down, and Palmer himself, who spent much of the day on the Senate floor, announced a raft of new strictures he would place on the budget and conditions for putting the repeal through. But by evening, the signature policy of the Gillard government was being quietly prepared for execution -- a solitary visitor in the public gallery was in attendance, and the press gallery locked. Thus do we do politics in Australia.

The day began with the usual pomp -- by which is meant an assembly with the eerie air of first day at primary school and a regional Tidy Town award ceremony. There was a brief flurry when it became clear that the Palmer United/Motoring Enthusiasts bloc had, to a man and woman, decided to affirm their oath of office rather than swear on the Bible, or a Falcon maintenance manual. Thou shalt have no other gods but Clive, perhaps. They had also shown the way with party colours -- Labor and Libs both piked the unanimous wearing of the red or blue in ties or dresses, and the Greens forgo on the chance to look like an aviary, but the PUP rocked out the yellow and black -- especially Jacqui Lambie, who resembled the Commonwealth Bank logo, not perhaps the best look these days. Glenn Lazarus, PUP Senate leader, took up two seats down the front, and sandwiched between the Greens and the Coalition were the odds'n'sods -- DLP, LDP and Family First, just about the palest group of people you’ve ever seen, less bloc, more isolation ward.

Precedent was further disturbed when there was a non-government nominee for Senate president -- the Greens' Scott Ludlam. Had they wanted, Labor and the crossbenches en masse could have imposed a non-government president and cycled it every year between them, but there was no chance of that happening, and Ludlam gained the votes of … the Greens.

But the main game was always going to be the climate tax repeal bill, which the government has been trying to bring up to the first day of sitting -- even though the debate and vote had already been tabled for a week hence, when a committee report drops. This was the first big test of the crossbenches. With Labor and the Greens wanting to have the vote as timetabled, what would the PUP bloc do? All eyes were upon them, the moment was theirs. Lucky Clive screwed it -- or did he? -- by holding yet another Press Club speech at exactly the same time.

So, as the PUP flexed its doggy muscles and voted down the Coalition’s attempt to bring forward the debate, the gallery was trailing down Capital Hill to the Press Club -- a perfect Canberra distance away, too close to drive, a nuisance to have to walk -- to hear the latest in Clive Palmer Thought. Good thing we hurried, because Clive was brief to the point of insult, if you'd paid full whack. With some words that might have been taken from the book of verse he published some decades ago -- "we are in this for our children, and our children are in this for time, and time waits for no man" -- he added to the current strictures he was putting on the now-beleaguered Abbott government. Having already rejected the Norton-Kemp proposals on free-market uni fees, the $7 GP co-pay, and the six-month dole pause, Palmer now rejected the abolition of the schoolkids' bonus and tied support for abolishing the mining tax to it. He also plugged together the Emissions Trading Scheme with a vote for Direct Action -- unless Abbott supports the former, Palmer won’t support the latter.

Denying, under repeated questioning, that there was any malfeasance in the payment of $12 million from a Mineralogy fund for his election campaigning, Palmer nevertheless had to utter -- when challenged about whether he had signed the cheques that transferred the money -- the fatal words "I don’t recall".

Great media moments, but by the time everyone trekked back to the Senate, PUP senators had already done their star turn. By the account of those who remained, the Coalition was gobsmacked by this display of insolence, which threw their plans into disarray. Senate leader Erica and others, a crossbencher told Crikey, were all but standing over the PUP group, trying to berate them into a yes vote. That failed, they resorted to condescension -- "are you sure you know what you’re doing?" the PUP senators were asked, at which point the Coalition heavies were pointed in the general direction of "off".

Since all this was going on at the same time as Clive was quoting JFK and talking about a Love Revolution at the Press, it could be said to be a wasted media opportunity -- PUP's bite as well as bark, etc, etc. But it also served as useful cover for what could also have been a car crash as the new senators dealt with their first big strategic and tactical call.

The latter suggested itself later in the day, after hours of back and forth horse-trading, with senators charging down corridors to find each other, handicapped by the fact that no one knew where anyone had been put. One Greens member had a chat with me, I said, "You must have work to do", took my leave, and he barrelled towards Clive’s office. Libs were queuing up to bend the knee.

How the crossbenchers were coping with this is anyone’s guess. No one was paying much attention to the micro-party groups -- there was no chance that John Madigan, David Leyonhjelm or Bob Day would delay the vote. They’re also fairly grizzled veterans of politics, in or out of the chamber. Question time consisted of a half-hour of cat-and-mouse as to whether the Coalition would admit that a report on the co-pay said it would crush the elderly, and a debate as to what the meaning of "aware" was ("I am aware of the report"). It’s the golden moment of question time -- that time when the schoolchildren herded into the public galleries get a glimpse of "democracy" and become, to a girl and boy, fervent admirers of Mussolini -- and the PUP bloc watched with widening eyes. Whatever their lives had been before, this was where they were now, for the next six years, locked in a room the colour of blood with a bunch of student politicians who want to do nothing but this all day.

By the evening session, the bills had been disentangled, and Palmer’s new demands -- tying retention of the schoolkids' bonus to the mining tax abolition, and the rolling over of an ETS not only to the carbon tax repeal, but to Direct Action -- had been allowed to percolate through. Many saw in this the hand of the Australia Institute, which had worked on the Clive-Al Gore extravaganza -- Michelle Grattan suggesting that Palmer’s announcements had been tied to the near-simultaneous release of an Australia Institute paper specifying how the low-income measures Palmer is preserving contribute to lessening inequality in Australia -- but others are sceptical. "This is all Clive," said a long-time Palmer observer. "This is the art of the deal."

Thus, when the vote was put again, the motion to put the debate next week, as scheduled, was lost as the PUP bloc switched their votes. There now follows an intricate series of votes in which the Coalition will have to keep faith with the PUP-bloc agreement. How they handle it will determine their relationship with the crossbenches for the months and years to come. Pulling a fast one, or several, will most likely be met with swift retribution. But the Coalition being the Coalition, will they be able to avoid the temptation?

We shall find out. And we still have the maiden speeches to look forward to.

quote:

The number of voters who think Australia is too soft on asylum seekers is now at its lowest level since 2010, with 18% of voters saying we’re too soft, compared to 28% in March and 60% in July last year. The number of voters who say the government’s approach is about right is at its highest ever, 36%, while the number of people saying Australia is too harsh is also at a record high -- 27%, compared to 25% in March and 12% in July last year. This is the first time more voters believe the government is too harsh than too soft -- although nearly a fifth of voters continue to want even more draconian measures adopted against asylum seekers.

Electricity was most likely to be identified as the household expense of concern, with 80% of voters expressing concern about it, including 49% who said they were “very concerned”. That was higher than health costs (76%; 42% very concerned) and transport (74% and 35%); gas was only 54% (24%).

On voting intention, Labor has regained two points (40%) while the Coalition has lost one (39%), the Greens (9%), the PUP (6%) and others (7%) remaining the same, for a two-party preferred outcome of 53%-47% in Labor’s favour.

Ragingsheep posted:

I wonder what % of Australians would be happy for the navy to just blow the boats up.

Ragingsheep posted:

I wonder what % of Australians would be happy for the navy to just blow the boats up.

Captain Pissweak posted:

Eighteen.

quote:

Jansant ‏@Jansant 59m

.@ToryShepherd "#Refugees Action Coalition says up to 10 mothers have attempted suicide on Christmas Island in last two days #auspol "

ewe2 posted:

Question time consisted of a half-hour of cat-and-mouse as to whether the Coalition would admit that a report on the co-pay said it would crush the elderly, and a debate as to what the meaning of "aware" was ("I am aware of the report").

quote:

We're now hearing the first news from the court proceedings trickle through. There are between 21 and 29 minors on board, with the youngest just two years old. Only eight minors are involved in the current action.

quote:

Merkel presents court with writ of summons from 50 plaintiffs, inc 8 minors (youngest 2) and 21 women
— Oliver Laughland (@oliverlaughland) July 8, 2014

quote:

The barrister representing the asylum seekers Ron Merkel says they are submitting that all the asylum seekers are Tamils and there is evidence that persecution caused them to flee the country. He submits they are being held by Australian authorities at sea, and the key issue is whether the relevant parts of the Migration Act allow the government to hold the asylum seekers. Crucially, he is also submitting he has received an affidavit from the government constituting the first official acknowledgement of their apprehension.

Here’s some key updates:

quote:

Merkel says he has received an affidavit signed by govt constituting the "first acknowledgement" plaintiffs have been apprehended by Aus
— Oliver Laughland (@oliverlaughland) July 8, 2014

quote:

Merkel: question as to whether they can avail themselves of protection under Migration Act, now on high seas #highcourt153
— Hannah Ryan (@HannahD15) July 8, 2014

quote:

Merkel QC: Group is being held in custody by Australian Navy on the high seas #highcourt153
— Jackson Wherrett (@jwherrett) July 8, 2014

quote:

Merkel: Affidavits filed by govt today are the "the first acknowledgement" of existence of these asylum seekers
— Michael Safi (@safimichael) July 8, 2014

quote:

The high court is now hearing from Ron Merkel submissions on whether the executive power afforded to the Commonwealth in the constitution can authorise a breach of Australia’s non-refoulement obligations by returning asylum seekers “against their will.”

He is submitting that the proposed course of action fundamentally affects the rights, interested and privileges of the asylum seekers. The "enhanced screening process" does not afford natural natural justice to the asylum seekers.

Here's the key updates:

quote:

Merkel: "The proposed refoulement ... Very fundamentally affects their rights"
— Michael Safi (@safimichael) July 8, 2014

quote:

Merkel says that the question is whether they can be returned not to India, but to Sri Lanka, where they came as refugees
— Leo Shanahan (@_leo_s) July 8, 2014

quote:

Merkel QC: the group were denied procedural fairness #highcourt153
— Jackson Wherrett (@jwherrett) July 8, 2014

quote:

Merkel is relying on the 2010 case M61/2010 v Commonwealth to support his submissions on the issues surrounding procedural fairness for asylum seekers. Here's the judgment summary (which is not the judge's reasons) from that earlier case, which related to the assessment processes for asylum seekers on Christmas Island:

quote:

Each plaintiff argued before the High Court that he was not afforded procedural fairness during the assessment or review process, and that the persons conducting the assessment and review erred in law by not treating themselves as bound by relevant provisions of the Migration Act and relevant decisions of Australian courts. The Commonwealth and the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship argued that the assessment and review processes were conducted as an exercise of non-statutory executive power. It was argued that there was consequently no obligation on assessors and reviewers to afford procedural fairness, or to decide applications according to law. The plaintiffs argued that the processes were a part of the exercise of the Minister's powers under the Migration Act. It was also argued by one plaintiff that section 46A of the Migration Act, which precluded him from making a valid application for a protection visa in the circumstances of the case, was invalid.

In a unanimous decision the Court held that because the Minister has decided to consider exercising powers under the Migration Act in every case where an offshore entry person claims to be owed protection obligations, the assessment and review inquiries adopted in respect of such offshore entry persons are therefore steps taken under and for the purposes of the Migration Act. Because these inquiries prolonged the detention of the plaintiffs, there was a direct impact on the rights and interests of the plaintiffs to freedom from detention at the behest of the Executive. Those making the inquiries were therefore bound to act according to law and to afford procedural fairness to the plaintiffs. The Court rejected the challenge to the validity of section 46A.

quote:

The case as Merkel has put it is not about whether the asylum seekers should be allowed into Australia, but rather whether the executive has the right to refoule them.

quote:

We now have the first official confirmation of the circumstances that the vessel was intercepted. Gleeson QC, appearing for the government, has told the court he vessel was intercepted in Australia's contiguous zone, not territorial waters.

quote:

Gleeson, acting for Morrison, says vessel was intercepted in Aus contiguous zone and all have been moved to high seas #highcourt153
— Oliver Laughland (@oliverlaughland) July 8, 2014

What are the implications of this? Gleeson QC is submitting that as they were not in Australia's migration zone, the asylum seekers cannot claim protection under the Migration Act.

Gleeson QC is now giving an undertaking that the government will not engage in any actions involving the surrender or delivery of the asylum seekers into the custody of the Sri Lankan government without giving 72 hours notice.

quote:

Govt undertakes not to return asylum seekers to Sri Lanka without giving 72 hours notice
— Michael Safi (@safimichael) July 8, 2014

adamantium|wang posted:

TOML

Foundry Dancer posted:

Have I got this right? Palmer wants to abolish the "carbon tax", but then wants to introduce an emissions trading scheme in its place. But isn't the carbon tax an emissions trading scheme (with a fixed price for the first couple of years)? What am I mising here?

quote:

Michael Safi ‏@safimichael 47s

Govt barrister maintaining that executive branch has power to decide "where detained people will end up"

quote:

Asylum seeker hearing to go to full bench of the high court

Justice Crennan has just announced that she will accept the government's undertaking not to hand any asylum seekers over to Sri Lanka without 72 hours notice, and said the case should be heard "expeditiously" by the full court.

adamantium|wang posted:

quote:

Justice Crennan added that the undertaking would not prevent the asylum seekers being taken elsewhere for processing, just not to Sri Lanka or into the possession of any of their agents. The case is being adjourned for the parties to negotiate on what should happen now.

Jumpingmanjim posted:

beaten like a Tamil asylum seeker illegal emigrant.

Gough Suppressant posted:

beaten like a Tamil asylum seeker illegal emigrant economic refugee.

Serrath posted:

So wait, maybe I'm slow or something but I couldn't decode the outcome of this. So the 141 asylum seekers will not be returned to Sri lanka and will, what, be sent to offshore processing centres instead?

is this now policy or is this just a temporary measure until they can actually have a full hearing?

Nibbles141 posted:

ETS is subject to the market. Also whilst Clive wants an ETS he wants the price set at zero.

Hypation posted:

So I go off on holidays wondering if liberals have returned to run the Liberal Party......

And first thing I see nearly is that Scott Morrison gently caress off and die death camp video. Watching that is like the definition of ambivalence - sure its not exactly good, but it means that all hope is not lost, because with poo poo like that it won't take long for MT & Co to the bastards.