blacksun posted:

As do I, which is why you should join the Greens a try to get their stance on this changed.

dr_rat posted:

Honestly if the budget goes south its probably more likely Abbott and hockey will get the toss. Abbott tied to close to Hockey and a bad budget will condemns them both.

Which is why this budget is looking to be safe as hell.

Tokamak posted:

change from within

Zetsubou-san posted:

Anidav posted:

It's not like Mario Kart, no Bullet Bill is going to put you in first place again

Zetsubou-san posted:

Graic Gabtar posted:

"Electoral Milk"

Sensing a new avatar for Anidav.

blacksun posted:

As do I, which is why you should join the Greens a try to get their stance on this changed.

EDIT: I've had this discussion with QM and a bunch of other people here before who insist that nuclear will play no role in the future of power generation. They are wrong. That said, I think the large majority of Australia's power coming from renewables is both possible, worth pursuing and the most likely outcome. That said there are situations where having small scale nuclear reactors is the only thing that makes sense, and will inevitably happen, even if Australia is a late adopter of the technology. By that point, the Greens stance will likely have changed anyway.

blacksun posted:

Except the party in question isn't run by a bunch of neo-liberal lite poo poo-lords who won't ever allow anything to change from their trajectory towards the centre.

Anidav posted:

No thanks.

Senor Tron posted:

If we do go to an early election I wonder what Coalition policies will be. After they went back on most of their 2013 promises we'll probably just see them talking about vaguely needing to fix mess, and boasting about boats and the carbon tax.

If they do go with a specific big policy I think it will be a gamble by putting an unpopular policy forward, like increasing the GST.

BlitzkriegOfColour posted:

I think you mean spiky turtle shell, m8

Cleretic posted:

Nope, the Bullet Bill autopilots you ahead at a breakneck pace. The spiky shell just nukes the guy in first. Bullet Bill is the more accurate item to refer to here.

Matthew Beet posted:

Are we still talking about nuclear power in australia seriously? what?

Matthew Beet posted:

Are we still talking about nuclear power in australia seriously? what?

freebooter posted:

Green street cred: just went and voted Green in the UK election even though I'm coming back to Australia in a few months.

quote:

Here’s a rare case of a candidate who doesn’t want any votes – and may not even mark an X next to his own name. James Parker, the Green candidate for the south London marginal of Eltham, has told his supporters they should give their votes to Labour, Jessica Elgot reports.

Parker, whose south London constituency is a Labour seat with a slim marginal of under 1,700 votes, told the Guardian he wanted to see Ed Miliband as prime minister.

“If you are voting Green in Eltham as a protest, do vote for Clive Efford, the Labour candidate,” Parker said. “If you really feel Green in your heart, then vote for me, but it is more important that we don’t have a Conservative government.”

Parker, who said he was genuinely still torn as to whether he would vote for himself, said he was hoping for Green victories in some of the closer seats, like Brighton Pavilion and Bristol West, but said he did not want people to vote Green where candidates, like him, could not win and where Labour was battling Tories.

Parker, a former Labour party member who left after the Iraq war, said. he wanted to see “a Labour government with Green influence.”

“The centre ground is between the Greens and Labour now,” he said. “I think as a party we could have played it better at this tactically, and stood down in areas where Labour were fighting the Conservatives, and Labour could have stood back in seats where we might win from the Lib Dems and the Tories.

“I’d like to see us work together. We on the left should not give in to competitive self-interest.”

Seagull posted:

doesn't the uk have fptp

Anidav posted:

as gently caress.

Quantum Mechanic posted:

actively rejected preferential voting at a referendum a few years back

Lid posted:

Thank you Rik Mayal and the Tories for that.

Matthew Beet posted:

Are we still talking about nuclear power in australia seriously? what?

Bifauxnen posted:

I still think thorium would be excellent. Especially for side benefits like harvesting rare earth metal byproducts, or using up existing nuclear waste. But no one ever seems to mean that when they talk nuclear - they just assume more of the same old same old uranium junk, and that can get stuffed.

Birdstrike posted:

FYI, D&D already solved our future energy sourcing needs: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3713507

quote:

The United Nations has reportedly called for an independent mechanism to monitor Australia's detention centre on Nauru.
The president of the UN's sub-committee on torture prevention, Malcom Evans, is urging for the provision after inspecting the centre this week.
The Guardian newspaper says UN representatives were allowed to photograph and interview asylum seekers away from the presence of guards during the visit.

The move follows suggestions by UN special rapporteur on torture, Juan Mendez, that prolonged detention like that on Nauru could contravene international conventions.
"Given the number of people currently being held on the island, the establishment of a national preventative mechanism to address their needs and their situation becomes even more pressing," Evans said.
The call also comes a day after Immigration Minister Peter Dutton announced the imminent transfer of the first batch of Nauru detainees to Cambodia.

Bifauxnen posted:

I still think thorium would be excellent. Especially for side benefits like harvesting rare earth metal byproducts, or using up existing nuclear waste. But no one ever seems to mean that when they talk nuclear - they just assume more of the same old same old uranium junk, and that can get stuffed.

blacksun posted:

Have the Greens policies regarding Lucas Heights and medical reactors changed? Because this is a much larger concern to me.

quote:

First figures put Conservatives on 316 seats and Labour on 239, with the night looking to shape up badly for Labour in Glasgow, Nigel Farage in South Thanet while the Lib Dems insist they will end up with more than 10 seats