Skip to main content

Democracy at Work?

Today saw marches against the new IR laws around Australia. All that John Howard and Kevin Andrews could say was that in a year's time people would wonder what all the fuss had been about.

I suspect that this issue will not go away. Messrs Howard and Andrew have set course on creating a devisive, and angry, Australia on a mammoth scale. Howard is dismissive of those who protest. What is seemingly forgotten in all of this is that some 70 % of those polled are against the new IR laws. That's a majority by an reckoning. Remember that some 70% were against Oz committing to the Iraq War. That didn't stop Howard going ahead anyway.

So, where is the democracy in all of this? It's not! The whole approach of the Government is perhaps demonstrated by this small item. The proposed Act is some 700 pages and the Explanatory Statement some 650 pages. On introduction of the Bill to the House, 4 [yes 4!] copies of the Bill and Explanatory Statement were provided to the Opposition. Now that allows for fulsome and informed debate!

How this all plays out before the legislation is actually passed may well depend on how Senator Barnaby Joyce responds to all of this new legislation. Read what Tim Colebatch had to say in The Age today.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Democracy doesn't mean "rule-by-opinion-poll" and I would expect you to understand that. It means people periodically get a chance to kick the people who run the country out of power. In between elections, the people who run the country have to make a calculation between what they belive to be best for the country and what is popular. Sometimes this means they take hard decisions.
November 16, 2005 12:15 pm
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...
Post a Comment
Read more

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...
Post a Comment
Read more

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...
6 comments
Read more