Let's talk Labor. Have you heard that they have 'gone off track'? Perhaps you are inclined to think they have 'moved away from their core values' or maybe even that they have become a bit of a disorganised circus? Really?
Let's start in 2010. One week of scrambling following the election from both sides and a hung parliament ensures that the PM has told her first (and as far as I can tell, only) lie. Ok. Let's call her Juliar. Why not. It's catchy. And a lie was told. We all saw it, we all heard it. In fact, we've seen and heard it so many times we could all probably recall her outfit and the date at the time. Yes, she also said that there would be a price on carbon. But that's irrelevant. She lied!
Then, before the eyes of the Labor faithful, the Federal Government passed laws allowing uranium to be sent to India, tried valiantly to 'Stop the BOATS!' and refused to consider legalising same sex marriage. OOPS! There goes Labor. The brand is tarnished. Mass exodus and turning up of noses, followed by months of inner turmoil, leaks and leadership speculation and nothing changed.......or did it?
The leadership is fairly obviously secure. At this point, it is Julia Gillard leading Labor to the election and that is highly unlikely to change.
There is no infighting. Each ALP member of Parliament, including those supposedly after the top job, have come out and reiterated their support for the PM and have kept a dogged determination to stick to policy goals.
The ALP is focussing on the big issues. NDIS, NBN, Carbon Tax, Mining Tax and Gonski reform. Those are all designed to benefit society, benefit the disadvantaged and give everyone in the country a 'fair go'.
I admit to finding it slightly ironic that Labor have excelled at economics yet that is what they are most derided for. Did they spend big? Yes they did. Did it avert a national recession? Why yes, I do believe it did. Now, after the spending is over are they fighting hard to get the surplus back? Indeed it does seem the case.
Here we have a Government which is implementing major legislation to aid those with a disability.
A Government reforming education to help ensure all children have equal opportunity to excel.
A Government which is fighting against the biggest dilemma of a generation, climate change, and is now being mirrored internationally.
A Government which is creating an internet based network which will transform the lives of those in rural and remote areas while allowing education, health and employment an easier ride all over the country.
A Government working hard to create a fair go for all Australians.
Labor have listened, they are paying attention. While the rest of us were not noticing, they returned to their core values.
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Sunday, March 3, 2013
How to win over a population - without doing anything useful.
The Federal election is still 7 months away and a lot can happen between now and September but perhaps it's a good time to reflect on the past few years and what has gone so terribly wrong for the Government. And it's not even Labor's fault! Or Julia Gillard's for that matter.
Let's focus for a minute on policy. Somehow in the process of juggling a balancing act, Labor, with the help of the Green's and Independents, have passed more legislation and bills than Howard did in his entire political career. Big items such as the Carbon Pricing, Mining Tax, the continuation of the NBN have also occurred but many others pass through Parliament daily and nobody notices. That's because the very act of Governance requires it. Ergo, they are Governing.
Australia is in a better position financially than any other country, is more respected on the world stage than at any time in recent history, and didn't have to sell assets like Telstra to do it.
On the surface, this country is being governed very well.
So, why is Labor failing?
Well, they aren't actually. Oh, plenty will blame Thompson, or Rudd, or the Greens, but the fact is, it's not the fault of any of them. All previous Governments have weathered scandals, infighting and public spats. No Government has been immune from it's own set of problems, but the problems rose quickly.....the PM of the day answered numerous questions on the issue......and they died down just as fast.
From the moment a deal was struck which created a shift in power to Labor but balanced precariously on a precipice, the Opposition began their assault. It's widely noted that the intense campaigning against Labor and Gillard occurs on a daily basis and in some circles it is denounced as an appalling act of treason (perhaps a bit harsh but the sentiment remains).
On the day of a new Parliament forming, the Opposition began placing itself as the echo of Parliament. Every time the PM opened her mouth, Abbott was there to do the same, immediately after. This means that his response is always printed, his Party's thoughts given credence and he ALWAYS has the last word. This is not normal operating procedure for Government.
In the past, the Government has had the job of explaining legislation and bills which pass through Parliament, not to get support, but to INFORM the general public. So, it stands to reason, if the information being passed to the media is immediately refuted as being poor or lacking judgement by the leader of the Opposition, it will have less impact and create a muddle in the minds of many. Muddy the message and it doesn't get through. Simple fact.
Labor have no control over this new phenomenon and the best they can do is repeat their message again and hope like hell that Abbott is not ready with his denigration in the next sound bite. It's very, very clever and is quite obviously working but it has a significant impact on the country as a whole, quite aside from the impact on Gillard's Government.
We are left now with a population who are ill-informed. Through no fault of their own. The message has been twisted so many times it is akin to a Government playing Chinese Whispers and the outcome is waffle which makes sense to no one. Small excerpts of sense make their way out but are few and far between and are generally missed because someone chose to wear glasses that day.
Taking the Opposition (or as someone kindly pointed out to me recently - the alternative Government) into consideration on merit alone let's take a look at what they have achieved for the significant part of the population which voted for them in 2010.
............... Oh dear. Precisely nothing. Frankly, if I had an inclination to vote Coalition, I'd be feeling pretty damned ripped off about now. How can they be considered an alternative Government if they have not been practising any governance? All Oppositions in the past have put their stamp on bills and legislation in some way, shape or form, ensuring that those who received their vote had a say. Even prior to this Parliament, Independents contributed to debate and added to the outcomes. Here we have a Party which achieved almost 50 percent of the vote and it has silenced them in Chambers. Unless it is derogatory, inflammatory or an outright 'NO', they have contributed zilch.
They had a unique set of circumstances this time around. With a hung Parliament they had the opportunity to inject a huge part of themselves into the daily workings of government but chose instead to concentrate all of their efforts on getting rid of Labor.
Admittedly, all Oppositions have a duty to tell the population why they are a better option. They have a duty to speak up in Parliamentary sittings if they object quite strongly to something being said or done. They do not however, have a duty to follow a Prime Minister around the country and the world, ensuring they have the last word. They do not have a duty to declare a government unfit at every minor stumble along the way. They do not have a duty to sit in very expensive chairs which the taxpayers fund....and do NOTHING.
They have become so effective at these 'skills' through practice and determination, that the media are now going along for the ride. They have them so convinced that Labor will lose it is frankly feeling like Abbott now has more say in this country than his superior. And no matter which side of the political spectrum you sit, that should not sit well with you.
The PM is in Western Sydney this weekend to talk to residents about the plan to tackle increasing crime in the area. Guess who popped in to say "Labor have a dismal record on crime?" Go on....take a guess. Oh yes, Abbott. With script in hand and smug grin, he fronted the media immediately following Gillard, and said precisely NOTHING. After his little speech, was anyone wiser as to what his plan would be? Ah, nope. Did he mention he even had one? Not as far as I could tell.
I bet it works though. Tomorrow's articles will have parts of her speech, followed by parts of his, and his will be what people remember. It seems they have a plan alright, and it consists of just one thing, WIN THE ELECTION! I suppose they will worry about actual governance later.....
Very, very clever. And quite insidious.
Let's focus for a minute on policy. Somehow in the process of juggling a balancing act, Labor, with the help of the Green's and Independents, have passed more legislation and bills than Howard did in his entire political career. Big items such as the Carbon Pricing, Mining Tax, the continuation of the NBN have also occurred but many others pass through Parliament daily and nobody notices. That's because the very act of Governance requires it. Ergo, they are Governing.
Australia is in a better position financially than any other country, is more respected on the world stage than at any time in recent history, and didn't have to sell assets like Telstra to do it.
On the surface, this country is being governed very well.
So, why is Labor failing?
Well, they aren't actually. Oh, plenty will blame Thompson, or Rudd, or the Greens, but the fact is, it's not the fault of any of them. All previous Governments have weathered scandals, infighting and public spats. No Government has been immune from it's own set of problems, but the problems rose quickly.....the PM of the day answered numerous questions on the issue......and they died down just as fast.
From the moment a deal was struck which created a shift in power to Labor but balanced precariously on a precipice, the Opposition began their assault. It's widely noted that the intense campaigning against Labor and Gillard occurs on a daily basis and in some circles it is denounced as an appalling act of treason (perhaps a bit harsh but the sentiment remains).
On the day of a new Parliament forming, the Opposition began placing itself as the echo of Parliament. Every time the PM opened her mouth, Abbott was there to do the same, immediately after. This means that his response is always printed, his Party's thoughts given credence and he ALWAYS has the last word. This is not normal operating procedure for Government.
In the past, the Government has had the job of explaining legislation and bills which pass through Parliament, not to get support, but to INFORM the general public. So, it stands to reason, if the information being passed to the media is immediately refuted as being poor or lacking judgement by the leader of the Opposition, it will have less impact and create a muddle in the minds of many. Muddy the message and it doesn't get through. Simple fact.
Labor have no control over this new phenomenon and the best they can do is repeat their message again and hope like hell that Abbott is not ready with his denigration in the next sound bite. It's very, very clever and is quite obviously working but it has a significant impact on the country as a whole, quite aside from the impact on Gillard's Government.
We are left now with a population who are ill-informed. Through no fault of their own. The message has been twisted so many times it is akin to a Government playing Chinese Whispers and the outcome is waffle which makes sense to no one. Small excerpts of sense make their way out but are few and far between and are generally missed because someone chose to wear glasses that day.
Taking the Opposition (or as someone kindly pointed out to me recently - the alternative Government) into consideration on merit alone let's take a look at what they have achieved for the significant part of the population which voted for them in 2010.
............... Oh dear. Precisely nothing. Frankly, if I had an inclination to vote Coalition, I'd be feeling pretty damned ripped off about now. How can they be considered an alternative Government if they have not been practising any governance? All Oppositions in the past have put their stamp on bills and legislation in some way, shape or form, ensuring that those who received their vote had a say. Even prior to this Parliament, Independents contributed to debate and added to the outcomes. Here we have a Party which achieved almost 50 percent of the vote and it has silenced them in Chambers. Unless it is derogatory, inflammatory or an outright 'NO', they have contributed zilch.
They had a unique set of circumstances this time around. With a hung Parliament they had the opportunity to inject a huge part of themselves into the daily workings of government but chose instead to concentrate all of their efforts on getting rid of Labor.
Admittedly, all Oppositions have a duty to tell the population why they are a better option. They have a duty to speak up in Parliamentary sittings if they object quite strongly to something being said or done. They do not however, have a duty to follow a Prime Minister around the country and the world, ensuring they have the last word. They do not have a duty to declare a government unfit at every minor stumble along the way. They do not have a duty to sit in very expensive chairs which the taxpayers fund....and do NOTHING.
They have become so effective at these 'skills' through practice and determination, that the media are now going along for the ride. They have them so convinced that Labor will lose it is frankly feeling like Abbott now has more say in this country than his superior. And no matter which side of the political spectrum you sit, that should not sit well with you.
The PM is in Western Sydney this weekend to talk to residents about the plan to tackle increasing crime in the area. Guess who popped in to say "Labor have a dismal record on crime?" Go on....take a guess. Oh yes, Abbott. With script in hand and smug grin, he fronted the media immediately following Gillard, and said precisely NOTHING. After his little speech, was anyone wiser as to what his plan would be? Ah, nope. Did he mention he even had one? Not as far as I could tell.
I bet it works though. Tomorrow's articles will have parts of her speech, followed by parts of his, and his will be what people remember. It seems they have a plan alright, and it consists of just one thing, WIN THE ELECTION! I suppose they will worry about actual governance later.....
Very, very clever. And quite insidious.
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Park for Sale - but at what cost?
Cairns is growing. There is no real argument there. The speed with which it is expanding is fluctuating and is currently quite a bit slower than what was predicted just a few years a go but it is still on the increase. With growth comes development.
The new highway over-passes and extra lanes on the south side attest to that. When they began, we lost part of a mountain and Forest Gardens lost it's beautiful entrance. Both disheartening initially as they went with great speed and the impact was quite an eye-sore. That said, this is, in the long term, a good idea. The mountain is grassing up and will be green and lush in no time. The better road will increase traffic flow whilst making the drive into or out of the city a much safer one. With the population on the south the heaviest growth area, highways and bypass roads are required.
What is also required is our green space. With so much development and so many areas filling fast with new homes, the small patches of green are desperately needed.
Why? They help create communities. They encourage kids out of the house and onto bikes, kicking a soccer ball or playing on swings. They give room for families to gather, for bbq's to be fired up and for our community to meet.
This is especially important in areas of growth. Most of the residents in these pockets of suburbia are new. Most have never met the neighbours. Our green spaces, whether small or large, give room for a suburb to become a community. Older areas of the south side have some of the largest green spaces. Provided for the residents before open space became unpopular.
Is it necessary to fill these parks with professional sporting clubs and not-for-profit organisations? No. It is a useful thing to do and for many of our parks, an ideal use of the space. For plenty of others however, an informal area, with no goal posts or lighting, is just as important for those who are able to access them.
Last week, Cairns Regional Council voted to look further into the use of 7 such green spaces. Parklands on the southside, in Division 2 and Division 3. Cr Rob Pyne voted against the motion and I completely agree with his vote. This is why.....
In the report given to Councillors there was discussion regarding the parks being 'under-utilised'. In the context given, it was assumed that a park without a sporting club is a useless waste of space. Not-for-profit groups were indicated as another option for the parks in question and 5 were considered useful so long as one of the two options could be achieved.
Little Fretwell for example, was slatted for possible use as a sporting clubs 'home', as long as the club in question could pay for the upkeep of the park, thereby reducing the cost of maintenance. This includes upgrading the car park. Little Fretwell is predominantly used by skateboarders, for BMX riding and for it's small but useful basketball court. What it is really best for is what it is already used for and in an ideal world, those existing facilities would be upgraded and expanded to better fill the space.
Two of the parks however, had a very different report given. One was in White Rock, near the school, and it was suggested in the report that if no group could be found to utilise the park on a permanent basis, it should be offered to White Rock School for development as an expansion of their car park.
At no time should a perfectly good park, situated in the middle of a densely populated suburb, be considered as a future car park. That's just absurd.
The second was Down Park. A park in Edmonton, on the other side of the highway, near B&D Landscaping. This park was previously used as the gathering point for ANZAC Day marches, is currently housing a small hall which is utilised by several groups including the Seventh Day Adventist Church and Choi Kwon Do and is available to hire by members of the community. I have attended many events there, trivia nights, picked up billets from America who were staying a few days and am well aware it is constantly in use.
There are also tennis courts and a large playground on the park area. This park is very large. It is completely surrounded by old Queenslanders (the majority of which are two story) and it is used by residents every single day. They walk their dog's there, they play games, they kick a football and they socialise.
The report states that Council should allocate part of the park for sale to developers for housing. This would apparently then pay to upkeep the remainder and to upgrade it's facilities. On paper, the proposal doesn't sound too bad. Sell off a sliver and fix up what's left. Brilliant!
Here's where I have an issue. If we sell off green space, even a small sliver of it, where will it end? Would this set a precedent? Would our green spaces and parks be looked at for their financial value rather than their value to the community? Or even worse, is it already happening?
If you take a good look at the entire report and the motion itself, it certainly appears that way. In each instance where a park is seen as under-utilised, it's options for use are wrapped up in financial gain for Council. That is not acceptable.
Our parks are for our use, as homes get smaller and blocks of land shrink, they are becoming even more valuable to our community. We need to keep them, but more than that, we need to ensure they are maintained and are well looked after. They are the safe environments for our children to play. They are the spaces where we go to breathe deeply and forget the four walls at home or at work which are at times suffocating. They are the places we go to get exercise, and to give our animals a run.
Do NOT let our parks be sold off! Contact your local Councillor TODAY and let them know it is NOT ok! We are the people who live beside these parks. We are the ones who use them. We are the ones who should dictate what happens to them.
The new highway over-passes and extra lanes on the south side attest to that. When they began, we lost part of a mountain and Forest Gardens lost it's beautiful entrance. Both disheartening initially as they went with great speed and the impact was quite an eye-sore. That said, this is, in the long term, a good idea. The mountain is grassing up and will be green and lush in no time. The better road will increase traffic flow whilst making the drive into or out of the city a much safer one. With the population on the south the heaviest growth area, highways and bypass roads are required.
What is also required is our green space. With so much development and so many areas filling fast with new homes, the small patches of green are desperately needed.
Why? They help create communities. They encourage kids out of the house and onto bikes, kicking a soccer ball or playing on swings. They give room for families to gather, for bbq's to be fired up and for our community to meet.
This is especially important in areas of growth. Most of the residents in these pockets of suburbia are new. Most have never met the neighbours. Our green spaces, whether small or large, give room for a suburb to become a community. Older areas of the south side have some of the largest green spaces. Provided for the residents before open space became unpopular.
Is it necessary to fill these parks with professional sporting clubs and not-for-profit organisations? No. It is a useful thing to do and for many of our parks, an ideal use of the space. For plenty of others however, an informal area, with no goal posts or lighting, is just as important for those who are able to access them.
Last week, Cairns Regional Council voted to look further into the use of 7 such green spaces. Parklands on the southside, in Division 2 and Division 3. Cr Rob Pyne voted against the motion and I completely agree with his vote. This is why.....
In the report given to Councillors there was discussion regarding the parks being 'under-utilised'. In the context given, it was assumed that a park without a sporting club is a useless waste of space. Not-for-profit groups were indicated as another option for the parks in question and 5 were considered useful so long as one of the two options could be achieved.
Little Fretwell for example, was slatted for possible use as a sporting clubs 'home', as long as the club in question could pay for the upkeep of the park, thereby reducing the cost of maintenance. This includes upgrading the car park. Little Fretwell is predominantly used by skateboarders, for BMX riding and for it's small but useful basketball court. What it is really best for is what it is already used for and in an ideal world, those existing facilities would be upgraded and expanded to better fill the space.
Two of the parks however, had a very different report given. One was in White Rock, near the school, and it was suggested in the report that if no group could be found to utilise the park on a permanent basis, it should be offered to White Rock School for development as an expansion of their car park.
At no time should a perfectly good park, situated in the middle of a densely populated suburb, be considered as a future car park. That's just absurd.
The second was Down Park. A park in Edmonton, on the other side of the highway, near B&D Landscaping. This park was previously used as the gathering point for ANZAC Day marches, is currently housing a small hall which is utilised by several groups including the Seventh Day Adventist Church and Choi Kwon Do and is available to hire by members of the community. I have attended many events there, trivia nights, picked up billets from America who were staying a few days and am well aware it is constantly in use.
There are also tennis courts and a large playground on the park area. This park is very large. It is completely surrounded by old Queenslanders (the majority of which are two story) and it is used by residents every single day. They walk their dog's there, they play games, they kick a football and they socialise.
The report states that Council should allocate part of the park for sale to developers for housing. This would apparently then pay to upkeep the remainder and to upgrade it's facilities. On paper, the proposal doesn't sound too bad. Sell off a sliver and fix up what's left. Brilliant!
Here's where I have an issue. If we sell off green space, even a small sliver of it, where will it end? Would this set a precedent? Would our green spaces and parks be looked at for their financial value rather than their value to the community? Or even worse, is it already happening?
If you take a good look at the entire report and the motion itself, it certainly appears that way. In each instance where a park is seen as under-utilised, it's options for use are wrapped up in financial gain for Council. That is not acceptable.
Our parks are for our use, as homes get smaller and blocks of land shrink, they are becoming even more valuable to our community. We need to keep them, but more than that, we need to ensure they are maintained and are well looked after. They are the safe environments for our children to play. They are the spaces where we go to breathe deeply and forget the four walls at home or at work which are at times suffocating. They are the places we go to get exercise, and to give our animals a run.
Do NOT let our parks be sold off! Contact your local Councillor TODAY and let them know it is NOT ok! We are the people who live beside these parks. We are the ones who use them. We are the ones who should dictate what happens to them.
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Cairns.........the hypocritical city.
Just a few months ago, Cairns region was presented with an unprecedented opportunity involving over 100 million dollars of State and Federal funding and a ready made plan to build a large precinct near the waterfront. A facility primarily for locals, this was to provide work for those in the construction industry who have suffered with the loss of several large developer companies and would have gone on to provide up to 125 full time equivalent jobs once complete. The facility was to be a replacement for one which has been proven unsatisfactory and is becoming unworkable.
Cairns is known for the arts and it's contribution to the industry all over Australia. It is common knowledge that we have a plethora of talent and a need to nurture it and this facility would have provided that, along with training for those who wished to take on 'behind the scenes' roles in audio, lighting, stage management, choreography, playwriting and much more. While those jobs still exist, the scope for them to grow is very, very limited.
The main objections to the facility from local residents were three issues. First, the cost. Placed at almost $60 million , this cost would have been partly covered by a small increase in rates over 5 years, including the construction phase and the early operational phase. As a public facility, it would have had to be supplemented by Council for the term of it's life at slightly more than the current building, which as mentioned previously is no longer viable for it's intended use. However, unlike privately owned facilities such as the one proposed by Shangri La, local community groups and schools could have accessed and utilised the facility at an extremely low cost, further cementing it's role as a venue built for locals.
The second issue was a perceived lack of consultation. Residents failed to take into account the decades of planning by previous Councils and came to the conclusion that this was 'thrust' upon them without giving them a say at all. The numerous consultation and information sessions the scope of which have never been seen before were apparently not sufficient.
The third was the site itself. Situated just a few metres from the edge of the seafront, the most common thought appeared to be that it was going to take vital space away from what has now become known as our 'working port'. One company in particular took great pains to remind residents that the expansion of their business would be impeded by this development and that must not be permitted. While it was mentioned in response that the port would not be affected due to the 'buffer zone' which would remain intact, that information was reported much more quietly than the opposing view.
So, here we sit, 6 months later. State funding has been revoked, land offered for peppercorn rent given back, the plan voted down in Council chambers and Federal funding in doubt. It appears that the people have spoken. Shortly after the election, new Councillors and the new Mayor were given estimates of the cost of building a much smaller facility which would have a single use, rather than the grand plan previously offered. This cost was much more than they expected and as a result, no performing arts centre will be built in Cairns.....at least, not in the immediate future.
While this information saddened those who supported the CEP, it did not surprise those who followed the progress of the project and faced the opposition to it's construction. Today, the memory of the excitement the project provided and the incredible diversity of use it would have given the region is all that remains.
In Saturday's paper two stories gained my attention. One on the back of the front page announcing that Sea Swift has been sold. The company most vocal against the CEP. It is acknowledged that their opposition was based on the need for future expansion while noting that the article states expansion of two ports for their use, neither of which is Cairns. As a base, Cairns is still a priority and it is not stated in the article that this will change which is good news for the region. It then becomes the question of whether this business could not have continued to expand by utilising Cairns as it's primary ship building port and concurrently expanding it's presence in other ports of Australia. In fact, that is exactly what is happening, without the CEP.
The second story garnering another look, was one featuring the company which is a major shareholder in the new development about to commence in the CBD. With Woolworths as it's anchor store, the Central Park shopping development will be built in three stages, the third being the one which begs for attention. First stage of the $270 million development, a large shopping centre, directly opposite Cairns Central. Nothing odd there except perhaps the fact that Cairns will struggle to fill and support more retail outlets. The second stage, office space and and residential units. Again, nothing untoward in that part, except that the slowing of Cairns economy would suggest that office space is probably not required. Third stage.............a large hotel styled on the Versace model, Cairns' first 6 star hotel.
Why is this third stage standing out? Why is the fact that someone wants to invest in Cairns a negative thing? It goes to it's placement. According to the article, there will not be room on the Spence St site for this third stage...so......they are looking to build it in the immediate vicinity (or even on the site) the CEP would have been. Specifically; "built on one of the Ports North development sites between the Cairns Hilton and the Cairns Cruise Liner Terminal". Incredible!
It should be noted that this article mentions that the sale of it's commercial and residential space is required before stage 3 could begin, an estimated 6 years away. That said, if this company, or others like it, are permitted to build on the same site deemed unsuitable for a public facility due to it's proximity to a working port, I for one will not be impressed.
While the CEP and all that went with it (a bridge over to the Convention Centre, a museum, connecting car park etc..) is no longer an option, the reasons for it's demise must surely still exist? Or are weary locals actually telling the truth when they say that Cairns is open slather to developers and exceedingly unkind to those wishing for a better lifestyle? It's certainly how it appears.
I note also that nobody is questioning the new Council on the current status of the sports stadium many seemed to prefer. Does anyone even care anymore?
Cairns is known for the arts and it's contribution to the industry all over Australia. It is common knowledge that we have a plethora of talent and a need to nurture it and this facility would have provided that, along with training for those who wished to take on 'behind the scenes' roles in audio, lighting, stage management, choreography, playwriting and much more. While those jobs still exist, the scope for them to grow is very, very limited.
The main objections to the facility from local residents were three issues. First, the cost. Placed at almost $60 million , this cost would have been partly covered by a small increase in rates over 5 years, including the construction phase and the early operational phase. As a public facility, it would have had to be supplemented by Council for the term of it's life at slightly more than the current building, which as mentioned previously is no longer viable for it's intended use. However, unlike privately owned facilities such as the one proposed by Shangri La, local community groups and schools could have accessed and utilised the facility at an extremely low cost, further cementing it's role as a venue built for locals.
The second issue was a perceived lack of consultation. Residents failed to take into account the decades of planning by previous Councils and came to the conclusion that this was 'thrust' upon them without giving them a say at all. The numerous consultation and information sessions the scope of which have never been seen before were apparently not sufficient.
The third was the site itself. Situated just a few metres from the edge of the seafront, the most common thought appeared to be that it was going to take vital space away from what has now become known as our 'working port'. One company in particular took great pains to remind residents that the expansion of their business would be impeded by this development and that must not be permitted. While it was mentioned in response that the port would not be affected due to the 'buffer zone' which would remain intact, that information was reported much more quietly than the opposing view.
So, here we sit, 6 months later. State funding has been revoked, land offered for peppercorn rent given back, the plan voted down in Council chambers and Federal funding in doubt. It appears that the people have spoken. Shortly after the election, new Councillors and the new Mayor were given estimates of the cost of building a much smaller facility which would have a single use, rather than the grand plan previously offered. This cost was much more than they expected and as a result, no performing arts centre will be built in Cairns.....at least, not in the immediate future.
While this information saddened those who supported the CEP, it did not surprise those who followed the progress of the project and faced the opposition to it's construction. Today, the memory of the excitement the project provided and the incredible diversity of use it would have given the region is all that remains.
In Saturday's paper two stories gained my attention. One on the back of the front page announcing that Sea Swift has been sold. The company most vocal against the CEP. It is acknowledged that their opposition was based on the need for future expansion while noting that the article states expansion of two ports for their use, neither of which is Cairns. As a base, Cairns is still a priority and it is not stated in the article that this will change which is good news for the region. It then becomes the question of whether this business could not have continued to expand by utilising Cairns as it's primary ship building port and concurrently expanding it's presence in other ports of Australia. In fact, that is exactly what is happening, without the CEP.
The second story garnering another look, was one featuring the company which is a major shareholder in the new development about to commence in the CBD. With Woolworths as it's anchor store, the Central Park shopping development will be built in three stages, the third being the one which begs for attention. First stage of the $270 million development, a large shopping centre, directly opposite Cairns Central. Nothing odd there except perhaps the fact that Cairns will struggle to fill and support more retail outlets. The second stage, office space and and residential units. Again, nothing untoward in that part, except that the slowing of Cairns economy would suggest that office space is probably not required. Third stage.............a large hotel styled on the Versace model, Cairns' first 6 star hotel.
Why is this third stage standing out? Why is the fact that someone wants to invest in Cairns a negative thing? It goes to it's placement. According to the article, there will not be room on the Spence St site for this third stage...so......they are looking to build it in the immediate vicinity (or even on the site) the CEP would have been. Specifically; "built on one of the Ports North development sites between the Cairns Hilton and the Cairns Cruise Liner Terminal". Incredible!
It should be noted that this article mentions that the sale of it's commercial and residential space is required before stage 3 could begin, an estimated 6 years away. That said, if this company, or others like it, are permitted to build on the same site deemed unsuitable for a public facility due to it's proximity to a working port, I for one will not be impressed.
While the CEP and all that went with it (a bridge over to the Convention Centre, a museum, connecting car park etc..) is no longer an option, the reasons for it's demise must surely still exist? Or are weary locals actually telling the truth when they say that Cairns is open slather to developers and exceedingly unkind to those wishing for a better lifestyle? It's certainly how it appears.
I note also that nobody is questioning the new Council on the current status of the sports stadium many seemed to prefer. Does anyone even care anymore?
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Alan Jones. Are you listening?
Misogynist. Bigot. Racist. Venomous. Inciter. All of these words have been used many times in the past few days to describe Alan Jones. In all forms of media, over and over again.
Let's pretend for a moment that he never said the PM's father died of shame. Lets pretend that the function where he bid on and won a chaff jacket never happened.
What then? What is it about these particular incidents which has incited such anger and an uprising the likes of which has not been seen in recent times in Australia? This comment and the jacket that went with it is not the worst thing Mr Jones ever did. Far from it in fact. He has said things on air which boggle the mind. Judging from the nature of most of them, the man really is bitter and vitriolic.
Have we made him that way? By glorifying his words, calling him a media personality, awarding him an Order of Australia Medal...........perhaps we are all responsible for who this small man has become? Or maybe some people are just so full of angst that it fairly oozes from their vocal chords from the time they can talk.
I looked up Alan Jones on Wikepedia. After the lengthy bits about his history as a person, I reached the section on the controversy. Reading it takes a while as it goes on for quite a while but I took the time to take a look. Most of those incidents mentioned were ones I remembered as they are all ones which were reported on Australia wide. What it makes you wonder though, is why his list has been allowed to get this long?
Over the past few days there have been petitions to sign, sponsors to contact, posts to re-tweet and 'share' on Facebook. It's been a veritable feeding frenzy for the social media world......all on a single topic and about one man and his comments.
Comments that were not even said on air. He spoke at a function, through a microphone, to a crowd who were filled with hilarity after he mentioned the PM and her dad. Pretty awful stuff really and well worth the comments and the shares. It's even had some success in that many sponsors are no longer sponsors and have taken the moral high ground to distance themselves from his words. And he never even said them on air. Those said on air have been much more frightening and have the capacity to do real harm. Take the Cronulla Riots for example. Jones was found to contribute to the inciting of the riots and exacerbating what was already a heated event. This man has power. Real power.
So, how do we take it away? How do we let the media know we no longer accept hate speech, or vile language which angers, inflames and hurts on our airwaves? How do we ensure media continues to be opinionated without being vitriolic?
There is really only one way. Yes, sponsors are deserting the Alan Jones Show, in their droves. People are rallying online and via social media and creating a situation where the comments made will not fade away into nothingness and obscurity. But it won't work. Other sponsors will appear shortly and take the place of those who have left. Ones without morals who don't care about public perception, just public dollars.
Why will they turn up? Because more people tuned into the Alan Jones Show this morning than have at any time in the past few years. People are still listening to him!
I realise some/most tuned in to hear him explain himself further and see what his reaction to the fallout would be. That doesn't matter though. They still tuned in. Later this month, I believe it's the 20th, a full report into ratings will be released. It's that document which his sponsors and bosses will pay attention to. What needs to happen now is a campaign to get people to STOP listening! Turn him off! Listen to something, ANYTHING else. And do not turn him back on. Ever.
It's really the only way to get his rubbish off air.
Encourage your friends, neighbours, online pals, to do the same. THEN see how long he gets to keep his job.
Let's pretend for a moment that he never said the PM's father died of shame. Lets pretend that the function where he bid on and won a chaff jacket never happened.
What then? What is it about these particular incidents which has incited such anger and an uprising the likes of which has not been seen in recent times in Australia? This comment and the jacket that went with it is not the worst thing Mr Jones ever did. Far from it in fact. He has said things on air which boggle the mind. Judging from the nature of most of them, the man really is bitter and vitriolic.
Have we made him that way? By glorifying his words, calling him a media personality, awarding him an Order of Australia Medal...........perhaps we are all responsible for who this small man has become? Or maybe some people are just so full of angst that it fairly oozes from their vocal chords from the time they can talk.
I looked up Alan Jones on Wikepedia. After the lengthy bits about his history as a person, I reached the section on the controversy. Reading it takes a while as it goes on for quite a while but I took the time to take a look. Most of those incidents mentioned were ones I remembered as they are all ones which were reported on Australia wide. What it makes you wonder though, is why his list has been allowed to get this long?
Over the past few days there have been petitions to sign, sponsors to contact, posts to re-tweet and 'share' on Facebook. It's been a veritable feeding frenzy for the social media world......all on a single topic and about one man and his comments.
Comments that were not even said on air. He spoke at a function, through a microphone, to a crowd who were filled with hilarity after he mentioned the PM and her dad. Pretty awful stuff really and well worth the comments and the shares. It's even had some success in that many sponsors are no longer sponsors and have taken the moral high ground to distance themselves from his words. And he never even said them on air. Those said on air have been much more frightening and have the capacity to do real harm. Take the Cronulla Riots for example. Jones was found to contribute to the inciting of the riots and exacerbating what was already a heated event. This man has power. Real power.
So, how do we take it away? How do we let the media know we no longer accept hate speech, or vile language which angers, inflames and hurts on our airwaves? How do we ensure media continues to be opinionated without being vitriolic?
There is really only one way. Yes, sponsors are deserting the Alan Jones Show, in their droves. People are rallying online and via social media and creating a situation where the comments made will not fade away into nothingness and obscurity. But it won't work. Other sponsors will appear shortly and take the place of those who have left. Ones without morals who don't care about public perception, just public dollars.
Why will they turn up? Because more people tuned into the Alan Jones Show this morning than have at any time in the past few years. People are still listening to him!
I realise some/most tuned in to hear him explain himself further and see what his reaction to the fallout would be. That doesn't matter though. They still tuned in. Later this month, I believe it's the 20th, a full report into ratings will be released. It's that document which his sponsors and bosses will pay attention to. What needs to happen now is a campaign to get people to STOP listening! Turn him off! Listen to something, ANYTHING else. And do not turn him back on. Ever.
It's really the only way to get his rubbish off air.
Encourage your friends, neighbours, online pals, to do the same. THEN see how long he gets to keep his job.
Tuesday, July 17, 2012
LNP State Conference and reality clash as 100 days are up!
A State Conference by any political party is an interesting few days. There is always a decision made somewhere along the line which baffles the population and one or two which don't make it through for unexplainable reasons. It's worth noting also, that generally decisions made at these Conferences are the creation of policy. That does not guarantee them any traction in real terms, particularly where the policy is a Federal one and the Conference a State one.
That said, there are many Motions passed at a State Conference which DO become part of legislation, so any and all of those passed over the weekend at the LNP State Conference in Queensland, could come to fruition for the wider community.
So, what went on? One of the most interesting facets of the conference was the rise to prominence within the LNP of the members of Young LNP. Many of the Motions put forward to the Conference Delegates came directly from their ranks and several of those which scored the most public scrutiny, were Young LNP Motions.
Most notable of those was the Motion to remove Abstudy altogether and instead have Austudy as the only method of assistance for secondary, TAFE and Universary students. This gained significant time in the media and is a touchy subject at the best of times. The view from Young LNP is that it segregates and divides the community, according to skin colour. One Federal MP Paul Neville, noted that Abstudy is an essential tool in the process of bridging the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. His belief that education is the best way to achieve that fell onto deaf ears and the Motion passed. After the vote he expressed his opinion by saying that it was 'not uncommon for the young members of a political party to have radical views.'
Also on the agenda was the removal of Climate Change teachings from the Science curriculum. The reason given for this one was obscure but appeared to be that it is seen as a Left/Green view of the world and that Climate Change science is not proven, therefore should not be on the curriculum. Interestingly, on the same day, another Motion passed which would see the revoking of Indigenous History from schools. The reason for this was much the same as the Climate Change discussion, with the added input that it was placing white Australians in a less than flattering light which (again) was apparently a Labor thing to do. There was much discussion about the new National curriculum as a whole and several times it was mentioned that it is predominantly Labor teachings and we should be removing most of it.
All very fascinating, especially given that Howard was the person responsible for the National Curriculum and hand picked the team who worked on it's content.
Also, given the fact that Indigenous Australians have worked very hard to get a more accurate version of Australia's history taught to students, it must be quite deflating to be told that your history is too 'negative' and should be watered down.
As for climate change. I'm unsure if we have to have water lapping at our front door and out of control weather patterns daily before the science is seen as 'real' but it's getting a bit old to continue denying what is surely obvious. Climate change is reality. Is it the fact that human interaction with the environment is being blamed for it's quickening rate of influence perhaps? If we instead said it was the fault of cows alone and no human being would have to alter their lifestyle or pay for the privilege of continuing to over-use resources, would the population have a different view of the science?
Whatever you personally believe, is it not more beneficial for our children to be taught both sides of the debate, which they currently are, so that they are informed? I believe the commonly used phrase is 'learning to think for themselves'. God forbid we should allow that. Could have catastrophic repercussions.
There were plenty more decisions made throughout the three days of bonding and some (including the restriction of Unions to enter workplaces and building sites) have been reported on and will face further scrutiny in the coming weeks and months.
All in all, a very busy and productive few days, depending on your point of view. Beginning with a speech by Newman that included references to Queensland's criminals, saying they should be very afraid of the Government, including in the middle several statements that branded Gough Whitlam as the second worst PM in Australia's history, and ending with a speech by National party President Mr Truss stating that Labor consistently produces the most disastrous Governments and the focus should remain now on Federal Labor so they can spread the negative sentiment that caused the Queensland election results nationally.
More interestingly perhaps was not the Conference itself but the fact that outside it's doors, in the 'real' world, Campbell Newman was inching up on his 100 day milestone. And the honeymoon period was officially ending. Mass sackings have resulted in huge protests and marches. The fire and ambulance services are joining forces to protest against new regulations and unsatisfactory work and wage agreements. Surrogacy laws banning same sex couples from utilising surrogacy to have a child is seeing the rising movement get active once again. The news that the reduction in solar tariffs will now be passed to the next owner of a home with existing solar power, rather than protected over the 20 year period as it previously was is also causing an uproar. The introduction of tougher penalties for child sex offenders against the advice of those on the front line has child safety workers concerned about possible increases in murders and the increased likelihood of drawn out trials.
The list goes on.......disbanding and sacking of staff from Skilling Queenslanders for work, sacking 2'000 plus from QR, sacking up to 500 from Department of Justice and the Attorney-General etc, etc, etc.....
So it seems that whilst those within the conference walls were lauding the recent win for Queensland's LNP as the greatest victory in political history, those outside are feeling the effects of a lopsided Government and are wondering what's around the corner for them.
That said, there are many Motions passed at a State Conference which DO become part of legislation, so any and all of those passed over the weekend at the LNP State Conference in Queensland, could come to fruition for the wider community.
So, what went on? One of the most interesting facets of the conference was the rise to prominence within the LNP of the members of Young LNP. Many of the Motions put forward to the Conference Delegates came directly from their ranks and several of those which scored the most public scrutiny, were Young LNP Motions.
Most notable of those was the Motion to remove Abstudy altogether and instead have Austudy as the only method of assistance for secondary, TAFE and Universary students. This gained significant time in the media and is a touchy subject at the best of times. The view from Young LNP is that it segregates and divides the community, according to skin colour. One Federal MP Paul Neville, noted that Abstudy is an essential tool in the process of bridging the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. His belief that education is the best way to achieve that fell onto deaf ears and the Motion passed. After the vote he expressed his opinion by saying that it was 'not uncommon for the young members of a political party to have radical views.'
Also on the agenda was the removal of Climate Change teachings from the Science curriculum. The reason given for this one was obscure but appeared to be that it is seen as a Left/Green view of the world and that Climate Change science is not proven, therefore should not be on the curriculum. Interestingly, on the same day, another Motion passed which would see the revoking of Indigenous History from schools. The reason for this was much the same as the Climate Change discussion, with the added input that it was placing white Australians in a less than flattering light which (again) was apparently a Labor thing to do. There was much discussion about the new National curriculum as a whole and several times it was mentioned that it is predominantly Labor teachings and we should be removing most of it.
All very fascinating, especially given that Howard was the person responsible for the National Curriculum and hand picked the team who worked on it's content.
Also, given the fact that Indigenous Australians have worked very hard to get a more accurate version of Australia's history taught to students, it must be quite deflating to be told that your history is too 'negative' and should be watered down.
As for climate change. I'm unsure if we have to have water lapping at our front door and out of control weather patterns daily before the science is seen as 'real' but it's getting a bit old to continue denying what is surely obvious. Climate change is reality. Is it the fact that human interaction with the environment is being blamed for it's quickening rate of influence perhaps? If we instead said it was the fault of cows alone and no human being would have to alter their lifestyle or pay for the privilege of continuing to over-use resources, would the population have a different view of the science?
Whatever you personally believe, is it not more beneficial for our children to be taught both sides of the debate, which they currently are, so that they are informed? I believe the commonly used phrase is 'learning to think for themselves'. God forbid we should allow that. Could have catastrophic repercussions.
There were plenty more decisions made throughout the three days of bonding and some (including the restriction of Unions to enter workplaces and building sites) have been reported on and will face further scrutiny in the coming weeks and months.
All in all, a very busy and productive few days, depending on your point of view. Beginning with a speech by Newman that included references to Queensland's criminals, saying they should be very afraid of the Government, including in the middle several statements that branded Gough Whitlam as the second worst PM in Australia's history, and ending with a speech by National party President Mr Truss stating that Labor consistently produces the most disastrous Governments and the focus should remain now on Federal Labor so they can spread the negative sentiment that caused the Queensland election results nationally.
More interestingly perhaps was not the Conference itself but the fact that outside it's doors, in the 'real' world, Campbell Newman was inching up on his 100 day milestone. And the honeymoon period was officially ending. Mass sackings have resulted in huge protests and marches. The fire and ambulance services are joining forces to protest against new regulations and unsatisfactory work and wage agreements. Surrogacy laws banning same sex couples from utilising surrogacy to have a child is seeing the rising movement get active once again. The news that the reduction in solar tariffs will now be passed to the next owner of a home with existing solar power, rather than protected over the 20 year period as it previously was is also causing an uproar. The introduction of tougher penalties for child sex offenders against the advice of those on the front line has child safety workers concerned about possible increases in murders and the increased likelihood of drawn out trials.
The list goes on.......disbanding and sacking of staff from Skilling Queenslanders for work, sacking 2'000 plus from QR, sacking up to 500 from Department of Justice and the Attorney-General etc, etc, etc.....
So it seems that whilst those within the conference walls were lauding the recent win for Queensland's LNP as the greatest victory in political history, those outside are feeling the effects of a lopsided Government and are wondering what's around the corner for them.
Saturday, July 14, 2012
Abbott the Evangelist.
Last night I sat and soaked up the speech by Tony Abbott in it's entirety from the opening day of the LNP State Conference in Brisbane. It's riveting stuff.
Words like these: “I believe that all of us in this room all of us in the Liberal and National parties around our country stand on the threshold of something great,”
“We stand on the threshold of riding to the rescue of our country.
“I stress it is not about us ... It is about building a better country. We can do it. We can do it. We are a great people whose best days are in front of us, a great people held back momentarily by a bad government.
“Can’t you feel it in the streets? The Australian people are willing us to succeed.”
And then there's this: “Like you, I remember and I cherish, I will never forget, the 24th of March, 2012. The 24th of March, 2012, a day that will live in the history of this great state because never was it more truly said of Queensland: beautiful one day, perfect the next.”
Those words are not necessarily untrue, nor are they particularly horrific when taken as words alone....what they do however, is mark Abbott as a man consumed with the need to gain power. A man who is almost evangelical in his phrasing and his wording. Similar to an evangelist, he is not necessarily working in the best interests of his 'followers'.
He wants to win, nobody can blame him for that as it is his role to do so. What I find repulsive is the way he chooses to do it, peddling untruths and feeding the undue fear of the general population.
He'll win. There's not much question about that. But at what cost to the health of Australia's people and it's environment? At what cost to its psyche? THAT is what is so frightening about this speech and others just like it.
While so many await in anticipation the downfall of Federal Labor, I question whether they have thought through properly what the alternative will mean for them.
While Labor continues to push people in Abbott's direction, it seems to me that there is little need for him to have effective policy or to even sell those policy choices (after all nobody is talking about Direct Action or any of the others in the multitude of LNP Federal policies) and when nobody is bothering to scrutinise the alternatives, the people end up with an unknown entity they voted for with the only thought in their head being to get rid of what they currently have.
It happened in Qld, in NSW, in Vic and in SA and now we have strike action, marches and a whole lot of bemused people wondering what on earth they voted for.
It must be noted that media outlets are feeding the frenzy by giving equal time to Abbott on the main stage as they give to the Government. An interesting turn of events to say the least. Abbott is professional at repeating his message consistently and it is well known that works......whether the message is a good one or not.
Labor are floundering about trying to find their place in the new landscape where extreme right wing politics make it much harder to find the middle. It's happening the world over, in America political commentators have written comprehensive books on the topic and the common belief is that dissent within the parties is the only way for changes back to a balanced viewpoint to occur.
The right wing of any political party is always loudest and when the entire scene shifts further right, that view becomes extreme. What it also does, is make the left look extreme as we have witnessed from the Greens. In actual fact, the Greens have not moved in either direction, instead being the only party to remain exactly as it was initially intended. It's everyone else who's moved over........
Right now we are witnessing a major party fall-out with the ALP as it comes to terms with it's shifting goals. That movement to the far right has reached it's crescendo and is causing uproar within the party structure. Over the next few months we will see the final attack from the right, before the quietly building left and centre movements (along with those in the right from areas not within NSW in particular) begin to get noticed via the steadily increasing public displays of dissent in the form of marches, strikes and the like. If the voice is clear enough and strong enough, it will force the shift back to centre ground within the ALP and make the LNP once again the voice of the right and far right.
If they are not successful, mark my words, another party will be formed and nobody wants that.
We still have many who are glad for the results in recent State elections and those have always, and will always, vote LNP. Then there are those who swing between the two, who like to keep their options open and moved toward the Greens and Independents at the last election because they couldn't face the alternatives. Those are the ones who will bring Abbott to power and those are the ones who deserve to be treated with more respect by the media and both major parties. Starting right now.
Words like these: “I believe that all of us in this room all of us in the Liberal and National parties around our country stand on the threshold of something great,”
“We stand on the threshold of riding to the rescue of our country.
“I stress it is not about us ... It is about building a better country. We can do it. We can do it. We are a great people whose best days are in front of us, a great people held back momentarily by a bad government.
“Can’t you feel it in the streets? The Australian people are willing us to succeed.”
And then there's this: “Like you, I remember and I cherish, I will never forget, the 24th of March, 2012. The 24th of March, 2012, a day that will live in the history of this great state because never was it more truly said of Queensland: beautiful one day, perfect the next.”
Those words are not necessarily untrue, nor are they particularly horrific when taken as words alone....what they do however, is mark Abbott as a man consumed with the need to gain power. A man who is almost evangelical in his phrasing and his wording. Similar to an evangelist, he is not necessarily working in the best interests of his 'followers'.
He wants to win, nobody can blame him for that as it is his role to do so. What I find repulsive is the way he chooses to do it, peddling untruths and feeding the undue fear of the general population.
He'll win. There's not much question about that. But at what cost to the health of Australia's people and it's environment? At what cost to its psyche? THAT is what is so frightening about this speech and others just like it.
While so many await in anticipation the downfall of Federal Labor, I question whether they have thought through properly what the alternative will mean for them.
While Labor continues to push people in Abbott's direction, it seems to me that there is little need for him to have effective policy or to even sell those policy choices (after all nobody is talking about Direct Action or any of the others in the multitude of LNP Federal policies) and when nobody is bothering to scrutinise the alternatives, the people end up with an unknown entity they voted for with the only thought in their head being to get rid of what they currently have.
It happened in Qld, in NSW, in Vic and in SA and now we have strike action, marches and a whole lot of bemused people wondering what on earth they voted for.
It must be noted that media outlets are feeding the frenzy by giving equal time to Abbott on the main stage as they give to the Government. An interesting turn of events to say the least. Abbott is professional at repeating his message consistently and it is well known that works......whether the message is a good one or not.
Labor are floundering about trying to find their place in the new landscape where extreme right wing politics make it much harder to find the middle. It's happening the world over, in America political commentators have written comprehensive books on the topic and the common belief is that dissent within the parties is the only way for changes back to a balanced viewpoint to occur.
The right wing of any political party is always loudest and when the entire scene shifts further right, that view becomes extreme. What it also does, is make the left look extreme as we have witnessed from the Greens. In actual fact, the Greens have not moved in either direction, instead being the only party to remain exactly as it was initially intended. It's everyone else who's moved over........
Right now we are witnessing a major party fall-out with the ALP as it comes to terms with it's shifting goals. That movement to the far right has reached it's crescendo and is causing uproar within the party structure. Over the next few months we will see the final attack from the right, before the quietly building left and centre movements (along with those in the right from areas not within NSW in particular) begin to get noticed via the steadily increasing public displays of dissent in the form of marches, strikes and the like. If the voice is clear enough and strong enough, it will force the shift back to centre ground within the ALP and make the LNP once again the voice of the right and far right.
If they are not successful, mark my words, another party will be formed and nobody wants that.
We still have many who are glad for the results in recent State elections and those have always, and will always, vote LNP. Then there are those who swing between the two, who like to keep their options open and moved toward the Greens and Independents at the last election because they couldn't face the alternatives. Those are the ones who will bring Abbott to power and those are the ones who deserve to be treated with more respect by the media and both major parties. Starting right now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)