When I noted the establishment of OpenAustralia as a new initiative in facilitating public scrutiny of Parliament, I expressed a wish that the Senate would be included as well as the House - because that’s where a lot of the action is in terms of committees and bills. I’m very pleased to read that just in time for the first sitting of the new Senate next week - when The Greens, Nick Xenophon and Steve Fielding will hold the balance of power - they’ve added the Senate to their website.
Tag Archive for 'Family First'
If I were Steve Fielding, I’d vote for every government bill that comes before the Senate, because I’d be scared witless of a double dissolution. No one’s gonna preference you this time round, dude. And all the silly stunts in the world won’t save you.

Anyway, I’d have thought that generally Family First would oppose going topless in public.
By the way, Malcolm Turnbull has denied that it’s opposition policy to call for an increase in the aged pension. I guess that they’ll just have to drown their sorrows in alcopops, while Brendan parks his Tarago next to their gutters at 3am and comes in to console these “everyday Australians”.
Seriously, though, isn’t anyone able to comprehend that the Henry Inquiry will probably recommend a change to indexation of pensions, which will do far more to provide a decent standard of living for retired and older citizens than some John Howard one off cheque in the mail for a few hundred bucks? Continue reading ‘Would do anything for re-election’
The Age believes Attorney-General Robert McClelland will announce today that he will introduce amendments to Parliament as early as next month to alter around 100 federal laws.
The changes will not allow gay marriages or same-sex couples to adopt children, and the issue of access to the Family Court for same-sex couples is still being resolved.
Some of the changes would take effect immediately, but many financial laws — such as social security, tax and veterans’ affairs — would be phased in by mid-2009. But first the changes will have to be passed by the Senate, where the Coalition retains its majority until July 1.
Even after then, Labor will need the vote of conservative Christian and Family First senator Steve Fielding and independent senator Nick Xenophon if it cannot clinch Coalition support.
Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson has signalled he backed the principle of removing discrimination against gay couples but has yet to secure formal support from his colleagues.
This is the sort of situation that led to my rabbiting on so much about the importance of balancing the Senate in our last election. I’ll bet on Fielding voting against this bill, in which case unless the Liberals support it it won’t go through. Continue reading ‘Rudd govt anti-same-sex-discrimination bill depends on the Senate balance of power’
From today’s Crikey email:
While most Australians were thinking about anything other than politics over the Easter long weekend, that doesn’t apply to various groups within the Nats, who were busily leaking to the papers on the ever more confusing “United Conservative Party” push in Queensland.
Laurie Oakes, as is often the case, had the pick of the leaks, revealing in his column that Ron Boswell was gearing himself up for one last fight against what has been dubbed the “Pineapple Party” — the stand alone Springborg/Joyce version which would swallow up not just the Libs, but also corral everyone on the right wing fringes from Family First through the Fishing Party to the remnants of One Nation. This was unconvincingly denied by Nats state president Bruce McIvor, but the timing of the leak is significant — the Liberals’ state council meets next weekend to deliberate on the UCP concept.
Unsurprisingly, Boswell prefers to push a straight Libs/Nats amalgamation, while leading moderate Libs such as George Brandis still oppose any sort of amalgamated or reformed party. According to Oakes, Nelson’s amalgamation gambit has to be seen in this context — as a pre-emptive maneouvre to slow the Borg’s momentum.
Oakes observes that the Federal Nats are more or less dead in the water. What he overlooks is that — at state level — the Queensland Nats are finally coming to realise that they are too.
Tim Dunlop yesterday wrote about moves from the Rudd government to undo some of the gag-clauses placed by the Howard government on government funding for charitable institutions, in which he quotes a neat summation of the policy from 2006 by Tanya Plibersek:
if you help the homeless it’s OK; if you say there shouldn’t be so many homeless you lose funding
Now, given that the balance of power in the Senate will shortly be held by Family First’s Stephen Fielding, Independent Nick Xenophon and the Greens, all of whose records would appear to support not-for-profit organisations being able to engage in social advocacy and criticism without threats of defunding, this measure to dismantle gag clauses is likely to have broad bipartisan support.
But what about other gag clauses currently in place?
Lauredhel wrote about a challenge from the less conservative arm of the Liberal Opposition (Brandan Nelson and Mal Washer) for the Labor government to dismantle the legacy of Brian Harradine’s time holding the balance of power in the Senate:
Harradine, holding all the cards, managed to get legislation passed banning foreign aid money from funding comprehensive women’s health care services. AusAid could no longer disseminate any abortion information, and some contraception was on the hit list too
While I applaud the initiative of Nelson and Washer in seeking to dismantle a fetter which constrains the choices of so many women in poor countries, I wonder how much pure politicking is involved in making this challenge to Rudd. Continue reading ‘Taking off the gags’
Family First candidates just can’t help themselves. After Andrew Quah, Ben Jacobsen is the next Family First candidate suffering a case of indecent exposure. The indecency in this case is bigotry as in Jacobsen’s strange request that Liberal candidate for Leichhardt, Charlie McKillop reveal her sexual preference. The reason is that “it reflects the kind of values that will guide someone if they are elected to Parliament.”
For Jacobsen his idea of values, specifically of the family type, include bigotry.
It is interesting to see Family First try and play in the Australian political arena with the values of the American religious right. Such a move is doomed to fail. The reason why such politics work well in the United States stems from a long history of puritanical ideals. We simply don’t have any tradition like that in mainstream Australia. Any austere religiously motivated practices get overwhelmed by Australian’s tendency towards Dionysian pursuits. It is also a reason why the Culture Wars were “lost” by the right. Most issues couldn’t get any traction as the issues were imported from the United States with little understanding of the social history of the cultural battlegrounds.
An interesting feature of the sexually repressive nature of United States politics are the seemingly regular revelation that a strident anti-homosexual politician (invariably Republican) doesn’t mind a bit of same sex action. While there is an obvious sense of schadenfreude with such revelations, it is also quite sad.
Now that Family First have overcome the hurdle of representation via Stephen Fielding, the more they play on the Australian political stage the more is revealed of their religiously motivated agenda.
According to the latest Newspoll, the narrowing is on. Or something. Because with Labor still on a primary of 48%, it’s evident that some of any genuine movement that’s being picked up is coming from elsewhere - perhaps independents or Family First. Newspoll appear to believe this because as far as I can tell they’ve changed the allocation of preferences to 60/40 to Labor. It’s quite possible that there is some polarisation of the minor party right wing vote towards the Coalition, but claims that Labor’s 2PP lead has been cut in half should be coloured by that shift in the methodology.
As the always informative Possum remarks:
It has actually been the fluctuations in the minor party vote estimates that are behind most of the volatility in the TPP figures over the last 10 months.
Not that you’d pick that up from Dennis Shanahan’s latest column, which I think refers to this Newspoll, though oddly he talks about “the latest series of Newspolls”. Perhaps it’s some sort of aggregated News Ltd pseph wizardry. And I have no idea why he thinks the latest Galaxy four seat poll in NSW is in any sense bad news for Rudd, or that it indicates that NSW isn’t going to be fertile ground for Labor. I was pretty dubious about the week one Galaxy Queensland poll, and it’s worth pointing out to Mr Shanahan that it’s two weeks old and if you’re going to claim a shift back to Howard on the basis of a poll taken over this last weekend, then you can’t talk about one a few weeks ago as if it’s contemporary evidence. But I’m sure I’m whistling in the wind.
In the United States, a pleasing aspect of the so called family values politicians that pander to the religious right is that many seem to trip over their own self-righteous feet of clay. Witness the downfall of Larry Craig and Ted Haggard for example.
In Australia, before the last election there was the revelation that Ross Cameron, himself a family values type, had a cheating heart. This election, Family First has fallen foul of some filthy shenanigans with Andrew Quah being dumped as the Family First’s candidate for the seat of Reid.
Quah’s misdeeds involve circulation of pictures around the internet which would lead voters in Reid no doubt which way Quah’s politics swung. He has since been disendorsed as the FF candidate for Reid.
As usual in such incidents, personal responsibility is cast aside in favour of a barely believable statement of denial:
Mr Quah told the Herald yesterday he thought it was possible that he had posed for the compromising photographs. “I might have been drunk off my face or my political enemies might have drugged me.”
The Australian Conservation Foundation has released its initial progress scorecard of the environmental policy commitments of the ALP, the Coalition, the Greens, the Democrats and Family First.
It’s not a pretty sight for either of the major parties. The Coalition rates just 21 out of 100 whilst Labor rates 49/100. Of the minor parties, the Greens are on 93/100, the Democrats are on 90/100 and Family First are also a dud on 31/100. The detailed basis for the scorecard is here.
ACF’s scorecard will be updated every week during the election campaign to reflect new commitments from the parties.
It will be interesting to see what bilbies Messrs. Garrett and Turnbull can pull out of their respective hats in the coming weeks.
WorkChoices: Having the hired help do election duties on their behalf lets Liberal Party members do other things like play golf and laugh at the little people
With federal election shenanigans in progress, members of political parties all over the nation are toiling in MPs’ offices or squalid former stores.
Undoubtedly, Queensland will be a key battle ground in this federal election. Shortly, I’ll be writing on the shape of the Sunshine State contest and key seats (some of them unexpected) to watch. But since the commonwealth election was called on the day after the state by-election for Brisbane Central was held to replace Peter Beattie in Parliament, it’s worth dwelling for a moment on its implications.
The failure of the Liberals to field a candidate (and the failure also of the Nationals’ scramble to fill the void) obviously limits the degree to which federal implications can be drawn from Labor candidate Grace Grace’s convincing win on Saturday.
But convincing it was. Labor won its first by election victory since 2000, and under the new leadership of Anna Bligh, the ALP held the line on primaries.
The Greens exceeded the benchmark set for them on Friday by their state campaign coordinator, Ian Gittus, of 30%, polling 33.1% on primaries.
What’s interesting in the results, though, is what can be inferred about where the Liberal vote went. Continue reading ‘Brisbane Central by-election: federal implications?’
This is a guest post by Sam Butler of Queer Penguin
For the purposes of this article, let’s optimistically assume the following: Labor wins this year’s federal election; Labor and the Greens and/or Democrats form a Senate majority; and Labor implements its promises within its first term of office.
Fanciful I know, but necessary for the sake of argument, as it was with such assumptions in mind that Labor recently outlined its GLBTI policy in Sydney to a small but passionate assortment of believers and cynics, organised by the Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby and featuring Labor candidates for inner-city seats as well as the party’s would-be Attorney General, Senator Joe Ludwig.
As all speakers went to great lengths to make clear, Labor is a better option than the Howard government where ending legislative discrimination against same-sex couples is concerned. Labor is committed not only to amending the 58 laws identified in HREOC’s Same Sex: Same Entitlements report, but also an even more comprehensive audit of additional laws and departmental policies. Sydney MP Tanya Plibersek and Wentworth candidate George Newhouse articulated a thorough understanding of other key issues concerning GLBTI folk, including domestic violence and the rise of assaults on Oxford Street, with corresponding action plans.
So far, so good. It’s at the next step – formal recognition of same-sex couples – where things get tricky. Continue reading ‘Hard Labor’
Blind voting tool produces a result blind Freddie saw coming a mile away.
AUSTRALIANS would re-elect Prime Minister John Howard in a landslide if votes were cast purely on policy - not personality or party loyalty - according to the first results from a “blind voting” tool developed by NEWS.com.au.
Almost 35,200 of the 72,300 participants who have completed the Vote-a-matic were matched with the Coalition, compared with 28,700 participants who were identified as a fit with Kevin Rudd’s Labor Party.
A further 6700 participants have been matched with the Democrats, while around 1700 went to the Greens and 175 to Family First.
The trends in results are a reversal of findings in the authoritative political polls which indicate the Coalition could face catastrophic defeat in the election, due to be held before the end of the year.
At least they can claim they own it.
Elsewhere, Lefty weighs in and so does the GreensBlog.



Recent comments
Lloyd Morcom, Chris (a different one), sublime cowgirl, Darin, Paul Burns, Kingsley [...]
David Irving (no relation), Pavlov's Cat, Helen, Paul Burns, hannah's dad, Benedictus [...]
Mindy, Pavlov's Cat, Lefty E, Nabakov, Lefty E, joe2 [...]
sublime cowgirl, Fine, steveh, wizofaus, grace pettigrew, wbb [...]
Paul Burns, Baraholka, Paul Burns, Adrien, joe2, Paul Burns [...]
Ambigulous, suz, Colin, un ami des beaux arts, adrian, suz [...]
Legal Eagle, Michael Sutcliffe, Mark, Tyro Rex, Adrien, Posey [...]
Bilko, Paul Burns, Dave Bath, Bilko, Nabakov, Adrien [...]
Paul Burns, Darlene, Darlene, via collins, MikeM, glen [...]
Leon, Derek, Down and Out of Sài Gòn, tigtog, Bingo Bango Boingo, Mark [...]
rosieblue, Lefty E, wankaroo, What me banal?, FDB, Eye'm A Love Man, Ooh Baby, Eye'm A Love Man [...]
RobWindt, Pappinbarra Fox, Ai! Que Dolor!, Patrick B, peter jones, Paul Burns [...]