Wednesday, June 28, 2006
Democracy in Howard's Australia
Voting is compulsory in Australia. It is seen as both a right and a responsibility. Failure to vote is a punishable offence. Yet the Howard Liberal-National Coalition Government has used its majorities in both houses of the Australian Parliament to restrict access to the electoral roll.
Following the calling of an election, the people used to have seven days in which to enroll to vote. Now the roll will close on the same day. Last election, more than four hundred thousand people registered to vote within the seven day period. This equates to a population of six hundred thousand, or seven electorates in todays terms. Yes seven parliamentary seats. How's that for a gerrymander. I find this extraordianary and alarming. Imagine the effect of a news headline which read; Government denies the vote to seven electorates.
Senator Minchen, Minister for Finance has said that it was done to save increasing the resources of the Electoral Commission. Is this not ludicrous? The Minister denies four hundred thousand people the vote in order to save a few lousy shekels. Isn't this a just a wee bit absurd? On the basis that neither the Minister nor the Cabinet are that stupid it is reasonable to suppose that there must be another reason. What could it be? Why would our Government do this ? Who is most likely to benefit? It wouldn't be, would it, that the people who register following the calling of an election are most likely to vote for opposition parties? Surely not. Surely it wouldn't be, would it, that the Minister holds the view that if you're not registered at the time an election is called then you're irresponsible and deserve to miss out? No, no that would be far too devious. It is a mystery. This Act was not necessary in any honest meaning of the word. It has weakened, not strengthened, our democracy. Is this the sort of thing we want our Government to do?
At the same time the Government has increased from $1,500 to $10,000 the amount which anyone can give to political parties and candidates, off the record, secretly. I forsee huge relative and absolute increases in donations direct to candidates. Expect many and much more of those $10,000 lunches with Ministers. It is platitudinous to say "There is no such thing as a free lunch." but it is also a trueism. It is very simple, those who donate to political parties and especially those who slip money under the table in brown paper bags, do so to win influence. They expect a quid pro quo when the boat comes in. Is this how we want out elections to be determined and our futures resolved?
Keep the foregoing in mind and consider the flashy and profligate pork barrelling which the Howard Government has indulged in immediately prior to the last election and again earlier this year, large amounts of public monies splashed out without honest justification and not based on any objective administrative calculus of need. We are told, "Don't worry this is surplus to Government requirements, surplus to the budget." So the Treasurer can just scatter it according to his whim? Surplus to Government requirements and surplus to the budget it may have been in his terms, but it was not surplus to the needs of public services, nor was it surplus to the public purse. This kind of behaviour is just plain 'good ol' boy' abuse of a position of trust. The decisions are made by politicians and they wish to be remembered when the election comes round. Here we have something like the old English ' rotten borough' style of electoral management, corruption at the base of our democracy. Is it not time that we stood against these grotesqueries and outlawed politicans and governments using their positions to serve the interests of themselves and their political parties?
The Prime Minister of Australia professes his love of our democracy even his love of dissent within the ranks, a vicious cynical double entendre if ever there was one. The last time I saw him say this, he stood on the steps of Irelands Parliament with a sneer and a snigger and implied that it was natural since Australians had Irish blood in the veins. Of course he loves our democracy, because he so easily manipulates it and gets away with it. What a cruel joke this little man is working on the Australian people.
Consider how our referendum on the issue of the Republic was corrupted. It beggars belief that we tolerated the interference of a politician in setting the question and form of the ballot paper. In an honestly administered country this would have been assigned to an independent public service with expert (non-political) input and designed to achieve and honest reliable and unbiased result. But in Australia it was interfered with by the dirtiest cabinet in recent times. A bigger conflict of interest situation one could not design. One or more grubs crawled all over it. And we the people sat on our hands and allowed it to pass.
Consider the lies and deceit on the children overboard matter, so thick that they obscured the sun. Now we have the promises on women and children seeking asylum in Australia being treated as nothing. And our Government plays with legal definitions of the geography of Australia to deny asylum seekers their human rights. Is this how we want Australia to treat our fellow humans in distress?
Remember the lies and prevarications surrounding the invasion of Iraq. And the AWB Iraq wheat sales matter. Consider how the key players and Ministers used every schoolboy excuse under the sun to evade their responsibility and, so far, appear to have got away with it. Are we not a nation of fools to put up with this behaviour?
Think of the new nuclear power issue, when and how it was raised and managed. At peak interest in the AWB matter Howard had Australians running round distracted to the point of losing their heads like farmyard chooks before the axe. Sure we need a debate, one about energy and not before an honest evaluation of the options. We do not need the debate which Howard has manufactured for his own nefarious ends.
Howards antagonistic Liberal-National Coalition is ripping the heart and soul out of Australia. And never has there been an assault on the Australian people so vicious as Howard and Minister Andrews have unleashed with the Work Place relations legisation. You don't manage human relations by setting people into adversary relationship. Businesses don't operate productively where there is no mutual respect between the members of the workforce. And contracts based on force majeure rapidly become unmanageable.
It is said that Howard tells new members of parliament on his side of politics that while they promised to represent the people in order to win their seats, now that they are in office, their loyalties must be to the Government and their party/coalition. There can be no deeper deceit than this, no greater fraud. Is this what we want? Is this the best we can do? Can we not design something better?
We need to think about these things and read their meaning. I see a malfunctioning system. A system which needs to be redesigned. We need to propose solutions to the problems which the Howard Government has thrown up if we are to ensure democracy in Australia. We need to write and rewrite the rules of of governance and administration.
We need analysis followed by dabate, about how we want our governments to manage our affairs and resources to build the kind of society which we want. You could say we need to put our representatives and our Government on a new contract because the terms of the existing contracts are not serving us well.
Australians have been leaders towards democracy. It is time for another contribution.
28/06/2006
Following the calling of an election, the people used to have seven days in which to enroll to vote. Now the roll will close on the same day. Last election, more than four hundred thousand people registered to vote within the seven day period. This equates to a population of six hundred thousand, or seven electorates in todays terms. Yes seven parliamentary seats. How's that for a gerrymander. I find this extraordianary and alarming. Imagine the effect of a news headline which read; Government denies the vote to seven electorates.
Senator Minchen, Minister for Finance has said that it was done to save increasing the resources of the Electoral Commission. Is this not ludicrous? The Minister denies four hundred thousand people the vote in order to save a few lousy shekels. Isn't this a just a wee bit absurd? On the basis that neither the Minister nor the Cabinet are that stupid it is reasonable to suppose that there must be another reason. What could it be? Why would our Government do this ? Who is most likely to benefit? It wouldn't be, would it, that the people who register following the calling of an election are most likely to vote for opposition parties? Surely not. Surely it wouldn't be, would it, that the Minister holds the view that if you're not registered at the time an election is called then you're irresponsible and deserve to miss out? No, no that would be far too devious. It is a mystery. This Act was not necessary in any honest meaning of the word. It has weakened, not strengthened, our democracy. Is this the sort of thing we want our Government to do?
At the same time the Government has increased from $1,500 to $10,000 the amount which anyone can give to political parties and candidates, off the record, secretly. I forsee huge relative and absolute increases in donations direct to candidates. Expect many and much more of those $10,000 lunches with Ministers. It is platitudinous to say "There is no such thing as a free lunch." but it is also a trueism. It is very simple, those who donate to political parties and especially those who slip money under the table in brown paper bags, do so to win influence. They expect a quid pro quo when the boat comes in. Is this how we want out elections to be determined and our futures resolved?
Keep the foregoing in mind and consider the flashy and profligate pork barrelling which the Howard Government has indulged in immediately prior to the last election and again earlier this year, large amounts of public monies splashed out without honest justification and not based on any objective administrative calculus of need. We are told, "Don't worry this is surplus to Government requirements, surplus to the budget." So the Treasurer can just scatter it according to his whim? Surplus to Government requirements and surplus to the budget it may have been in his terms, but it was not surplus to the needs of public services, nor was it surplus to the public purse. This kind of behaviour is just plain 'good ol' boy' abuse of a position of trust. The decisions are made by politicians and they wish to be remembered when the election comes round. Here we have something like the old English ' rotten borough' style of electoral management, corruption at the base of our democracy. Is it not time that we stood against these grotesqueries and outlawed politicans and governments using their positions to serve the interests of themselves and their political parties?
The Prime Minister of Australia professes his love of our democracy even his love of dissent within the ranks, a vicious cynical double entendre if ever there was one. The last time I saw him say this, he stood on the steps of Irelands Parliament with a sneer and a snigger and implied that it was natural since Australians had Irish blood in the veins. Of course he loves our democracy, because he so easily manipulates it and gets away with it. What a cruel joke this little man is working on the Australian people.
Consider how our referendum on the issue of the Republic was corrupted. It beggars belief that we tolerated the interference of a politician in setting the question and form of the ballot paper. In an honestly administered country this would have been assigned to an independent public service with expert (non-political) input and designed to achieve and honest reliable and unbiased result. But in Australia it was interfered with by the dirtiest cabinet in recent times. A bigger conflict of interest situation one could not design. One or more grubs crawled all over it. And we the people sat on our hands and allowed it to pass.
Consider the lies and deceit on the children overboard matter, so thick that they obscured the sun. Now we have the promises on women and children seeking asylum in Australia being treated as nothing. And our Government plays with legal definitions of the geography of Australia to deny asylum seekers their human rights. Is this how we want Australia to treat our fellow humans in distress?
Remember the lies and prevarications surrounding the invasion of Iraq. And the AWB Iraq wheat sales matter. Consider how the key players and Ministers used every schoolboy excuse under the sun to evade their responsibility and, so far, appear to have got away with it. Are we not a nation of fools to put up with this behaviour?
Think of the new nuclear power issue, when and how it was raised and managed. At peak interest in the AWB matter Howard had Australians running round distracted to the point of losing their heads like farmyard chooks before the axe. Sure we need a debate, one about energy and not before an honest evaluation of the options. We do not need the debate which Howard has manufactured for his own nefarious ends.
Howards antagonistic Liberal-National Coalition is ripping the heart and soul out of Australia. And never has there been an assault on the Australian people so vicious as Howard and Minister Andrews have unleashed with the Work Place relations legisation. You don't manage human relations by setting people into adversary relationship. Businesses don't operate productively where there is no mutual respect between the members of the workforce. And contracts based on force majeure rapidly become unmanageable.
It is said that Howard tells new members of parliament on his side of politics that while they promised to represent the people in order to win their seats, now that they are in office, their loyalties must be to the Government and their party/coalition. There can be no deeper deceit than this, no greater fraud. Is this what we want? Is this the best we can do? Can we not design something better?
We need to think about these things and read their meaning. I see a malfunctioning system. A system which needs to be redesigned. We need to propose solutions to the problems which the Howard Government has thrown up if we are to ensure democracy in Australia. We need to write and rewrite the rules of of governance and administration.
We need analysis followed by dabate, about how we want our governments to manage our affairs and resources to build the kind of society which we want. You could say we need to put our representatives and our Government on a new contract because the terms of the existing contracts are not serving us well.
Australians have been leaders towards democracy. It is time for another contribution.
28/06/2006
