freebooter posted:

So is the housing market going to collapse or what

At this point I want it to happen not so much so I can afford a house, more because I want boomers to get their comeuppance

"The Guardian posted:

Vast majority of boat arrivals in past 40 years given refugee protection

More than 80% of asylum seekers who have arrived in Australia by boat over the last 40 years have been given refugee protection, new analysis has revealed, with suggestions asylum seekers are not getting fair assessments on Manus Island.

The data, taken from publicly available federal government statistics and analysed by the Refugee Council of Australia also shows a marked difference between the rate of successful determinations made in the Nauru or Manus Island processing centres.

The RCOA’s report compiled a number of sources looking at boat arrivals during particular time periods affected by different political eras, and found there were 69,602 boat arrivals between January 1976 and June 2015.

Of those arrivals 30,400 people had had their case resolved, with 81% given some form of protection, including permanent and temporary protection visas.

Paul Power, the executive director of the RCOA, said the organisation wanted to “paint a realistic picture” of boat arrivals and refugee status as both sides of the debate often relied on flawed or incorrect information.

“This is needed in the public discussion,” Power told Guardian Australia.

“We’ve consistently heard politicians, like [former foreign affairs minister] Bob Carr, argue that many of the people coming are economic migrants and, yet even for the people he was speaking about at that point, the final outcomes have been that the majority are refugees.

“This has been one of the policy dilemmas for the Australian government. If the great majority of people coming by boat were people who had no claim for refugee status, then the policy is able to deal with it very easily and people are returned home.”

He also noted those on the opposing side of the debate often cited 2008-2012 figures which showed much higher refugee determinations of more than 90%.

Under offshore processing policies either side of that period, the rates of refugee protection status were measured at about 70%.

More than 32,000 cases of people who arrived by boat in the last 40 years remain unresolved and, while data on when those people arrived is not available, “all the anecdotal evidence suggests the vast majority are people who arrived during or after August 2012” when the “no advantage” policy was enacted, Power said.

“If you look at the number of people who arrived by boat since 2012, subtract the people who have been recognised as refugees on Nauru and Manus … then it’s very close to the number.”

The research also showed a huge disparity between determinations made on Nauru – about 85% granting refugee protection – and Manus Island – only 58%.

Daniel Webb, the director of legal advocacy at the Human Rights Law Centre said the gap was “either a pretty strange statistical anomaly or [showed] the assessment process in PNG is not fair and accurate.”

The United Nations high commissioner for refugees has previously criticised PNG’s process for determining refugee status, finding a limited capacity in officials to conduct assessments and a lack of clear or adequate legal and regulatory framework.

Webb pointed to comments made in 2014 by the then prime minister, Tony Abbott, and his PNG counterpart, Peter O’Neil, that it was likely “a good majority” of claims would be rejected.

“It’s hard to have faith in a process when both prime ministers appeared to pre-empt its outcome,” he said.

“When you walk through that Manus detention centre, and you see the desperate conditions people are being left to languish in, it’s pretty clear the whole arrangement isn’t actually about processing people but about pressuring them to return.”

Trapezium Dave posted:

He's in the back of the Snape one:

fickle poofterist posted:

Where did I see the graph with the house pricing and GDP over time and some boomer comments about hard work? I want to show it to dad and convince him to give me more pocket money

Subjunctive posted:

El Scotch posted:

PaletteSwappedNinja posted:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-03-01/abc-politics-live-blog-march-1/7209628

Live: Cory Bernardi seconded to the United Nations
MAP: Australia
The Federal Government is sending controversial senator Cory Bernardi to the United Nations for a three-month secondment, starting September.

Here is a little more detail on Senator Bernardi's trip to the Big Apple.

The Federal Government is sending Liberal Senator Cory Bernardi to the United Nations on a three month secondment.

The ABC understands Senator Bernardi will start his post in September.

The Government sends one Coalition and one Labor MP each year as parliamentary observers of the UN General Assembly.

Senator Bernadi has been critical of the United Nations in the past, describing it as an "unelected and unaccountable body" and a "fiscal black hole of bureaucracy" during debate in the Senate.

Here's a reminder of what Senator Bernardi told the ABC last month, trying to dissuade his government from endorsing former Labor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd as a potential replacement for current secretary-general Ban Ki-Moon.

Unless of course ... the plan is to destroy the United Nations from within, then that's what I think he would do.
Cory Bernardi, February 4

katlington posted:

If you embarrass turnbull he will give you a paid vacation, pass it on

Vladimir Poutine posted:

I'm not even exaggerating here, there was an opinion piece in The Advertiser the other day criticising cyclists and at the every end of it it said "[author's name] is claiming to be an Adelaide teenager".

Birdstrike posted:

3 day weekend party or gtfo

quote:

On John Howard's big night, all eyes turn to Abbott and Turnbull
Gabrielle Chan

It began like your awkward school reunion. Old ministers of the crown, milling around looking as useless as tits on a bull, mixing it with up and comers, lobbyists, pollsters, strategists and hangers-on.

The occasion was the 20th anniversary of the election of the Howard government – a regular love-in. John Howard sashayed through the crowd, remembering everyone’s name, meeting, greeting and signing books.

The Howard cabinets posed for class photos. Nationals and Liberals were well represented. Names like Peter Costello, Tim Fischer, John Anderson, Robert Hill, Richard Alston, John Fahey, Peter Reith and so many more.

Malcolm Turnbull arrived and greeted Howard. A photo was called for. Howard – ever the uncle – suggested bringing Tony Abbott into the picture. “That’s not going to happen,” said someone from behind. Abbott lurked. Somewhere, a glass broke.

For it was a day when the new politics of the Turnbull government was derailed by the old politics. Leaks and recriminations. The old politics of Abbott. The old politics of pre-PM Turnbull. The old politics that sent the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments packing. It was sweaty in that hot under the collar-type of way. Beneath the bonhomie and back-slapping lay the bitter seeds of ambition quashed.

The former treasurer Peter Costello and the former Nationals leader John Anderson were the warm-up acts. In typical style, Costello gave a rousing speech about how he saved the world and they were all truly thankful. And don’t believe Labor about wasting rich bounty of the mining boom, he said. The iron ore price was $13 a tonne when they came to office in 2006.

“It was a big job,” Costello said. “When we were dispatched, we didn’t owe a cent”.

He joked about being thankful for Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard and Wayne Swan. “They made us look much better,” he said. It was a dangerous theme.

For all his bullshit and bravado, most eyes were on the current prime minister and the vanquished. Turnbull and Abbott sat within range but there was no interaction after the first handshake. No eye contact. It was like having the divorced parents at the same wedding table.

Turnbull did what he had to do and acknowledged Abbott’s role in bringing the party back to government. But it was Howard that Turnbull had come to praise. And by praising the specifics, Turnbull used his trademark communication skill to say two things at once.

Howard understood he was the first among equals. You didn’t.

Howard had respect for the traditional cabinet system. You didn’t.

Turnbull went further. When Howard became prime minister, he was the gold standard. Turnbull was trying to replicate it by bringing Howard’s former chiefs of staff Arthur Sinodinos and Tony Nutt into the fold. (Sinodinos is the cabinet secretary and Nutt is the federal party director.)

Using the old man as a human shield, Turnbull delivered his story about Howard urging him to staying on in politics after he had announced his resignation on losing the leadership to Abbott. At that time, leadership was the last thing on his mind, Turnbull said.

A table up the back snorted.

With his address, Howard cut through his broad church, belting heads together, reminding the parishioners it was the party of both Edmund Burke and John Stuart Mill.

His government succeeded because it had a a clear philosophical view and it understood changing circumstances, he said. Its achievements were the tightening of the gun laws after Port Arthur and his policies on border protection, epitomised by turning back the Tampa in 2001. Up went the crowd.

It was perhaps, his moment of greatest applause, when he uttered the words: “We will decide who comes to this country and the circumstances in which they come.”

Without missing a beat, Howard raised the extreme spectre of a Donald Trump presidency or the alternative, Hillary Clinton. A poor choice. The centre is where it is at, Howard said. Australia was different to the US because the middle class had not been hollowed out. It has been one of his favourite themes – his beloved middle class, so exalted by Robert Menzies before him. The Liberal party must be careful its membership represents the “generality of those who support us”.

“All of us in this room and hundreds and thousands beyond will work our insides out to see your government returned,” Howard said.

But that may depend on Abbott, who sat mostly silent, the death’s head at the feast.

Cartoon posted:

So let's start with what noted right wing shill sheet the AFR has to say about the BIS Shrapnel report:

Who are BIS Shrapnel?

Birdstrike posted:

<smh gif>

Endman posted:

Great write-up, should be linked in OP imho.

LibertyCat posted:

so, have you guys ever considered doing an OP that isn't horribly biased towards the Greens (who get less than 10 percent of the vote)? It might encourage greater diversity of opinions.

Cartoon posted:

Lid posted:

Bronwyn Bishop was instructed by Tony Abbott’s office not to apologise for the $5,000 helicopter ride that cost the former speaker her job, a new book reveals.

The Road to Ruin author Niki Savva has revealed Bishop wanted to “lay it all on the line” and issue a “grovelling” apology for taking the expensive ride at the taxpayers’ expense.

But the former prime minister’s office told her not to say sorry because it would imply guilt and could spark a domino effect that would affect others.

“She was told not to say sorry, not to admit guilt,” Savva told ABC on Sunday.

Holy poo poo how dumb can you be. This is the most self-inflicted government implosion in history.

Lid posted:

Because we need more white male libertarians in the senate.

Lid posted:

The book by political commentator Niki Savva, The Road to Ruin, How Tony Abbott and Peta Credlin destroyed their own government, also alleges Mr Abbott slapped the buttocks of his chief of staff Peta Credlin, not realising a minister witnessed the behaviour. Fairfax Media has independently verified this account.

Doctor Spaceman posted:

https://twitter.com/MarkDiStef/status/706644986977062912

Savva gets a lot of inside info and gossip because of her background, but you're right that anything she says should be taken with a huge grain of salt.

Amoeba102 posted:

Jumpingmanjim posted:

How do you feel about plain packaging?

Jumpingmanjim posted:

I can think of a book the government would like banned.

Jumpingmanjim posted:

I can think of a book the government would like banned.

Endman posted:

I'm probably not the best person to ask about book banning since I'd welcome an internet filter if it actually worked as described and blocked access to child pornography instead of the unrealistic clusterfucks that have been proposed thus far.

I am literally Stalin.

Milky Moor posted:

That's actually what happens in a lot of cases. It's why a lot of sites with that sort of thing are hosted in Eastern Europe and such places. It's why law enforcement tend to go after the idiots who stalk chat rooms and try to set up meets with underage kids, import material or upload a lot of it online.

freebooter posted:

What's the source for this, I want to share it

Anidav posted:

Rumor mill is saying a 3rd MP wants to resign from QLD Labor, potentially giving the LNP back government. Some media outlets are reporting an early election announcement this week in order to beat an incoming resignation announcement.

Lid posted:

"Recent comparisons of immigration detention centres to 'gulags'," the statement read. "[S]uggestions that detention involves a 'public numbing and indifference' similar to that allegedly experienced in Nazi Germany; and persistent suggestions that detention facilities are places of 'torture' are highly offensive, unwarranted and plainly wrong – and yet they continue to be made in some quarters."

Solemn Sloth posted:

Secretary of the department of Australia for Australians

Recent comparisons of immigration detention centres to ‘gulags’; suggestions that detention involves a “public numbing and indifference” similar to that allegedly experienced in Nazi Germany; and persistent suggestions that detention facilities are places of ‘torture’ are highly offensive, unwarranted and plainly wrong – and yet they continue to be made in some quarters.

starkebn posted:

do the fines go to the Job Agency in question? if so laffo, can't see that going wrong.

MonoAus posted:

Not saying this isn't a terrible idea, but what should happen if someone is abusive/doesn't show up to appointments?

MonoAus posted:

Why are they trying to bring in fines then? Surely if this is a 'gently caress-the-poors' situation it's better to stick with cutting you off for not turning up than fining you.

MaxxBot posted:

I know nothing about Auspol so bear with me here, I've been following some of the events since Abbott was ousted and I have a couple questions.

Why do you think Turnbull is so anti-gay? I was under the impression that he was more moderate than Abbott but he seems just as bad if not worse with the anti-bullying stuff. He seems almost as committed to fighting a losing battle on this issue as US Republicans are.

Also, how does the LGBT community feel about having such a person attend Mardi Gras? If an anti-gay politician attended pride somewhere here in the US it would not end well, they generally avoid doing so.

Smegmatron posted:

In fairness, I loving loathe Windsor for what he did to the NBN and I hate that nobody ever holds him to account for it. Almost worth it to see Barnaby and Newscorp cry though.

The Guardian posted:

Windsor said he would be running because the issues he believes are important have stalled. He mentioned climate change, the stalling of the national broadband network and the doubt surrounding Gonski funding as factors in his decision.

Graic Gabtar posted:

Slightly off topic, but I always find it surprising that complaining bitterly about private enterprise rarely considers that people could in fact out compete them with a better product.

Something about a free market economy.

Frogmanv2 posted:

This only happens because if it doesnt regional areas often get forgotten and skipped over.