In Nepean, ONP were second on primaries but did not make it to the final two-candidate distribution.
The reason for this is that the ONP did not pick up a lot of preferences before elimination.

At the primary stage, the votes were:

Lib 38.5%
ONP 24.7%
Ind 21.3%
Others 15.5%

After the distribution of Others

Lib 41.2%
Ind 30.6%
ONP 28.3%

That is, Libs picked up 17% of preferences from Other, ONP got 23%, and 60% went to the Independent.

At the elimination of ONP, most of those prefs went to the Liberal rather than the Independent, leading to a final 2cp of around 63 – 37 in the Liberal’s favour.

Lord knows how it will pan out in the November election but it does illustrate that a high primary vote can fail to translate to a lot of seats if much of the rest of the population put you last on the docket.

dv said:

In Nepean, ONP were second on primaries but did not make it to the final two-candidate distribution.
The reason for this is that the ONP did not pick up a lot of preferences before elimination.

At the primary stage, the votes were:

Lib 38.5%
ONP 24.7%
Ind 21.3%
Others 15.5%

After the distribution of Others

Lib 41.2%
Ind 30.6%
ONP 28.3%

That is, Libs picked up 17% of preferences from Other, ONP got 23%, and 60% went to the Independent.

At the elimination of ONP, most of those prefs went to the Liberal rather than the Independent, leading to a final 2cp of around 63 – 37 in the Liberal’s favour.

Lord knows how it will pan out in the November election but it does illustrate that a high primary vote can fail to translate to a lot of seats if much of the rest of the population put you last on the docket.

Looks like probably as many as voted for ONP, put them last.

ETTE media analyses the data of the coverage of Randa Abdel Fattah by The Australian

3 minutes

SCIENCE said:

The Queensland Fire Department (QFD) told the ABC smoke was seen onboard, but there was no visible fire and nothing needed to be extinguished.

The ABC understood an electrical fault was likely to blame, potentially from the onboard microwave oven.

QFD said the oven has now been isolated and tested.

The Australian Defence Force has been contacted for comment.

The Italians knew how to vly a C-27J

The Japanese Prime Minister looks much happier shaking Albo’s hand than being with Trump. That’s a real smile. On both of them.

From this ABC news story

buffy said:

The Japanese Prime Minister looks much happier shaking Albo’s hand than being with Trump. That’s a real smile. On both of them.

From this ABC news story

Isn’t she a far right awful person though?

Bubblecar said:

buffy said:

The Japanese Prime Minister looks much happier shaking Albo’s hand than being with Trump. That’s a real smile. On both of them.

From this ABC news story

Isn’t she a far right awful person though?

I have no idea. I just noticed the difference in facial expression from what I saw recently when she was in America.

buffy said:

Bubblecar said:

buffy said:

The Japanese Prime Minister looks much happier shaking Albo’s hand than being with Trump. That’s a real smile. On both of them.

From this ABC news story

Isn’t she a far right awful person though?

I have no idea. I just noticed the difference in facial expression from what I saw recently when she was in America.

By most accounts, she’s a Japanese Pauline Hanson, or perhaps somewhat worse.

Bubblecar said:

buffy said:

Bubblecar said:

Isn’t she a far right awful person though?

I have no idea. I just noticed the difference in facial expression from what I saw recently when she was in America.

By most accounts, she’s a Japanese Pauline Hanson, or perhaps somewhat worse.

fascism keeps the world running well

Bubblecar said:

buffy said:

The Japanese Prime Minister looks much happier shaking Albo’s hand than being with Trump. That’s a real smile. On both of them.

From this ABC news story

Isn’t she a far right awful person though?

Worser than Ivan Milat

I wonder with various scarcities going on, if big business has thought of reducing profit margins to help the economy.
You know instead of trying screw every last cent out of consumers they reduce expectations.
I mean profit is profit isn’t it
Same with banks give people a break by reducing fees and such.
Or must the beast the economy grow despite every other consideration

Cymek said:

I wonder with various scarcities going on, if big business has thought of reducing profit margins to help the economy.
You know instead of trying screw every last cent out of consumers they reduce expectations.
I mean profit is profit isn’t it
Same with banks give people a break by reducing fees and such.
Or must the beast the economy grow despite every other consideration

LOL

SCIENCE said:

Cymek said:

I wonder with various scarcities going on, if big business has thought of reducing profit margins to help the economy.
You know instead of trying screw every last cent out of consumers they reduce expectations.
I mean profit is profit isn’t it
Same with banks give people a break by reducing fees and such.
Or must the beast the economy grow despite every other consideration

LOL

Yes it would never happen
It’s business as usual despite everything going on
We have no choice except to accept this is how is and always will be.
Social control through money

A new Redbridge federal poll today.

“Two-party preferred measures have Labor leading the Coalition by 54-46 and One Nation by 55-45 (in each case compared with 53-47 last time). A three-way preferred prime minister result has Anthony Albanese at 33%, Pauline Hanson at 23% and Angus Taylor floundering at 14%.”

Today Avi Yemini is calling for members for ‘Muslim Votes Matter’ as well. He aims to exploit groups voting to channel votes from fake parties to One Nation.

…

2026-04-30

The Victorian Greens have today warned that keeping Victoria’s undemocratic group voting system is allowing extremists to shamelessly exploit the system and deceive voters in order to elect far-right MPs to the parliament at the November election.

It comes as far-right extremist, Avi Yemini publicly declared he would register the ‘Free Palestine Party’ and then funnel these votes to far-right political parties, intentionally deceiving voters in order to get himself elected. This is currently legal under Victoria’s undemocratic ‘group voting’ system.

Avi Yemini is the second person to declare they will be running under a deceiving name, in February anti-lockdown campaigner, Monica Smit, said she would run under the name of “Save the Environment Party” in order to funnel votes to right-wing parties who have anti-environment policies.

The Victorian Electoral Matters Parliamentary committee has repeatedly recommended that the group voting system is undemocratic and should be abolished before the next election.

The Greens say Labor’s claims that abolishing group voting tickets would secure seats for One Nation are false, and in fact keeping the GVT system could see many far-right parties elected on a fraction of a percent of a vote.

The group voting system has elected micro-parties with tiny votes, like the Transport Matters party who were elected in 2018 with 0.65% of the vote, or the Daylight Saving party elected in WA with just 98 votes.

Abolishing the group voting system will mean only parties with a high enough primary vote will be able to secure a seat in Parliament, properly reflecting the will of Victorian voters.

Quotes attributable to Leader of the Victorian Greens, Ellen Sandell.

“Group voting tickets are seriously dodgy. The fact that Labor is refusing to get rid of them is even dodgier. How can Labor condone a voting system that allows people to be tricked into voting for a party with a fake name that is completely opposed to their values?

“If Labor doesn’t abolish dodgy group voting tickets, they’re letting deceitful far-right political parties buy seats in Parliament and essentially handing the Upper House over to the far-right.”

Quotes attributable to Victorian Greens integrity spokesperson, Tim Read:

“Multiple parliamentary inquiries have found that group voting tickets are undemocratic and should be abolished and it’s time that Labor listened.”

https://greens.org.au/vic/news/media-release/greens-warn-danger-group-voting-tickets-far-right-party-shamelessly-shares

Witty Rejoinder said:

Today Avi Yemini is calling for members for ‘Muslim Votes Matter’ as well. He aims to exploit groups voting to channel votes from fake parties to One Nation.

…

2026-04-30

The Victorian Greens have today warned that keeping Victoria’s undemocratic group voting system is allowing extremists to shamelessly exploit the system and deceive voters in order to elect far-right MPs to the parliament at the November election.

It comes as far-right extremist, Avi Yemini publicly declared he would register the ‘Free Palestine Party’ and then funnel these votes to far-right political parties, intentionally deceiving voters in order to get himself elected. This is currently legal under Victoria’s undemocratic ‘group voting’ system.

Avi Yemini is the second person to declare they will be running under a deceiving name, in February anti-lockdown campaigner, Monica Smit, said she would run under the name of “Save the Environment Party” in order to funnel votes to right-wing parties who have anti-environment policies.

The Victorian Electoral Matters Parliamentary committee has repeatedly recommended that the group voting system is undemocratic and should be abolished before the next election.

The Greens say Labor’s claims that abolishing group voting tickets would secure seats for One Nation are false, and in fact keeping the GVT system could see many far-right parties elected on a fraction of a percent of a vote.

The group voting system has elected micro-parties with tiny votes, like the Transport Matters party who were elected in 2018 with 0.65% of the vote, or the Daylight Saving party elected in WA with just 98 votes.

Abolishing the group voting system will mean only parties with a high enough primary vote will be able to secure a seat in Parliament, properly reflecting the will of Victorian voters.

Quotes attributable to Leader of the Victorian Greens, Ellen Sandell.

“Group voting tickets are seriously dodgy. The fact that Labor is refusing to get rid of them is even dodgier. How can Labor condone a voting system that allows people to be tricked into voting for a party with a fake name that is completely opposed to their values?

“If Labor doesn’t abolish dodgy group voting tickets, they’re letting deceitful far-right political parties buy seats in Parliament and essentially handing the Upper House over to the far-right.”

Quotes attributable to Victorian Greens integrity spokesperson, Tim Read:

“Multiple parliamentary inquiries have found that group voting tickets are undemocratic and should be abolished and it’s time that Labor listened.”

https://greens.org.au/vic/news/media-release/greens-warn-danger-group-voting-tickets-far-right-party-shamelessly-shares

Seems like outright deception

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Today Avi Yemini is calling for members for ‘Muslim Votes Matter’ as well. He aims to exploit groups voting to channel votes from fake parties to One Nation.

…

2026-04-30

The Victorian Greens have today warned that keeping Victoria’s undemocratic group voting system is allowing extremists to shamelessly exploit the system and deceive voters in order to elect far-right MPs to the parliament at the November election.

It comes as far-right extremist, Avi Yemini publicly declared he would register the ‘Free Palestine Party’ and then funnel these votes to far-right political parties, intentionally deceiving voters in order to get himself elected. This is currently legal under Victoria’s undemocratic ‘group voting’ system.

Avi Yemini is the second person to declare they will be running under a deceiving name, in February anti-lockdown campaigner, Monica Smit, said she would run under the name of “Save the Environment Party” in order to funnel votes to right-wing parties who have anti-environment policies.

The Victorian Electoral Matters Parliamentary committee has repeatedly recommended that the group voting system is undemocratic and should be abolished before the next election.

The Greens say Labor’s claims that abolishing group voting tickets would secure seats for One Nation are false, and in fact keeping the GVT system could see many far-right parties elected on a fraction of a percent of a vote.

The group voting system has elected micro-parties with tiny votes, like the Transport Matters party who were elected in 2018 with 0.65% of the vote, or the Daylight Saving party elected in WA with just 98 votes.

Abolishing the group voting system will mean only parties with a high enough primary vote will be able to secure a seat in Parliament, properly reflecting the will of Victorian voters.

Quotes attributable to Leader of the Victorian Greens, Ellen Sandell.

“Group voting tickets are seriously dodgy. The fact that Labor is refusing to get rid of them is even dodgier. How can Labor condone a voting system that allows people to be tricked into voting for a party with a fake name that is completely opposed to their values?

“If Labor doesn’t abolish dodgy group voting tickets, they’re letting deceitful far-right political parties buy seats in Parliament and essentially handing the Upper House over to the far-right.”

Quotes attributable to Victorian Greens integrity spokesperson, Tim Read:

“Multiple parliamentary inquiries have found that group voting tickets are undemocratic and should be abolished and it’s time that Labor listened.”

https://greens.org.au/vic/news/media-release/greens-warn-danger-group-voting-tickets-far-right-party-shamelessly-shares

Seems like outright deception

Yes, quite apart from the question whether group voting is a good idea, how is it legal for a party to give itself a name that is clearly deliberately misleading?

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Today Avi Yemini is calling for members for ‘Muslim Votes Matter’ as well. He aims to exploit groups voting to channel votes from fake parties to One Nation.

…

2026-04-30

The Victorian Greens have today warned that keeping Victoria’s undemocratic group voting system is allowing extremists to shamelessly exploit the system and deceive voters in order to elect far-right MPs to the parliament at the November election.

It comes as far-right extremist, Avi Yemini publicly declared he would register the ‘Free Palestine Party’ and then funnel these votes to far-right political parties, intentionally deceiving voters in order to get himself elected. This is currently legal under Victoria’s undemocratic ‘group voting’ system.

Avi Yemini is the second person to declare they will be running under a deceiving name, in February anti-lockdown campaigner, Monica Smit, said she would run under the name of “Save the Environment Party” in order to funnel votes to right-wing parties who have anti-environment policies.

The Victorian Electoral Matters Parliamentary committee has repeatedly recommended that the group voting system is undemocratic and should be abolished before the next election.

The Greens say Labor’s claims that abolishing group voting tickets would secure seats for One Nation are false, and in fact keeping the GVT system could see many far-right parties elected on a fraction of a percent of a vote.

The group voting system has elected micro-parties with tiny votes, like the Transport Matters party who were elected in 2018 with 0.65% of the vote, or the Daylight Saving party elected in WA with just 98 votes.

Abolishing the group voting system will mean only parties with a high enough primary vote will be able to secure a seat in Parliament, properly reflecting the will of Victorian voters.

Quotes attributable to Leader of the Victorian Greens, Ellen Sandell.

“Group voting tickets are seriously dodgy. The fact that Labor is refusing to get rid of them is even dodgier. How can Labor condone a voting system that allows people to be tricked into voting for a party with a fake name that is completely opposed to their values?

“If Labor doesn’t abolish dodgy group voting tickets, they’re letting deceitful far-right political parties buy seats in Parliament and essentially handing the Upper House over to the far-right.”

Quotes attributable to Victorian Greens integrity spokesperson, Tim Read:

“Multiple parliamentary inquiries have found that group voting tickets are undemocratic and should be abolished and it’s time that Labor listened.”

https://greens.org.au/vic/news/media-release/greens-warn-danger-group-voting-tickets-far-right-party-shamelessly-shares

Seems like outright deception

Such individuals /parties should be expelled

The Rev Dodgson said:

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Today Avi Yemini is calling for members for ‘Muslim Votes Matter’ as well. He aims to exploit groups voting to channel votes from fake parties to One Nation.

…

2026-04-30

The Victorian Greens have today warned that keeping Victoria’s undemocratic group voting system is allowing extremists to shamelessly exploit the system and deceive voters in order to elect far-right MPs to the parliament at the November election.

It comes as far-right extremist, Avi Yemini publicly declared he would register the ‘Free Palestine Party’ and then funnel these votes to far-right political parties, intentionally deceiving voters in order to get himself elected. This is currently legal under Victoria’s undemocratic ‘group voting’ system.

Avi Yemini is the second person to declare they will be running under a deceiving name, in February anti-lockdown campaigner, Monica Smit, said she would run under the name of “Save the Environment Party” in order to funnel votes to right-wing parties who have anti-environment policies.

The Victorian Electoral Matters Parliamentary committee has repeatedly recommended that the group voting system is undemocratic and should be abolished before the next election.

The Greens say Labor’s claims that abolishing group voting tickets would secure seats for One Nation are false, and in fact keeping the GVT system could see many far-right parties elected on a fraction of a percent of a vote.

The group voting system has elected micro-parties with tiny votes, like the Transport Matters party who were elected in 2018 with 0.65% of the vote, or the Daylight Saving party elected in WA with just 98 votes.

Abolishing the group voting system will mean only parties with a high enough primary vote will be able to secure a seat in Parliament, properly reflecting the will of Victorian voters.

Quotes attributable to Leader of the Victorian Greens, Ellen Sandell.

“Group voting tickets are seriously dodgy. The fact that Labor is refusing to get rid of them is even dodgier. How can Labor condone a voting system that allows people to be tricked into voting for a party with a fake name that is completely opposed to their values?

“If Labor doesn’t abolish dodgy group voting tickets, they’re letting deceitful far-right political parties buy seats in Parliament and essentially handing the Upper House over to the far-right.”

Quotes attributable to Victorian Greens integrity spokesperson, Tim Read:

“Multiple parliamentary inquiries have found that group voting tickets are undemocratic and should be abolished and it’s time that Labor listened.”

https://greens.org.au/vic/news/media-release/greens-warn-danger-group-voting-tickets-far-right-party-shamelessly-shares

Seems like outright deception

Yes, quite apart from the question whether group voting is a good idea, how is it legal for a party to give itself a name that is clearly deliberately misleading?

I mean it would be like a party well to the right of centre calling themselves “Liberal”.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Cymek said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Today Avi Yemini is calling for members for ‘Muslim Votes Matter’ as well. He aims to exploit groups voting to channel votes from fake parties to One Nation.

…

2026-04-30

The Victorian Greens have today warned that keeping Victoria’s undemocratic group voting system is allowing extremists to shamelessly exploit the system and deceive voters in order to elect far-right MPs to the parliament at the November election.

It comes as far-right extremist, Avi Yemini publicly declared he would register the ‘Free Palestine Party’ and then funnel these votes to far-right political parties, intentionally deceiving voters in order to get himself elected. This is currently legal under Victoria’s undemocratic ‘group voting’ system.

Avi Yemini is the second person to declare they will be running under a deceiving name, in February anti-lockdown campaigner, Monica Smit, said she would run under the name of “Save the Environment Party” in order to funnel votes to right-wing parties who have anti-environment policies.

The Victorian Electoral Matters Parliamentary committee has repeatedly recommended that the group voting system is undemocratic and should be abolished before the next election.

The Greens say Labor’s claims that abolishing group voting tickets would secure seats for One Nation are false, and in fact keeping the GVT system could see many far-right parties elected on a fraction of a percent of a vote.

The group voting system has elected micro-parties with tiny votes, like the Transport Matters party who were elected in 2018 with 0.65% of the vote, or the Daylight Saving party elected in WA with just 98 votes.

Abolishing the group voting system will mean only parties with a high enough primary vote will be able to secure a seat in Parliament, properly reflecting the will of Victorian voters.

Quotes attributable to Leader of the Victorian Greens, Ellen Sandell.

“Group voting tickets are seriously dodgy. The fact that Labor is refusing to get rid of them is even dodgier. How can Labor condone a voting system that allows people to be tricked into voting for a party with a fake name that is completely opposed to their values?

“If Labor doesn’t abolish dodgy group voting tickets, they’re letting deceitful far-right political parties buy seats in Parliament and essentially handing the Upper House over to the far-right.”

Quotes attributable to Victorian Greens integrity spokesperson, Tim Read:

“Multiple parliamentary inquiries have found that group voting tickets are undemocratic and should be abolished and it’s time that Labor listened.”

https://greens.org.au/vic/news/media-release/greens-warn-danger-group-voting-tickets-far-right-party-shamelessly-shares

Seems like outright deception

Yes, quite apart from the question whether group voting is a good idea, how is it legal for a party to give itself a name that is clearly deliberately misleading?

It isn’t.

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Cymek said:

Seems like outright deception

Yes, quite apart from the question whether group voting is a good idea, how is it legal for a party to give itself a name that is clearly deliberately misleading?

It isn’t.

I would imagine that it is legal. Otherwise somebody would have already prosecuted them. Politicians are very litigious.

pretty sure the machinations of team sports are part of the team sports

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Yes, quite apart from the question whether group voting is a good idea, how is it legal for a party to give itself a name that is clearly deliberately misleading?

It isn’t.

I would imagine that it is legal. Otherwise somebody would have already prosecuted them. Politicians are very litigious.

It is deception.

roughbarked said:

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

It isn’t.

I would imagine that it is legal. Otherwise somebody would have already prosecuted them. Politicians are very litigious.

It is deception.

I’m sure the Official Monster Raving Loony Party is everything it says on the box.

roughbarked said:

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

It isn’t.

I would imagine that it is legal. Otherwise somebody would have already prosecuted them. Politicians are very litigious.

It is deception.

politicians never lie

SCIENCE said:

roughbarked said:

Michael V said:

I would imagine that it is legal. Otherwise somebody would have already prosecuted them. Politicians are very litigious.

It is deception.

politicians never lie

Clearly SCIENCE is a politician.

The Rev Dodgson said:

SCIENCE said:

roughbarked said:

It is deception.

politicians never lie

Clearly SCIENCE is a politician.

A Politician, A Scientician, And An Inveterate Liar Walks Into A Bar

The Bartender And Linguistician Asks Them “Is That Not A Noun Verb Count Mismatch¿”

“No” They Say, ““They” Is The Singular Nominative Third Person Gender Nonspecific Pronoun These Days”

SCIENCE said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

SCIENCE said:

politicians never lie

Clearly SCIENCE is a politician.

A Politician, A Scientician, And An Inveterate Liar Walks Into A Bar

The Bartender And Linguistician Asks Them “Is That Not A Noun Verb Count Mismatch¿”

“No” They Say, ““They” Is The Singular Nominative Third Person Gender Nonspecific Pronoun These Days”

are you channeling DV?

ChrispenEvan said:

It’s a noise box. Canavan makes noises.

I mean we have a conservative party called Liberal and a rural party called National so we might as well have a pro-genocide party called Discontinue The Genocide. Nothing matters now.

ChrispenEvan said:

SCIENCE said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Clearly SCIENCE is a politician.

A Politician, A Scientician, And An Inveterate Liar Walks Into A Bar

The Bartender And Linguistician Asks Them “Is That Not A Noun Verb Count Mismatch¿”

“No” They Say, ““They” Is The Singular Nominative Third Person Gender Nonspecific Pronoun These Days”

are you channeling DV?

good point, dv would have pointed out that they meant yes it is not, our bad

Before going into politics, Matt Canavan was a senior executive with the multinational financial services firm KPMG.

Here he is cosplaying as a human while campaigning in Farrer.

Police approached the man about 11am after he was seen loitering near the venue wearing the shirt emblazoned with a swastika with a Star of David inside. It also had the slogan: “Antisemitism. Proud to be accused. Speak up!” Police issued him with a move-on order but he was not arrested.

well that’s a pretty harsh response, mustoff been an adult cisgender white male

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/swastika-shirt-antisemitism-social-cohesion-royal-commission/106646264

SCIENCE said:

Police approached the man about 11am after he was seen loitering near the venue wearing the shirt emblazoned with a swastika with a Star of David inside. It also had the slogan: “Antisemitism. Proud to be accused. Speak up!” Police issued him with a move-on order but he was not arrested.

well that’s a pretty harsh response, mustoff been an adult cisgender white male

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/swastika-shirt-antisemitism-social-cohesion-royal-commission/106646264

thankfully in their wisdom and leniency the authorities are enabling the repatriation of these adult cisgender white males oh wait

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/isis-families-syria-australia-flights-booked-arrest-flagged/106647034

yes yes we know it’s only the adult cisgender ones they’re threatening to arrest so 2/4 ain’t bad

SCIENCE said:

Police approached the man about 11am after he was seen loitering near the venue wearing the shirt emblazoned with a swastika with a Star of David inside. It also had the slogan: “Antisemitism. Proud to be accused. Speak up!” Police issued him with a move-on order but he was not arrested.

well that’s a pretty harsh response, mustoff been an adult cisgender white male

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/swastika-shirt-antisemitism-social-cohesion-royal-commission/106646264

I’m not sure why we need specialised antisemitism laws or they should also include anti whatever hatred.

Cymek said:

SCIENCE said:

Police approached the man about 11am after he was seen loitering near the venue wearing the shirt emblazoned with a swastika with a Star of David inside. It also had the slogan: “Antisemitism. Proud to be accused. Speak up!” Police issued him with a move-on order but he was not arrested.

well that’s a pretty harsh response, mustoff been an adult cisgender white male

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/swastika-shirt-antisemitism-social-cohesion-royal-commission/106646264

I’m not sure why we need specialised antisemitism laws or they should also include anti whatever hatred.

they clearly antisemitism seriously

Cymek said:

SCIENCE said:

Police approached the man about 11am after he was seen loitering near the venue wearing the shirt emblazoned with a swastika with a Star of David inside. It also had the slogan: “Antisemitism. Proud to be accused. Speak up!” Police issued him with a move-on order but he was not arrested.

well that’s a pretty harsh response, mustoff been an adult cisgender white male

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/swastika-shirt-antisemitism-social-cohesion-royal-commission/106646264

I’m not sure why we need specialised antisemitism laws or they should also include anti whatever hatred.

Me neither. Except politicians get hijacked by loud and vocal groups.

Michael V said:

Cymek said:

SCIENCE said:

Police approached the man about 11am after he was seen loitering near the venue wearing the shirt emblazoned with a swastika with a Star of David inside. It also had the slogan: “Antisemitism. Proud to be accused. Speak up!” Police issued him with a move-on order but he was not arrested.

well that’s a pretty harsh response, mustoff been an adult cisgender white male

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/swastika-shirt-antisemitism-social-cohesion-royal-commission/106646264

I’m not sure why we need specialised antisemitism laws or they should also include anti whatever hatred.

Me neither. Except politicians get hijacked by loud and vocal groups.

会哭的孩子有奶吃

SCIENCE said:

Michael V said:

Cymek said:

I’m not sure why we need specialised antisemitism laws or they should also include anti whatever hatred.

Me neither. Except politicians get hijacked by loud and vocal groups.

会哭的孩子有奶吃

Absolutely.

The Jewish Council of Australia, which maintains an antigenocide position. Well they got they donations that they needed to counter Zionist Supremacist viewpoints at the Royal Commission.

They will highlight:

Crucial legal support for members of our Jewish community to provide evidence to the commission. Almost every Jewish person who has spoken out for Palestinian human rights has experienced attacks and targeting. We want to be able to support them to safely provide their perspectives to the commission. etc

The ability for our barristers to interrogate evidence which seeks to use the fight against antisemitism to stifle dissent. While I am hopeful that the commission will remain focussed on understanding the root causes of antisemitism in Australia and how we can meaningfully tackle it, it is inevitable that groups acting in Israel’s interests will be hoping to advance their own agenda. Having us in the room will be the single most effective way we can ensure these hearings are not exploited to pursue a right wing agenda and demonise Palestinians, Muslims, immigrants and those speaking out against Israel’s genocide.

– An opportunity for the Jewish Council to elevate the voices of our community in the Royal Commission and in the media. Antisemitism will only increase if Jewish identity is falsely conflated with political loyalty to the state of Israel. These hearings are an opportunity to draw national attention to the experiences of Jewish people who are systematically censored and delegitimised for speaking out in support of Palestinian justice.

SCIENCE said:

Cymek said:

SCIENCE said:

Police approached the man about 11am after he was seen loitering near the venue wearing the shirt emblazoned with a swastika with a Star of David inside. It also had the slogan: “Antisemitism. Proud to be accused. Speak up!” Police issued him with a move-on order but he was not arrested.

well that’s a pretty harsh response, mustoff been an adult cisgender white male

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/swastika-shirt-antisemitism-social-cohesion-royal-commission/106646264

I’m not sure why we need specialised antisemitism laws or they should also include anti whatever hatred.

they clearly [take] antisemitism seriously

sorry fixed

oh and

no comment

oh so suddenly planned économies and communisme are getting sexy

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-07/what-if-we-used-taxes-or-superannuation-to-control-inflation/106645404

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/inland-rail-cancellation-reactions/106646490

This is a terrible decision and the LNP is right to shred Labor over this. Infrastructure costs have increased since 2019 but this is a generational project that will be providing benefits for decades.

Quite apart from the waste of a half completed project and the damage to businesses who had planned around it, the effect of this change is to add tens of millions of tonnes to our future emissions, as freight that would be on rail will now be on trucks. The Greens should also be ropable.

we knew the sunk costs of getting fascists to build our submarines were too great to just ditch the project

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/inland-rail-cancellation-reactions/106646490

This is a terrible decision and the LNP is right to shred Labor over this. Infrastructure costs have increased since 2019 but this is a generational project that will be providing benefits for decades.

Quite apart from the waste of a half completed project and the damage to businesses who had planned around it, the effect of this change is to add tens of millions of tonnes to our future emissions, as freight that would be on rail will now be on trucks. The Greens should also be ropable.

Well Barnaby is all over it… his pet project.

From the snippets I’ve heard over recent years if has always sounded a bit half baked.. and now it will be.. until they recommence building it. There are problems especially with the last stages to Brisbane.. eg it doesn’t make it to the port.

at least the nbn turned out perfect

SCIENCE said:

at least the nbn turned out perfect

Unsure if that’s sarcasm
It was a dogs bollocks for a while when it was really an important long term infrastructure that needed doing properly

Ian said:

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/inland-rail-cancellation-reactions/106646490

This is a terrible decision and the LNP is right to shred Labor over this. Infrastructure costs have increased since 2019 but this is a generational project that will be providing benefits for decades.

Quite apart from the waste of a half completed project and the damage to businesses who had planned around it, the effect of this change is to add tens of millions of tonnes to our future emissions, as freight that would be on rail will now be on trucks. The Greens should also be ropable.

Well Barnaby is all over it… his pet project.

From the snippets I’ve heard over recent years if has always sounded a bit half baked.. and now it will be.. until they recommence building it. There are problems especially with the last stages to Brisbane.. eg it doesn’t make it to the port.

Yes. Without a port access it isn’t making much sense. Never mind, they took a long while to get from Adelaide to Darwin.

SCIENCE said:

at least the nbn turned out perfect

U reckon?

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/inland-rail-cancellation-reactions/106646490

This is a terrible decision and the LNP is right to shred Labor over this. Infrastructure costs have increased since 2019 but this is a generational project that will be providing benefits for decades.

Quite apart from the waste of a half completed project and the damage to businesses who had planned around it, the effect of this change is to add tens of millions of tonnes to our future emissions, as freight that would be on rail will now be on trucks. The Greens should also be ropable.

I agree.

SCIENCE said:

at least the nbn turned out perfect

I wouldn’t say perfect but I have had no problems with it. get good speeds that exceed my needs. reliable.

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/inland-rail-cancellation-reactions/106646490

This is a terrible decision and the LNP is right to shred Labor over this. Infrastructure costs have increased since 2019 but this is a generational project that will be providing benefits for decades.

Quite apart from the waste of a half completed project and the damage to businesses who had planned around it, the effect of this change is to add tens of millions of tonnes to our future emissions, as freight that would be on rail will now be on trucks. The Greens should also be ropable.

Plus it would get a shed load of trucks off the road.

Peak Warming Man said:

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/inland-rail-cancellation-reactions/106646490

This is a terrible decision and the LNP is right to shred Labor over this. Infrastructure costs have increased since 2019 but this is a generational project that will be providing benefits for decades.

Quite apart from the waste of a half completed project and the damage to businesses who had planned around it, the effect of this change is to add tens of millions of tonnes to our future emissions, as freight that would be on rail will now be on trucks. The Greens should also be ropable.

Plus it would get a shed load of trucks off the road.

Oh you said that, dur.

anyway pretty sure there’s a country out there that could do it for us quick efficient economic like, if only we traded with them like they were our biggest trading partner

wait

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/inland-rail-cancellation-reactions/106646490

This is a terrible decision and the LNP is right to shred Labor over this. Infrastructure costs have increased since 2019 but this is a generational project that will be providing benefits for decades.

Quite apart from the waste of a half completed project and the damage to businesses who had planned around it, the effect of this change is to add tens of millions of tonnes to our future emissions, as freight that would be on rail will now be on trucks. The Greens should also be ropable.

Yeah. Serious short-terminism from federal Labor.

Witty Rejoinder said:

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/inland-rail-cancellation-reactions/106646490

This is a terrible decision and the LNP is right to shred Labor over this. Infrastructure costs have increased since 2019 but this is a generational project that will be providing benefits for decades.

Quite apart from the waste of a half completed project and the damage to businesses who had planned around it, the effect of this change is to add tens of millions of tonnes to our future emissions, as freight that would be on rail will now be on trucks. The Greens should also be ropable.

Yeah. Serious short-terminism from federal Labor.

The money is probably required for those absolutely delivered on time nuclear submarines and infrastructure

SCIENCE said:

anyway pretty sure there’s a country out there that could do it for us quick efficient economic like, if only we traded with them like they were our biggest trading partner

wait

We spent all the money we had on new defence requirements that won’t get here for years.

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

anyway pretty sure there’s a country out there that could do it for us quick efficient economic like, if only we traded with them like they were our biggest trading partner

wait

We spent all the money we had on new defence requirements that won’t get here for years.

I think SCIENCE was talking about how China has installed its new high-speed rail systems so quickly.

Sunk costs, submarines. I see what you did there.

dv said:

Michael V said:

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

SCIENCE said:

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/inland-rail-cancellation-reactions/106646490

This is a terrible decision and the LNP is right to shred Labor over this. Infrastructure costs have increased since 2019 but this is a generational project that will be providing benefits for decades.

Quite apart from the waste of a half completed project and the damage to businesses who had planned around it, the effect of this change is to add tens of millions of tonnes to our future emissions, as freight that would be on rail will now be on trucks. The Greens should also be ropable.

we knew the sunk costs of getting fascists to build our submarines were too great to just ditch the project

anyway pretty sure there’s a country out there that could do it for us quick efficient economic like, if only we traded with them like they were our biggest trading partner

wait

We spent all the money we had on new defence requirements that won’t get here for years.

I think SCIENCE was talking about how China has installed its new high-speed rail systems so quickly.

Sunk costs, submarines. I see what you did there.

we mean

Season 3 Episode 7: On The Defence

roughbarked said:

Ian said:

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/inland-rail-cancellation-reactions/106646490

This is a terrible decision and the LNP is right to shred Labor over this. Infrastructure costs have increased since 2019 but this is a generational project that will be providing benefits for decades.

Quite apart from the waste of a half completed project and the damage to businesses who had planned around it, the effect of this change is to add tens of millions of tonnes to our future emissions, as freight that would be on rail will now be on trucks. The Greens should also be ropable.

Well Barnaby is all over it… his pet project.

From the snippets I’ve heard over recent years if has always sounded a bit half baked.. and now it will be.. until they recommence building it. There are problems especially with the last stages to Brisbane.. eg it doesn’t make it to the port.

Yes. Without a port access it isn’t making much sense. Never mind, they took a long while to get from Adelaide to Darwin.

The Kagura intermodal was planned to connect to the existing Sydney-Brisbane freight line to the port of Brisbane

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-06/inland-rail-cancellation-reactions/106646490

This is a terrible decision and the LNP is right to shred Labor over this. Infrastructure costs have increased since 2019 but this is a generational project that will be providing benefits for decades.

Quite apart from the waste of a half completed project and the damage to businesses who had planned around it, the effect of this change is to add tens of millions of tonnes to our future emissions, as freight that would be on rail will now be on trucks. The Greens should also be ropable.

+1

There was a tussle in Farrer. Liberals and One Nation scuffle

fucking lol

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-08/police-advised-turn-bodycams-to-flight-mode-over-security-flaw/106654330

so they were told it was being investigated and then they were told and they were told and they were told

and suddenly now it’s urgent

yous know what

there’s some kind of cruise ship virus out there but it’s nowhere near here so it’s all good

SCIENCE said:

fucking lol

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-08/police-advised-turn-bodycams-to-flight-mode-over-security-flaw/106654330

so they were told it was being investigated and then they were told and they were told and they were told

and suddenly now it’s urgent

yous know what

there’s some kind of cruise ship virus out there but it’s nowhere near here so it’s all good

Ian said:

SCIENCE said:

fucking lol

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-08/police-advised-turn-bodycams-to-flight-mode-over-security-flaw/106654330

so they were told it was being investigated and then they were told and they were told and they were told

and suddenly now it’s urgent

yous know what

there’s some kind of cruise ship virus out there but it’s nowhere near here so it’s all good

Police accountability lawyer Jeremy King said rather than solving the issue, the advice from Victoria Police raised even more problems.

He said it was concerning that thousands of Victoria Police officers now had permission to effectively deactivate their body-worn cameras during raids and other incidents.

“Body-worn cameras are one of the few meaningful ways we can hold police accountable,” he said.

“They record critical evidence.

apparently it’s less than 30 years old but people are going

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-09/chinese-community-concerns-future-of-golden-water-mouth/106657632

to get upset about it

¿

Historic win for ONP in Farrer, something like 60-40 versus Milthorpe.
This is the first time One Nation has won a seat in the House of Reps at an election. Farrer has been held by the Coalition since the seat was created in 1949.

If you do the maths, it’s clear a lot of the Nationals preferences were directed to One Nation ahead of Liberals. Like, about half. The Coalition might really be history.

dv said:

Historic win for ONP in Farrer, something like 60-40 versus Milthorpe.
This is the first time One Nation has won a seat in the House of Reps at an election. Farrer has been held by the Coalition since the seat was created in 1949.

If you do the maths, it’s clear a lot of the Nationals preferences were directed to One Nation ahead of Liberals. Like, about half. The Coalition might really be history.

So what do they have?

A wife basher?

A kiddie rapist?

Or a house burgler?

Coz that seems to be their usual choice.

Kingy said:

dv said:

Historic win for ONP in Farrer, something like 60-40 versus Milthorpe.
This is the first time One Nation has won a seat in the House of Reps at an election. Farrer has been held by the Coalition since the seat was created in 1949.

If you do the maths, it’s clear a lot of the Nationals preferences were directed to One Nation ahead of Liberals. Like, about half. The Coalition might really be history.

So what do they have?

A wife basher?

A kiddie rapist?

Or a house burgler?

Coz that seems to be their usual choice.

The usual pattern is that the winning candidate will have a falling out with Pauline over something, and quit the party to sit as an independent.

Kingy said:

dv said:

Historic win for ONP in Farrer, something like 60-40 versus Milthorpe.
This is the first time One Nation has won a seat in the House of Reps at an election. Farrer has been held by the Coalition since the seat was created in 1949.

If you do the maths, it’s clear a lot of the Nationals preferences were directed to One Nation ahead of Liberals. Like, about half. The Coalition might really be history.

So what do they have?

A wife basher?

A kiddie rapist?

Or a house burgler?

Coz that seems to be their usual choice.

Don’t forget Peter Slipper’s bumboy and Pauline’s Svengali Ashby who might just be getting too big for his britches.

alleged

SCIENCE said:

alleged

That’s a very good reason to not vote for the Nationals either.

SCIENCE said:

alleged

Actually, I said that to mrs rb last night. “Next thing we’ll see is a coalitiion between the Nationals and One Notion”.

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

alleged

Actually, I said that to mrs rb last night. “Next thing we’ll see is a coalitiion between the Nationals and One Notion”.

so they’ll be two

SCIENCE said:

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

alleged

Actually, I said that to mrs rb last night. “Next thing we’ll see is a coalitiion between the Nationals and One Notion”.

so they’ll be two

Two notions? Oh joy.

I meant to put this in this thread.

On Friday morning I went to the Yarning Circle which welcomes Non Indigenous and Indigenous people a like. It was very moving. It was at the local Aboriginal Community Centre. I wish all Australians had this opportunity. The cultural learning leaves you with a full heart. It’s on every week. I don’t get there as often as I would like. This was the first time I got there this year. So I am not a regular but I feel quite emotional in a positive way when I leave. And the new understandings leave me in deep thought for quite some time in the weeks after I have gone.

If you ever get a chance to go it is quite the experience.

Pauline Hanson lashes ‘arrogant’ critics who say One Nation can’t go mainstream

roughbarked said:

Pauline Hanson lashes ‘arrogant’ critics who say One Nation can’t go mainstream

They will need some actual policies if they want to go mainstream. I am still not giving them credit for being other than a protest vote at the moment. Just moaning about immigration is only going to get you so far.

party_pants said:

roughbarked said:

Pauline Hanson lashes ‘arrogant’ critics who say One Nation can’t go mainstream

They will need some actual policies if they want to go mainstream. I am still not giving them credit for being other than a protest vote at the moment. Just moaning about immigration is only going to get you so far.

One Notion is not enough.
One seat is also not enough.
However, The rural areas are notionally conservatives on the whole. It stands to reasson that the Liberals and the Nationals are not far off from One Notion and the current shaky coalition could well well mean that either party could move to absorb them into a coalition, It has already been suggsted in the above article.

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

roughbarked said:

Pauline Hanson lashes ‘arrogant’ critics who say One Nation can’t go mainstream

They will need some actual policies if they want to go mainstream. I am still not giving them credit for being other than a protest vote at the moment. Just moaning about immigration is only going to get you so far.

One Notion is not enough.
One seat is also not enough.
However, The rural areas are notionally conservatives on the whole. It stands to reasson that the Liberals and the Nationals are not far off from One Notion and the current shaky coalition could well well mean that either party could move to absorb them into a coalition, It has already been suggsted in the above article.

“Inside the Liberal Party, still finding its feet from its worst election result in modern history, senior figures are now entertaining whether the party would enter a coalition with One Nation if it was the only pathway to power at the next federal election.

Former prime minister Tony Abbott, who is now contesting for the party’s federal presidency, has openly mulled that possibility.

Mr Wilson, a Liberal moderate, did not reject the possibility of a coalition with One Nation.

“Of course we traditionally form a coalition with the National Party, but it’s up to the Australian people to decide who they want to vote for,” he said.” from that link.

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

roughbarked said:

Pauline Hanson lashes ‘arrogant’ critics who say One Nation can’t go mainstream

They will need some actual policies if they want to go mainstream. I am still not giving them credit for being other than a protest vote at the moment. Just moaning about immigration is only going to get you so far.

One Notion is not enough.
One seat is also not enough.
However, The rural areas are notionally conservatives on the whole. It stands to reasson that the Liberals and the Nationals are not far off from One Notion and the current shaky coalition could well well mean that either party could move to absorb them into a coalition, It has already been suggsted in the above article.

I think the Liberals have an identity crisis. They are much more a party of the city than a party of the rural regions. I can perhaps see some sort of coalition between the Nationals and One Nation, but one that doesn’t include the Liberals. The Liberals have chance but to rebrand themselves to appeal to the current real-time demographics that now live in what were once their safe city seats, basically those that lean teal. If they don’t appeal to the teals, they will make themselves irrelevant. But in doing so they need to split decisively away from the Nats and One Nats.

The problem for the Liberal party of course, is that they keep purging those types of teal-ish people from the party, and the faction in control is exactly the sort of people that need purging to appeal to the voters in those electorates. They probably can’t do it, so it will need a new party to form. Which is going to be difficult.

party_pants said:

roughbarked said:

Pauline Hanson lashes ‘arrogant’ critics who say One Nation can’t go mainstream

They will need some actual policies if they want to go mainstream. I am still not giving them credit for being other than a protest vote at the moment. Just moaning about immigration is only going to get you so far.

Yes, yes.

PH is a professional whinger. Her PHON party is built on that.

party_pants said:

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

They will need some actual policies if they want to go mainstream. I am still not giving them credit for being other than a protest vote at the moment. Just moaning about immigration is only going to get you so far.

One Notion is not enough.
One seat is also not enough.
However, The rural areas are notionally conservatives on the whole. It stands to reasson that the Liberals and the Nationals are not far off from One Notion and the current shaky coalition could well well mean that either party could move to absorb them into a coalition, It has already been suggsted in the above article.

I think the Liberals have an identity crisis. They are much more a party of the city than a party of the rural regions. I can perhaps see some sort of coalition between the Nationals and One Nation, but one that doesn’t include the Liberals. The Liberals have chance but to rebrand themselves to appeal to the current real-time demographics that now live in what were once their safe city seats, basically those that lean teal. If they don’t appeal to the teals, they will make themselves irrelevant. But in doing so they need to split decisively away from the Nats and One Nats.

The problem for the Liberal party of course, is that they keep purging those types of teal-ish people from the party, and the faction in control is exactly the sort of people that need purging to appeal to the voters in those electorates. They probably can’t do it, so it will need a new party to form. Which is going to be difficult.

I reckon it will be the Nationals that do it.

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

roughbarked said:

One Notion is not enough.
One seat is also not enough.
However, The rural areas are notionally conservatives on the whole. It stands to reasson that the Liberals and the Nationals are not far off from One Notion and the current shaky coalition could well well mean that either party could move to absorb them into a coalition, It has already been suggsted in the above article.

I think the Liberals have an identity crisis. They are much more a party of the city than a party of the rural regions. I can perhaps see some sort of coalition between the Nationals and One Nation, but one that doesn’t include the Liberals. The Liberals have chance but to rebrand themselves to appeal to the current real-time demographics that now live in what were once their safe city seats, basically those that lean teal. If they don’t appeal to the teals, they will make themselves irrelevant. But in doing so they need to split decisively away from the Nats and One Nats.

The problem for the Liberal party of course, is that they keep purging those types of teal-ish people from the party, and the faction in control is exactly the sort of people that need purging to appeal to the voters in those electorates. They probably can’t do it, so it will need a new party to form. Which is going to be difficult.

I reckon it will be the Nationals that do it.

I don’t think the Nats can appeal to the city-based teal voter. I think there is a clear gap, even a chasm, between the rural voter and the teal voter, and no party can appeal to both. They need to appeal to one or the other, and any attempt to appeal to both at the same time risks alienating and losing that voter to a more specific party or indie.

party_pants said:

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

I think the Liberals have an identity crisis. They are much more a party of the city than a party of the rural regions. I can perhaps see some sort of coalition between the Nationals and One Nation, but one that doesn’t include the Liberals. The Liberals have chance but to rebrand themselves to appeal to the current real-time demographics that now live in what were once their safe city seats, basically those that lean teal. If they don’t appeal to the teals, they will make themselves irrelevant. But in doing so they need to split decisively away from the Nats and One Nats.

The problem for the Liberal party of course, is that they keep purging those types of teal-ish people from the party, and the faction in control is exactly the sort of people that need purging to appeal to the voters in those electorates. They probably can’t do it, so it will need a new party to form. Which is going to be difficult.

I reckon it will be the Nationals that do it.

I don’t think the Nats can appeal to the city-based teal voter. I think there is a clear gap, even a chasm, between the rural voter and the teal voter, and no party can appeal to both. They need to appeal to one or the other, and any attempt to appeal to both at the same time risks alienating and losing that voter to a more specific party or indie.

So maybe they need the Libs as well? A three way coalition.

roughbarked said:

Pauline Hanson lashes ‘arrogant’ critics who say One Nation can’t go mainstream

All the comms teams and opposition have to frame her as the mainstream.

Howard made it all mainstream long ago.

She’s using the Trump playbook, pretending to be an outsider. Pretending she’s not part of the establishment already.

ms spock said:

roughbarked said:

Pauline Hanson lashes ‘arrogant’ critics who say One Nation can’t go mainstream

All the comms teams and opposition have to frame her as the mainstream.

Howard made it all mainstream long ago.

She’s using the Trump playbook, pretending to be an outsider. Pretending she’s not part of the establishment already.

Will it go further though? Has it got legs for the distance?
One seat doesn’t give them much power. The worst they can do is cause labour shortages and not deliver on promises. All of which is likely.
If they merge with the coalition and beat Labor at the bext Federal election, then all hell could break loose.

roughbarked said:

ms spock said:

roughbarked said:

Pauline Hanson lashes ‘arrogant’ critics who say One Nation can’t go mainstream

All the comms teams and opposition have to frame her as the mainstream.

Howard made it all mainstream long ago.

She’s using the Trump playbook, pretending to be an outsider. Pretending she’s not part of the establishment already.

Will it go further though? Has it got legs for the distance?
One seat doesn’t give them much power. The worst they can do is cause labour shortages and not deliver on promises. All of which is likely.
If they merge with the coalition and beat Labor at the bext Federal election, then all hell could break loose.

Here’s a twist.

Charlotte Mortlock is convinced a new political party is just what Australia needs right now.

“If you can’t have a crack in Australia, where can you have a crack?” the former political staffer tells triple j hack.

“I am not naive, I am ambitious. Australia can do hard things.”

Promising to “reinvent the wheel” and support “Australians who are feeling politically abandoned”, Mortlock says her Something Better campaign is focused on capitalising on the common interests of Australians, rather than their differences. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-10/charlotte-mortlock-something-better-liberals-greens-one-nation/106658632

roughbarked said:

ms spock said:

roughbarked said:

Pauline Hanson lashes ‘arrogant’ critics who say One Nation can’t go mainstream

All the comms teams and opposition have to frame her as the mainstream.

Howard made it all mainstream long ago.

She’s using the Trump playbook, pretending to be an outsider. Pretending she’s not part of the establishment already.

Will it go further though? Has it got legs for the distance?
One seat doesn’t give them much power. The worst they can do is cause labour shortages and not deliver on promises. All of which is likely.
If they merge with the coalition and beat Labor at the bext Federal election, then all hell could break loose.

When Clive Palmer ran, he microtargeted those people, in his electorate, saying he would give $150 extra per week, especially for those doing it hard on the pension. He has no power to do so, but there were no counter ads, debunking this.The ad had an elderly woman in it. It was well done. Now we live in information silos we don’t know what other voters are seeing in their ads or online content. It concerns me.

party_pants said:

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

They will need some actual policies if they want to go mainstream. I am still not giving them credit for being other than a protest vote at the moment. Just moaning about immigration is only going to get you so far.

One Notion is not enough.
One seat is also not enough.
However, The rural areas are notionally conservatives on the whole. It stands to reasson that the Liberals and the Nationals are not far off from One Notion and the current shaky coalition could well well mean that either party could move to absorb them into a coalition, It has already been suggsted in the above article.

I think the Liberals have an identity crisis. They are much more a party of the city than a party of the rural regions. I can perhaps see some sort of coalition between the Nationals and One Nation, but one that doesn’t include the Liberals. The Liberals have chance but to rebrand themselves to appeal to the current real-time demographics that now live in what were once their safe city seats, basically those that lean teal. If they don’t appeal to the teals, they will make themselves irrelevant. But in doing so they need to split decisively away from the Nats and One Nats.

The problem for the Liberal party of course, is that they keep purging those types of teal-ish people from the party, and the faction in control is exactly the sort of people that need purging to appeal to the voters in those electorates. They probably can’t do it, so it will need a new party to form. Which is going to be difficult.

Ironically if in the next couple of years renewable energy proves to be both as cheap and as plentiful as predicted it will no longer need to be a bridge they’ll die on and they can easily put aside any opposition without any blowback from the deniers in the party and move to the centre again.

Ian said:

Nightmarish.

Bubblecar said:

Ian said:

Nightmarish.

I’m reasonably sure that Mr Farley stil has to see that part.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-11/upside-down-flags-protest-regional-victorians/106592092

roughbarked said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-11/upside-down-flags-protest-regional-victorians/106592092

This is how we get sovcits…

Divine Angel said:

roughbarked said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-11/upside-down-flags-protest-regional-victorians/106592092

This is how we get sovcits…

Ja. One of their big complaints is water buy backs. Meaning they think government is stealing their right to flog the water resources.
If I could grow green stuff like in that photo, I’d be thanking providence for the free water bounty I’d be receiving.

Divine Angel said:

roughbarked said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-11/upside-down-flags-protest-regional-victorians/106592092

This is how we get sovcits…

Whilst rural Victorians might have reasonable grievances it’ll be fun to see how they fair if ON get some power. Maybe they should look to the MAGA movement to see what they may be in for.

roughbarked said:

Divine Angel said:

roughbarked said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-11/upside-down-flags-protest-regional-victorians/106592092

This is how we get sovcits…

Ja. One of their big complaints is water buy backs. Meaning they think government is stealing their right to flog the water resources.
If I could grow green stuff like in that photo, I’d be thanking providence for the free water bounty I’d be receiving.

Cherry picked from that article:
Another listener, Michael from Wooragee, said he found the flags useful to identify whom he would stay away from.

“I love how the village idiots now mark their location with a red ensign,” he said.

“It’s very helpful to know who to avoid.”

Bogsnorkler said:

Divine Angel said:

roughbarked said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-11/upside-down-flags-protest-regional-victorians/106592092

This is how we get sovcits…

Whilst rural Victorians might have reasonable grievances it’ll be fun to see how they fair if ON get some power. Maybe they should look to the MAGA movement to see what they may be in for.

Hopefully they are capable of some discernment?

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

Divine Angel said:

This is how we get sovcits…

Ja. One of their big complaints is water buy backs. Meaning they think government is stealing their right to flog the water resources.
If I could grow green stuff like in that photo, I’d be thanking providence for the free water bounty I’d be receiving.

Cherry picked from that article:
Another listener, Michael from Wooragee, said he found the flags useful to identify whom he would stay away from.

“I love how the village idiots now mark their location with a red ensign,” he said.

“It’s very helpful to know who to avoid.”

so Michael from Wooragee endorses division

roughbarked said:

Bogsnorkler said:

Divine Angel said:

This is how we get sovcits…

Whilst rural Victorians might have reasonable grievances it’ll be fun to see how they fair if ON get some power. Maybe they should look to the MAGA movement to see what they may be in for.

Hopefully they are capable of some discernment?

what this is exactly how the fascists love it, even if life is objectively shit if the Fuhrer tells you it’s great then it’s the best

SCIENCE said:

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

Ja. One of their big complaints is water buy backs. Meaning they think government is stealing their right to flog the water resources.
If I could grow green stuff like in that photo, I’d be thanking providence for the free water bounty I’d be receiving.

Cherry picked from that article:
Another listener, Michael from Wooragee, said he found the flags useful to identify whom he would stay away from.

“I love how the village idiots now mark their location with a red ensign,” he said.

“It’s very helpful to know who to avoid.”

so Michael from Wooragee endorses division

Apparently so.

The hide of a rhino award goes to Senator Hume going on ABC Breakfast to blame Labor for the Liberal loss in Farrer.

dv said:

The hide of a rhino award goes to Senator Hume going on ABC Breakfast to blame Labor for the Liberal loss in Farrer.

I thought the very same thing.

roughbarked said:

dv said:

The hide of a rhino award goes to Senator Hume going on ABC Breakfast to blame Labor for the Liberal loss in Farrer.

I thought the very same thing.

Did Labour win ?

dv said:

The hide of a rhino award goes to Senator Hume going on ABC Breakfast to blame Labor for the Liberal loss in Farrer.

Gosh!

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

dv said:

The hide of a rhino award goes to Senator Hume going on ABC Breakfast to blame Labor for the Liberal loss in Farrer.

I thought the very same thing.

Did Labour win ?

Michael V said:

dv said:

The hide of a rhino award goes to Senator Hume going on ABC Breakfast to blame Labor for the Liberal loss in Farrer.

Gosh!

we mean it makes sense, all of these teams are just covers for the same antefascists fighting less-right possibilities, of course they’re always going to be throwing dirt in this direction

SCIENCE said:

we mean it makes sense, all of these teams are just covers for the same antefascists

see how about this playbook

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-11/wa-will-fail-to-achieve-net-zero-by-2050-woodside-report-warns/106665142

“Your efforts are futile so you need to give up and turn to us to keep your lights on.”

alleged

SCIENCE said:

alleged

As a puppet its probably preferable to the stick insert method

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

dv said:

The hide of a rhino award goes to Senator Hume going on ABC Breakfast to blame Labor for the Liberal loss in Farrer.

I thought the very same thing.

Did Labour win ?

They didn’t run.

Cymek said:

SCIENCE said:

alleged

As a puppet its probably preferable to the stick insert method

dv said:

SCIENCE said:

Cymek said:

roughbarked said:

I thought the very same thing.

Did Labour win ?

They didn’t run.

‘e says yes

SCIENCE said:

alleged

:)

Yep.

SCIENCE said:

alleged

Memes like this need to go viral. She needs to be called out as the part of the corrupt politicians that she is.

ms spock said:

SCIENCE said:

alleged

Memes like this need to go viral. She needs to be called out as the part of the corrupt politicians that she is.

With Gina, she already has great power and wealth.
She’s never going to have it taken away so you wonder just what she wants more for.
Is it some sort of massive ego stroke to accumulate it for no real reason
I assume she’s a sociopath so that’s part of it

Cymek said:

ms spock said:

SCIENCE said:

alleged

Memes like this need to go viral. She needs to be called out as the part of the corrupt politicians that she is.

With Gina, she already has great power and wealth.
She’s never going to have it taken away so you wonder just what she wants more for.
Is it some sort of massive ego stroke to accumulate it for no real reason
I assume she’s a sociopath so that’s part of it

To be fair, she’s hardly the first very rich person to behave that way.

Though why I would want to be fair, I just don’t know.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Cymek said:

ms spock said:

Memes like this need to go viral. She needs to be called out as the part of the corrupt politicians that she is.

With Gina, she already has great power and wealth.
She’s never going to have it taken away so you wonder just what she wants more for.
Is it some sort of massive ego stroke to accumulate it for no real reason
I assume she’s a sociopath so that’s part of it

To be fair, she’s hardly the first very rich person to behave that way.

Though why I would want to be fair, I just don’t know.

No. I make a point of never using that expression.

.. The internet is for Prejudice :)

Cymek said:

ms spock said:

SCIENCE said:

alleged

Memes like this need to go viral. She needs to be called out as the part of the corrupt politicians that she is.

With Gina, she already has great power and wealth.
She’s never going to have it taken away so you wonder just what she wants more for.
Is it some sort of massive ego stroke to accumulate it for no real reason
I assume she’s a sociopath so that’s part of it

I’ve expressed some displeasure to son#2 about Gina Rinehart’s evil tendrils woven into the fabric of WA. He sort of responded in the “company” way. Radicalism in my family is fading away. My parents etc would be a bit sad about this. I won’t mention it to my younger brother, the Queensland anarchist.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/picture/2026/may/11/prime-minister-pauline-hanson-is-this-the-inevitable-conclusion-of-our-beleaguered-democracy

Among the budget measures will be an increase in military spending to 3% of GDP by 2033. This will make Australia the 12th biggest military spender as a % of GDP, and the 11th biggest in actual dollars.

dv said:

Among the budget measures will be an increase in military spending to 3% of GDP by 2033. This will make Australia the 12th biggest military spender as a % of GDP, and the 11th biggest in actual dollars.

If we assemble and eventually make missiles here we may get more bang for our buck.
Looking just at the Iran conflict seems nations would need tens of thousands minimum for defence

Cymek said:

dv said:

Among the budget measures will be an increase in military spending to 3% of GDP by 2033. This will make Australia the 12th biggest military spender as a % of GDP, and the 11th biggest in actual dollars.

If we assemble and eventually make missiles here we may get more bang for our buck.
Looking just at the Iran conflict seems nations would need tens of thousands minimum for defence

I mean I’m not sure tens of thousands will get you much these days.

dv said:

Cymek said:

dv said:

Among the budget measures will be an increase in military spending to 3% of GDP by 2033. This will make Australia the 12th biggest military spender as a % of GDP, and the 11th biggest in actual dollars.

If we assemble and eventually make missiles here we may get more bang for our buck.
Looking just at the Iran conflict seems nations would need tens of thousands minimum for defence

I mean I’m not sure tens of thousands will get you much these days.

Number of missiles I meant

Cymek said:

dv said:

Cymek said:

If we assemble and eventually make missiles here we may get more bang for our buck.
Looking just at the Iran conflict seems nations would need tens of thousands minimum for defence

I mean I’m not sure tens of thousands will get you much these days.

Number of missiles I meant

Well let’s wind it back. What is the purpose of Defence in Australia? What are the threats? Who are our enemies likely to be? What are they going to do?

Morgan poll today has ALP ahead of the Coalition 53.5% – 46.5%.

Unlike some other polling houses, Morgan did not run a 2pp of ALP v ONP.

dv said:

Cymek said:

dv said:

I mean I’m not sure tens of thousands will get you much these days.

Number of missiles I meant

Well let’s wind it back. What is the purpose of Defence in Australia? What are the threats? Who are our enemies likely to be? What are they going to do?

China is, of course, the prime suspect.

Indonesia also get a place in the line-up, though not to the same degree, especially these days, as their political rhetoric is a bit more muted lately.

What would they do?

Same as always: maritime interdiction.

In case anyone hadn’t noticed, this place is an island, and islands always depend on sea links to survive and prosper. Stuff coming in, stuff going out. No sea links means strangulation.

The Japanese understood this in WW2, and that was reflected in their plans for New Guinea and the Solomon Islands, as well as New Caledonia and Fiji.

The geography of this part of the world means that Australia is quite vulnerable to having its sea links cut off, especially to the north (eg to Japan) and to the American continents. Some of the blockage could be circumvented by merchant ships using ‘other’ routes, but those alternatives will take a whole lot longer, and be much more expensive, and it would slow movement and goods of materials down, as ships would take longer to make their voyages, which means they would be making fewer voyages per month/year.

Not quite as risky to the west, but doable for a navy that’s large enough and suitably equipped.

Australia might fare better than some countries with regard to be able to produce its own food, but we rely on sea transport (mostly from the north) for our fuel.

All the food in the world is of no use, if there’s no fuel for the transport needed to get it to consumers.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-12/perth-quarantine-facility-to-help-hantavirus-disease-control/106667314

Bullsbrook Centre for National Resilience to be used to quarantine passengers from hantavirus ship

—-

Handy that this was built.

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-12/perth-quarantine-facility-to-help-hantavirus-disease-control/106667314

Bullsbrook Centre for National Resilience to be used to quarantine passengers from hantavirus ship

—-

Handy that this was built.

Hanta handy.

captain_spalding said:

dv said:

Cymek said:

Number of missiles I meant

Well let’s wind it back. What is the purpose of Defence in Australia? What are the threats? Who are our enemies likely to be? What are they going to do?

China is, of course, the prime suspect.

Indonesia also get a place in the line-up, though not to the same degree, especially these days, as their political rhetoric is a bit more muted lately.

What would they do?

Same as always: maritime interdiction.

In case anyone hadn’t noticed, this place is an island, and islands always depend on sea links to survive and prosper. Stuff coming in, stuff going out. No sea links means strangulation.

The Japanese understood this in WW2, and that was reflected in their plans for New Guinea and the Solomon Islands, as well as New Caledonia and Fiji.

The geography of this part of the world means that Australia is quite vulnerable to having its sea links cut off, especially to the north (eg to Japan) and to the American continents. Some of the blockage could be circumvented by merchant ships using ‘other’ routes, but those alternatives will take a whole lot longer, and be much more expensive, and it would slow movement and goods of materials down, as ships would take longer to make their voyages, which means they would be making fewer voyages per month/year.

Not quite as risky to the west, but doable for a navy that’s large enough and suitably equipped.

Australia might fare better than some countries with regard to be able to produce its own food, but we rely on sea transport (mostly from the north) for our fuel.

All the food in the world is of no use, if there’s no fuel for the transport needed to get it to consumers.

First line of defence to take on China if they decide to invade is nuke their fleet.
No pissing around with conventional weapons, be aggressive and show them we aren’t weak.

dv said:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-12/perth-quarantine-facility-to-help-hantavirus-disease-control/106667314

Bullsbrook Centre for National Resilience to be used to quarantine passengers from hantavirus ship

—-

Handy that this was built.

When I was trying to plan my return to Australia at the end of 2021 I hoped to get quarantined in the Joondalup centre.

Cymek said:

captain_spalding said:

dv said:

Well let’s wind it back. What is the purpose of Defence in Australia? What are the threats? Who are our enemies likely to be? What are they going to do?

China is, of course, the prime suspect.

Indonesia also get a place in the line-up, though not to the same degree, especially these days, as their political rhetoric is a bit more muted lately.

What would they do?

Same as always: maritime interdiction.

In case anyone hadn’t noticed, this place is an island, and islands always depend on sea links to survive and prosper. Stuff coming in, stuff going out. No sea links means strangulation.

The Japanese understood this in WW2, and that was reflected in their plans for New Guinea and the Solomon Islands, as well as New Caledonia and Fiji.

The geography of this part of the world means that Australia is quite vulnerable to having its sea links cut off, especially to the north (eg to Japan) and to the American continents. Some of the blockage could be circumvented by merchant ships using ‘other’ routes, but those alternatives will take a whole lot longer, and be much more expensive, and it would slow movement and goods of materials down, as ships would take longer to make their voyages, which means they would be making fewer voyages per month/year.

Not quite as risky to the west, but doable for a navy that’s large enough and suitably equipped.

Australia might fare better than some countries with regard to be able to produce its own food, but we rely on sea transport (mostly from the north) for our fuel.

All the food in the world is of no use, if there’s no fuel for the transport needed to get it to consumers.

First line of defence to take on China if they decide to invade is nuke their fleet.
No pissing around with conventional weapons, be aggressive and show them we aren’t weak.

The reality seems to be that China operates very stably and is quite content with the way the world economy is running.
We’ll see what happens but one possibility is that both Russia and the USA become further isolated, China keeps its head down, and the ROTW builds trade and defence links to work around all this. For the last 20 years the actual interruptions in shipping and production have been due to Russian and American attacks.

dv said:

Cymek said:

captain_spalding said:

China is, of course, the prime suspect.

Indonesia also get a place in the line-up, though not to the same degree, especially these days, as their political rhetoric is a bit more muted lately.

What would they do?

Same as always: maritime interdiction.

In case anyone hadn’t noticed, this place is an island, and islands always depend on sea links to survive and prosper. Stuff coming in, stuff going out. No sea links means strangulation.

The Japanese understood this in WW2, and that was reflected in their plans for New Guinea and the Solomon Islands, as well as New Caledonia and Fiji.

The geography of this part of the world means that Australia is quite vulnerable to having its sea links cut off, especially to the north (eg to Japan) and to the American continents. Some of the blockage could be circumvented by merchant ships using ‘other’ routes, but those alternatives will take a whole lot longer, and be much more expensive, and it would slow movement and goods of materials down, as ships would take longer to make their voyages, which means they would be making fewer voyages per month/year.

Not quite as risky to the west, but doable for a navy that’s large enough and suitably equipped.

Australia might fare better than some countries with regard to be able to produce its own food, but we rely on sea transport (mostly from the north) for our fuel.

All the food in the world is of no use, if there’s no fuel for the transport needed to get it to consumers.

First line of defence to take on China if they decide to invade is nuke their fleet.
No pissing around with conventional weapons, be aggressive and show them we aren’t weak.

The reality seems to be that China operates very stably and is quite content with the way the world economy is running.
We’ll see what happens but one possibility is that both Russia and the USA become further isolated, China keeps its head down, and the ROTW builds trade and defence links to work around all this. For the last 20 years the actual interruptions in shipping and production have been due to Russian and American attacks.

Yeah I don’t see China as a threat, they’d do themselves a disservice by becoming an invading aggressor.
The USA would go all out if they invaded Taiwan and it would be costly for likely little return
Its more than Australia runs the risk of having no one come to our aid if something did happen.
I wouldn’t trust the USA to paint a target on our back and then throw us away when we are no longer useful
So we need to show that invading is a no no as our response will be very stern.
It does seem that using nuclear weapons on an invading fleet is considered acceptable

Australia’s Defence Policy Explained.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgspkxfkS4k

Beautifully explained.

Cymek said:

dv said:

Cymek said:

First line of defence to take on China if they decide to invade is nuke their fleet.
No pissing around with conventional weapons, be aggressive and show them we aren’t weak.

The reality seems to be that China operates very stably and is quite content with the way the world economy is running.
We’ll see what happens but one possibility is that both Russia and the USA become further isolated, China keeps its head down, and the ROTW builds trade and defence links to work around all this. For the last 20 years the actual interruptions in shipping and production have been due to Russian and American attacks.

Yeah I don’t see China as a threat, they’d do themselves a disservice by becoming an invading aggressor.
The USA would go all out if they invaded Taiwan and it would be costly for likely little return
Its more than Australia runs the risk of having no one come to our aid if something did happen.
I wouldn’t trust the USA to paint a target on our back and then throw us away when we are no longer useful
So we need to show that invading is a no no as our response will be very stern.
It does seem that using nuclear weapons on an invading fleet is considered acceptable

Can’t really nuke an invading fleet in international waters unless they’re actively interdicting our trade and destroying our own naval assets. Australia has long had a policy of making sure Indonesia cannot invade while simultaneously ensuring Indonesia is strong enough to resist any other invaders.

dv said:

The reality seems to be that China operates very stably and is quite content with the way the world economy is running.

…

one possibility is that both Russia and the USA become further isolated, China keeps its head down, and the ROTW builds trade and defence links to work around

…

the actual interruptions in shipping and production have been due to Russian and American attacks.

LOL yeah right we remember getting shouted down every time we said that for years and years

but we mean rUsSiA aren’t isolated if they’re in bed together right

Budget announcement starts about arthur nower from now, supposedly they are going to enact some of the policies that lost them the election in 2019.

dv said:

Budget announcement starts about arthur nower from now, supposedly they are going to enact some of the policies that lost them the election in 2019.

Fewer boomers and silents, more Gen Y ans Z, and they’re even more pissed off.

Negative gearing to apply only to new builds from July 2027.

about fucking time.

party_pants said:

dv said:

Budget announcement starts about arthur nower from now, supposedly they are going to enact some of the policies that lost them the election in 2019.

Fewer boomers and silents, more Gen Y ans Z, and they’re even more pissed off.

Once again we Gen Xers don’t even get mentioned…

dv said:

party_pants said:

dv said:

Budget announcement starts about arthur nower from now, supposedly they are going to enact some of the policies that lost them the election in 2019.

Fewer boomers and silents, more Gen Y ans Z, and they’re even more pissed off.

Once again we Gen Xers don’t even get mentioned…

Yeah. I’m one of them too.

Who’s the female MP behind Chalmer’s right shoulder?

Witty Rejoinder said:

Who’s the female MP behind Chalmer’s right shoulder?

The one in the red dress?

I have no idea.

party_pants said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Who’s the female MP behind Chalmer’s right shoulder?

The one in the red dress?

I have no idea.

Anne Aly?

Deficit is going to be 0.9% of GDP.

Witty Rejoinder said:

Who’s the female MP behind Chalmer’s right shoulder?

Found her:

https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Parliamentarian?MPID=270198

Witty Rejoinder said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Who’s the female MP behind Chalmer’s right shoulder?

Found her:

https://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Parliamentarian?MPID=270198

Ah, she’s the one who won Peter Dutton’s old seat at the last election. Skillful and sly bit of boasting to to have her in the frame behind any minister standing at the box.

dv said:

party_pants said:

dv said:

Budget announcement starts about arthur nower from now, supposedly they are going to enact some of the policies that lost them the election in 2019.

Fewer boomers and silents, more Gen Y ans Z, and they’re even more pissed off.

Once again we Gen Xers don’t even get mentioned…

Try being Generation Jones.

party_pants said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Who’s the female MP behind Chalmer’s right shoulder?

The one in the red dress?

I have no idea.

See that girl with the red dress on,
She can do it all night long,
She’s a bad girl, she’s a bad girl.

- ZZ Top

dv said:

There should be an intelligence test.

What is five times three?

It’s simple, but most of the so-called politicians struggle with basic maths.

Kingy said:

dv said:

There should be an intelligence test.

What is five times three?

It’s simple, but most of the so-called politicians struggle with basic maths.

What is five times three?

Let me see.

Five times three, times five times three, times five times three, times five times three, times five times three.

That equals five lots of time three duddn nit?.

Woodie said:

Kingy said:

dv said:

There should be an intelligence test.

What is five times three?

It’s simple, but most of the so-called politicians struggle with basic maths.

What is five times three?

Let me see.

Five times three, times five times three, times five times three, times five times three, times five times three.

That equals five lots of time three duddn nit?.

15. The answer is 15.

Unless you are stupider than Tronald Dump, you could possibly do basic maths.

dv said:

Aaargh…he makes me so angry.

kii said:

dv said:

Aaargh…he makes me so angry.

Don’t be angry at him, Aunty Kii. He can’t help it.

Be angry at the those that vote for him. They should know better.

Woodie said:

kii said:

dv said:

Aaargh…he makes me so angry.

Don’t be angry at him, Aunty Kii. He can’t help it.

Be angry at the those that vote for him. They should know better.

+1

AussieDJ said:

Woodie said:

kii said:

Aaargh…he makes me so angry.

Don’t be angry at him, Aunty Kii. He can’t help it.

Be angry at the those that vote for him. They should know better.

+1

I can’t see their faces. He has a very punchable face.

Opposition Leader Angus Taylor has described the changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts as an assault on aspiration. (ABC News: Matt Roberts)

Shadow Treasurer Tim Wilson says the government’s tax reform package will increase the cost of rent, result in fewer homes, and make it harder for young people to get into the housing market.

Today’s SMH headline (in even bigger than usual font):

CHALMERS BURSTS BOOMERS’ BUBBLE

It’s nice to be the centre of attention and everything, but it really isn’t all about everybody born over a particular 18 year range.

It’s about changing policies that needlessly benefit very rich people to help everybody else.

The majority of Boomers (I guess), including me, will not lose a single cent from the changes to negative gearing and trusts, and will only be affected by the changes to capital gains tax in reduced income to their superann, because they don’t have any direct property investments other than their own home.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Today’s SMH headline (in even bigger than usual font):

CHALMERS BURSTS BOOMERS’ BUBBLE

It’s nice to be the centre of attention and everything, but it really isn’t all about everybody born over a particular 18 year range.

It’s about changing policies that needlessly benefit very rich people to help everybody else.

The majority of Boomers (I guess), including me, will not lose a single cent from the changes to negative gearing and trusts, and will only be affected by the changes to capital gains tax in reduced income to their superann, because they don’t have any direct property investments other than their own home.

Ja.

roughbarked said:

Opposition Leader Angus Taylor has described the changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts as an assault on aspiration. (ABC News: Matt Roberts)

Shadow Treasurer Tim Wilson says the government’s tax reform package will increase the cost of rent, result in fewer homes, and make it harder for young people to get into the housing market.

I’d say the potential effect on rents is a real problem, but the other two bits are absolute typical “Liberal” crap.

Hopefully the different rules for new properties will encourage people hanging onto their empty blocks to convert them into new homes to rent out, which might even help to reduce rents over time.

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

Opposition Leader Angus Taylor has described the changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts as an assault on aspiration. (ABC News: Matt Roberts)

Shadow Treasurer Tim Wilson says the government’s tax reform package will increase the cost of rent, result in fewer homes, and make it harder for young people to get into the housing market.

I’d say the potential effect on rents is a real problem, but the other two bits are absolute typical “Liberal” crap.

Hopefully the different rules for new properties will encourage people hanging onto their empty blocks to convert them into new homes to rent out, which might even help to reduce rents over time.

This seems to be the main intent.

communısm bad

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

Opposition Leader Angus Taylor has described the changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts as an assault on aspiration. (ABC News: Matt Roberts)

Shadow Treasurer Tim Wilson says the government’s tax reform package will increase the cost of rent, result in fewer homes, and make it harder for young people to get into the housing market.

I’d say the potential effect on rents is a real problem, but the other two bits are absolute typical “Liberal” crap.

Hopefully the different rules for new properties will encourage people hanging onto their empty blocks to convert them into new homes to rent out, which might even help to reduce rents over time.

My take:

The budget papers report treasury modelling suggests rents will rise less than $2 a week for a household paying the median rent so the Coalition are going to town on something that is basically negligible. And if the expected 35,000 fall in new builds over ten years proves even slightly pessimistic one would expect both homeownership amongst the young and rent for those not looking to buy to fall as well. Personally I think the reforms about planning rules and impediments to be home construction to more than offset any change in investor behaviour from CGT and negative gearing changes.

Witty Rejoinder said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

Opposition Leader Angus Taylor has described the changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts as an assault on aspiration. (ABC News: Matt Roberts)

Shadow Treasurer Tim Wilson says the government’s tax reform package will increase the cost of rent, result in fewer homes, and make it harder for young people to get into the housing market.

I’d say the potential effect on rents is a real problem, but the other two bits are absolute typical “Liberal” crap.

Hopefully the different rules for new properties will encourage people hanging onto their empty blocks to convert them into new homes to rent out, which might even help to reduce rents over time.

My take:

The budget papers report treasury modelling suggests rents will rise less than $2 a week for a household paying the median rent so the Coalition are going to town on something that is basically negligible. And if the expected 35,000 fall in new builds over ten years proves even slightly pessimistic one would expect both homeownership amongst the young and rent for those not looking to buy to fall as well. Personally I think the reforms about planning rules and impediments to be home construction to more than offset any change in investor behaviour from CGT and negative gearing changes.

‘new home construction

Witty Rejoinder said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

Opposition Leader Angus Taylor has described the changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts as an assault on aspiration. (ABC News: Matt Roberts)

Shadow Treasurer Tim Wilson says the government’s tax reform package will increase the cost of rent, result in fewer homes, and make it harder for young people to get into the housing market.

I’d say the potential effect on rents is a real problem, but the other two bits are absolute typical “Liberal” crap.

Hopefully the different rules for new properties will encourage people hanging onto their empty blocks to convert them into new homes to rent out, which might even help to reduce rents over time.

My take:

The budget papers report treasury modelling suggests rents will rise less than $2 a week for a household paying the median rent so the Coalition are going to town on something that is basically negligible. And if the expected 35,000 fall in new builds over ten years proves even slightly pessimistic one would expect both homeownership amongst the young and rent for those not looking to buy to fall as well. Personally I think the reforms about planning rules and impediments to be home construction to more than offset any change in investor behaviour from CGT and negative gearing changes.

But nobody talks about that! (changes to planning rules).

Witty Rejoinder said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

roughbarked said:

Opposition Leader Angus Taylor has described the changes to negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts as an assault on aspiration. (ABC News: Matt Roberts)

Shadow Treasurer Tim Wilson says the government’s tax reform package will increase the cost of rent, result in fewer homes, and make it harder for young people to get into the housing market.

I’d say the potential effect on rents is a real problem, but the other two bits are absolute typical “Liberal” crap.

Hopefully the different rules for new properties will encourage people hanging onto their empty blocks to convert them into new homes to rent out, which might even help to reduce rents over time.

My take:

The budget papers report treasury modelling suggests rents will rise less than $2 a week for a household paying the median rent so the Coalition are going to town on something that is basically negligible. And if the expected 35,000 fall in new builds over ten years proves even slightly pessimistic one would expect both homeownership amongst the young and rent for those not looking to buy to fall as well. Personally I think the reforms about planning rules and impediments to be home construction to more than offset any change in investor behaviour from CGT and negative gearing changes.

Houses are way priced for what you get.

My house I no longer live in is worth 900,000 we paid 250,000
I wouldn’t pay anywhere near 900,000 for it and to think someone would have to pay this is criminal
It claims rent of $745 a week, I’d feel guilty to charge this.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Today’s SMH headline (in even bigger than usual font):

CHALMERS BURSTS BOOMERS’ BUBBLE

It’s nice to be the centre of attention and everything, but it really isn’t all about everybody born over a particular 18 year range.

It’s about changing policies that needlessly benefit very rich people to help everybody else.

The majority of Boomers (I guess), including me, will not lose a single cent from the changes to negative gearing and trusts, and will only be affected by the changes to capital gains tax in reduced income to their superann, because they don’t have any direct property investments other than their own home.

Also, speaking as part of the tail end boomers, we are dying off now. The people born just after the war, when the boom started, are hitting their 80s.

buffy said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Today’s SMH headline (in even bigger than usual font):

CHALMERS BURSTS BOOMERS’ BUBBLE

It’s nice to be the centre of attention and everything, but it really isn’t all about everybody born over a particular 18 year range.

It’s about changing policies that needlessly benefit very rich people to help everybody else.

The majority of Boomers (I guess), including me, will not lose a single cent from the changes to negative gearing and trusts, and will only be affected by the changes to capital gains tax in reduced income to their superann, because they don’t have any direct property investments other than their own home.

Also, speaking as part of the tail end boomers, we are dying off now. The people born just after the war, when the boom started, are hitting their 80s.

Hoping for another 30 years or so here, but realistically it may be a little less than that.

The Rev Dodgson said:

buffy said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Today’s SMH headline (in even bigger than usual font):

CHALMERS BURSTS BOOMERS’ BUBBLE

It’s nice to be the centre of attention and everything, but it really isn’t all about everybody born over a particular 18 year range.

It’s about changing policies that needlessly benefit very rich people to help everybody else.

The majority of Boomers (I guess), including me, will not lose a single cent from the changes to negative gearing and trusts, and will only be affected by the changes to capital gains tax in reduced income to their superann, because they don’t have any direct property investments other than their own home.

Also, speaking as part of the tail end boomers, we are dying off now. The people born just after the war, when the boom started, are hitting their 80s.

Hoping for another 30 years or so here, but realistically it may be a little less than that.

The females in my maternal line do late 80s, into 90s and my Auntie Nellie died a few weeks short of 103. My paternal line females also do well, I think – I don’t know much about them. So as I’m pushing 67, another 30 years would take me to 97. Possible, but definitely not certain.

buffy said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

buffy said:

Also, speaking as part of the tail end boomers, we are dying off now. The people born just after the war, when the boom started, are hitting their 80s.

Hoping for another 30 years or so here, but realistically it may be a little less than that.

The females in my maternal line do late 80s, into 90s and my Auntie Nellie died a few weeks short of 103. My paternal line females also do well, I think – I don’t know much about them. So as I’m pushing 67, another 30 years would take me to 97. Possible, but definitely not certain.

You are 9 years behind me.

Some might say I am a little optimistic.
Or maybe a glutton for punishment :)

SCIENCE said:

communısm bad

see

One Nation Leader Pauline Hanson has described the government’s tax changes as “communism” and “redistributing wealth”. Labor broke its pre-election promise and announced changes to negative gearing, capital gains tax and family trusts in last night’s budget. “To me this is basically taking the wealth from people that have worked hard and I’m talking to people my age … We didn’t go the restaurants and we didn’t have all this. Then we saved and we invested into, wealth to create that wealth,” Hanson says. “I see this as nothing but communism taking over and redistributing wealth. We’re not incentivising people to want to get ahead in this country, to go and work out saving money,” she says.

SCIENCE said:

SCIENCE said:

communısm bad

see

One Nation Leader Pauline Hanson has described the government’s tax changes as “communism” and “redistributing wealth”. Labor broke its pre-election promise and announced changes to negative gearing, capital gains tax and family trusts in last night’s budget. “To me this is basically taking the wealth from people that have worked hard and I’m talking to people my age … We didn’t go the restaurants and we didn’t have all this. Then we saved and we invested into, wealth to create that wealth,” Hanson says. “I see this as nothing but communism taking over and redistributing wealth. We’re not incentivising people to want to get ahead in this country, to go and work out saving money,” she says.

Narinder Singh Sandu, from Griffith’s Sikh community, said he believed people voted for Mr Farley based on issues such as water management rather than the party’s position on immigration.

“People are saying they want because of his knowledge regarding the water and are supporting him for that, but then at the same time, the same people need to look at who they rely on for workers,” he said.

a concern for minorities in Farrer

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

SCIENCE said:

communısm bad

see

One Nation Leader Pauline Hanson has described the government’s tax changes as “communism” and “redistributing wealth”. Labor broke its pre-election promise and announced changes to negative gearing, capital gains tax and family trusts in last night’s budget. “To me this is basically taking the wealth from people that have worked hard and I’m talking to people my age … We didn’t go the restaurants and we didn’t have all this. Then we saved and we invested into, wealth to create that wealth,” Hanson says. “I see this as nothing but communism taking over and redistributing wealth. We’re not incentivising people to want to get ahead in this country, to go and work out saving money,” she says.

Narinder Singh Sandu, from Griffith’s Sikh community, said he believed people voted for Mr Farley based on issues such as water management rather than the party’s position on immigration.

“People are saying they want because of his knowledge regarding the water and are supporting him for that, but then at the same time, the same people need to look at who they rely on for workers,” he said.

a concern for minorities in Farrer

“what about it, we really liked his artwork, it had nothing to do with the Zyklon B solution”

SCIENCE said:

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

see

One Nation Leader Pauline Hanson has described the government’s tax changes as “communism” and “redistributing wealth”. Labor broke its pre-election promise and announced changes to negative gearing, capital gains tax and family trusts in last night’s budget. “To me this is basically taking the wealth from people that have worked hard and I’m talking to people my age … We didn’t go the restaurants and we didn’t have all this. Then we saved and we invested into, wealth to create that wealth,” Hanson says. “I see this as nothing but communism taking over and redistributing wealth. We’re not incentivising people to want to get ahead in this country, to go and work out saving money,” she says.

Narinder Singh Sandu, from Griffith’s Sikh community, said he believed people voted for Mr Farley based on issues such as water management rather than the party’s position on immigration.

“People are saying they want because of his knowledge regarding the water and are supporting him for that, but then at the same time, the same people need to look at who they rely on for workers,” he said.

a concern for minorities in Farrer

“what about it, we really liked his artwork, it had nothing to do with the Zyklon B solution”

I wonder how many “white” Australians (I’m assuming they are the ones complaining) would do the hard yards and sacrifice immigrants workers do.
Also they probably pool resources and work as a family group to get ahead.

Four charts show Labor’s budget is not just about the generation gap, but the wealth gap too
By economics reporter Tom Crowley

Nobody asks economists for political advice, for good reason.

But when Labor started hinting that it was going to revisit changes to negative gearing and capital gains, and sell it as a housing policy for young people, the boffins and wonks were scratching their heads.

Sure, there was a pretty obvious link between the tax rules and the housing market, which had become the dominant economic concern for young voters. But there was one problem: the lack of evidence that tweaking taxes would do anything much to fix it.

Federal budget 2026: Stay up to date with the budget aftermath in our live blog.

Here’s how the budget’s tax changes will affect you
A house with a white timber fence and a yellow for sale sign.
Answers to all your questions about the federal budget’s changes to negative gearing and the capital gains tax.

Rein in negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount, and you might depress house prices a little and create more home owners. But the shift would be pretty modest and, meanwhile, you would see fewer homes built and slightly higher rents.

Hardly much bang for your buck, given how much political risk you would be taking, especially if you grandfathered changes to keep the past in the past, as the economists assumed, correctly, that the government would choose to do.

So how do you sell negative gearing as a housing policy, rather than a policy about taxing “the top end of town”, as it was when Labor pursued the changes in 2019?

The answer: you do both. Maybe the biggest surprise of this budget wasn’t what the changes were, but how they were argued. In addition to an intergenerational housing pitch, Labor is also preparing to make a full-throated argument that “the 1 per cent” should pay more.

Or as Bill Shorten put it in a well-timed media appearance: “Why is it that a plumber, a nurse, a journalist, a lawyer, a teacher, a doctor pay higher rates of tax when they go to work every day than someone who just sits on a pile of assets?”

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-13/labor-budget-pits-the-one-per-cent-against-the-rest/106675628

Just who do they get to proof-read their posts?

“One Nation will ease cost of living pain by scraping Net Zero”

https://x.com/OneNationAus/status/2054046697224089997

Crowdfunding lobby group Climate 200 has accused the Liberal Party of “accelerating” the rise of the far right in Australia after the Coalition directed preferences to One Nation and helped it secure the first federal Lower House seat for the party in 30 years.

The criticism comes as international media likened One Nation’s landslide Farrer by-election victory to the same populist wave that propelled Donald Trump in the United States and Reform UK in Britain.
Claims Liberals ‘crowned’ Pauline Hanson

One Nation candidate David Farley secured just under 40 per cent of the primary vote at the recent Farrer by-election. The Liberal and National parties recommended supporters place him ahead of his main rival, independent Michelle Milthorpe, on their how-to-vote cards, helping him comfortably win the seat after preferences were distributed.

Climate 200 co-convenor Kate Hook said the decision could have long-term consequences for Australian democracy.

“By preferencing One Nation, the Coalition acted as kingmaker and crowned Pauline Hanson, choosing the far right over the centre,” she said.

“Angus Taylor and Tim Wilson must explain why the Coalition hasn’t just enabled One Nation’s rise but accelerated it, even as their own campaigning warned voters, ‘One Nation, No Solutions.’”
In addition to preferencing One Nation, the Liberals and Nationals also ran a number of attack ads against Ms Milthorpe, calling her a teal and criticising her for accepting funding from Climate 200.

Ms Hook claimed the election result showed a vote for the Liberal Party was effectively a vote for One Nation.

“A vote for One Nation changes nothing about the power of wealthy individuals and corporations over our democracy. It hands more political influence to billionaire mining magnates, like Gina Rinehart,” she said.
When asked whether he agreed with the criticism, a campaign spokesman for Liberal candidate Raissa Butowski said the issue was a matter for the federal party. He also questioned why Ms Milthorpe had repeatedly distanced herself from Climate 200. The Liberal Party did not respond to our questions.

Ms Butkowski secured just 12 per cent of the primary vote, a massive fall in support after her predecessor Sussan Ley won 43 per cent last year.
Problems ahead for the Liberals and Nationals

Before the election, Charles Sturt University political scientist Dominic O’Sullivan warned the Coalition’s preference deal with One Nation could prove self-defeating.

“I think the Liberals and the Nationals have made a strategic error,” he said.

“It gives them another person in parliament for a party whose sole mission is to destroy the Liberal and National parties.”

One Nation polled very strongly in rural areas that bordered the federal seat of Riverina, which is held by the Nationals’ Michael McCormack.

Election analyst Antony Green said the Farrer result should put his party on notice.

“If repeated elsewhere, the Farrer result will come close to destroying the National Party and reduce its representation in the House of Representatives to a rump. The same existential threat applies to rural and regional Liberals,” he said.
International reaction to Farrer result

International media portrayed the result as a landmark moment for Australia’s far right and likened it to populist uprisings in Britain and the United States.

The New York Times reported that “a far-right party in Australia on Saturday won a seat in the country’s Lower House of parliament for the first time”, describing One Nation as “an anti-immigration party founded by firebrand politician Pauline Hanson”.

Reuters framed the Farrer result as part of a broader global populist surge, likening it to the MAGA political movement behind Donald Trump in the United States.

Britain’s Financial Times said the result mirrored recent local election outcomes in the United Kingdom, where “Nigel Farage’s anti-immigration Reform UK ate into the Conservative Party vote share”.

roughbarked said:

International media portrayed the result as a landmark moment for Australia’s far right and likened it to populist uprisings in Britain and the United States.

The New York Times reported that “a far-right party in Australia on Saturday won a seat in the country’s Lower House of parliament for the first time”, describing One Nation as “an anti-immigration party founded by firebrand politician Pauline Hanson”.

Reuters framed the Farrer result as part of a broader global populist surge, likening it to the MAGA political movement behind Donald Trump in the United States.

Britain’s Financial Times said the result mirrored recent local election outcomes in the United Kingdom, where “Nigel Farage’s anti-immigration Reform UK ate into the Conservative Party vote share”.

Most concerning.

Labor sees this populist wave as a threat and is going for policy boldness in response.

good

National Herald

Barnaby Joyce’s Senate Fantasy Risks Reopening Australia’s Darkest Constitutional Chapter
Australia has seen this movie before, and it did not end well.

When former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce openly declares that One Nation should become primarily a “Senate party,” Australians should hear the warning bells ringing across Parliament House.

Joyce’s reported ambition to run for the Senate in New South Wales in 2028 under the One Nation banner is not merely another act in the long-running theatre of populist politics. It is part of a deeper and more troubling strategy: the deliberate pursuit of balance-of-power leverage in the Senate, where a minor party can hold governments hostage without ever winning a national mandate.

The language may sound procedural and respectable — “review,” “accountability,” “confidence and supply” — but the political logic behind it is unmistakable. A Senate bloc wielding the power to obstruct budgets, stall legislation, and threaten governments unless demands are met is not healthy parliamentary scrutiny. It is coercive politics dressed up as constitutional virtue. Its political blackmail

Australia learned this lesson painfully in 1975.

During the constitutional crisis engineered by Malcolm Fraser and Senate leader Reg Withers, the Coalition blocked supply to the elected government of Gough Whitlam despite Labor retaining a majority in the House of Representatives. Withers famously declared that the Senate possessed its own democratic mandate — a claim technically defensible perhaps, but politically catastrophic.

The result was paralysis, institutional breakdown, and one of the most divisive moments in Australian political history.
Now, five decades later, echoes of that same mentality are resurfacing from the One Nation party and particularly from Barnaby Joyce .

Joyce’s remarks suggest a vision in which One Nation does not necessarily seek to govern from the House of Representatives but instead seeks power without responsibility by governing from the Senate chamber. The objective is obvious: use proportional representation to secure enough Upper House seats to dictate terms to whichever major party forms government.

Whether the government of the day is Labor or Liberal would almost become secondary. The real contest would be over who could satisfy the demands of a populist balance-of-power bloc capable of threatening legislative deadlock at every turn.

That is not democratic renewal.

It is parliamentary ransom.

There is nothing illegitimate about minor parties winning Senate seats. The Senate exists precisely to review legislation and represent diverse political voices. But there is a profound difference between review and veto politics, between scrutiny and sabotage.

The danger lies not in One Nation participating in democracy, but in openly aspiring to become a permanent political gatekeeper capable of extracting concessions under threat of obstruction and political bloody mindedness.
Australians do not elect governments expecting them to queue outside Pauline Hanson’s office seeking permission to govern.

Nor do Australians want a system where national budgets, economic policy, or urgent reforms are contingent upon satisfying the demands of ideological holdouts chasing nostalgia for a vanished Australia that never truly existed in the first place.

The romanticism that fuels sections of One Nation’s movement — the longing for an imagined simpler past, the politics of grievance, the constant rhetoric of betrayal by elites — may energise a passionate political base. But nostalgia is not a governing philosophy.

And perpetual obstruction is not statesmanship.

One Nation’s recent victory in Farrer has understandably emboldened the party. Yet a single Lower House breakthrough should not be mistaken for a national endorsement of Senate brinkmanship. Most Australians remain pragmatic voters. They want stability, functioning institutions, and governments capable of governing.

They do not want another constitutional crisis.

They do not want government supply weaponised.

And they do not want Parliament transformed into a permanent hostage negotiation between major governments and minor parties seeking disproportionate influence.

The Senate is a house of review — not a shadow executive, not an ideological checkpoint, and certainly not a platform for political blackmail.

Barnaby Joyce may see a glorious future in Senate leverage politics. But Australians remember what happens when parliamentary gamesmanship overtakes democratic responsibility.

The country paid a heavy price once before.

It should not be asked to pay it again.

National Herald

Bogsnorkler said:

National Herald

Barnaby Joyce’s Senate Fantasy Risks Reopening Australia’s Darkest Constitutional Chapter
Australia has seen this movie before, and it did not end well.

When former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce openly declares that One Nation should become primarily a “Senate party,” Australians should hear the warning bells ringing across Parliament House.

Joyce’s reported ambition to run for the Senate in New South Wales in 2028 under the One Nation banner is not merely another act in the long-running theatre of populist politics. It is part of a deeper and more troubling strategy: the deliberate pursuit of balance-of-power leverage in the Senate, where a minor party can hold governments hostage without ever winning a national mandate.

The language may sound procedural and respectable — “review,” “accountability,” “confidence and supply” — but the political logic behind it is unmistakable. A Senate bloc wielding the power to obstruct budgets, stall legislation, and threaten governments unless demands are met is not healthy parliamentary scrutiny. It is coercive politics dressed up as constitutional virtue. Its political blackmail

Australia learned this lesson painfully in 1975.

During the constitutional crisis engineered by Malcolm Fraser and Senate leader Reg Withers, the Coalition blocked supply to the elected government of Gough Whitlam despite Labor retaining a majority in the House of Representatives. Withers famously declared that the Senate possessed its own democratic mandate — a claim technically defensible perhaps, but politically catastrophic.

The result was paralysis, institutional breakdown, and one of the most divisive moments in Australian political history.
Now, five decades later, echoes of that same mentality are resurfacing from the One Nation party and particularly from Barnaby Joyce .

Joyce’s remarks suggest a vision in which One Nation does not necessarily seek to govern from the House of Representatives but instead seeks power without responsibility by governing from the Senate chamber. The objective is obvious: use proportional representation to secure enough Upper House seats to dictate terms to whichever major party forms government.

Whether the government of the day is Labor or Liberal would almost become secondary. The real contest would be over who could satisfy the demands of a populist balance-of-power bloc capable of threatening legislative deadlock at every turn.

That is not democratic renewal.

It is parliamentary ransom.

There is nothing illegitimate about minor parties winning Senate seats. The Senate exists precisely to review legislation and represent diverse political voices. But there is a profound difference between review and veto politics, between scrutiny and sabotage.

The danger lies not in One Nation participating in democracy, but in openly aspiring to become a permanent political gatekeeper capable of extracting concessions under threat of obstruction and political bloody mindedness.
Australians do not elect governments expecting them to queue outside Pauline Hanson’s office seeking permission to govern.

Nor do Australians want a system where national budgets, economic policy, or urgent reforms are contingent upon satisfying the demands of ideological holdouts chasing nostalgia for a vanished Australia that never truly existed in the first place.

The romanticism that fuels sections of One Nation’s movement — the longing for an imagined simpler past, the politics of grievance, the constant rhetoric of betrayal by elites — may energise a passionate political base. But nostalgia is not a governing philosophy.

And perpetual obstruction is not statesmanship.

One Nation’s recent victory in Farrer has understandably emboldened the party. Yet a single Lower House breakthrough should not be mistaken for a national endorsement of Senate brinkmanship. Most Australians remain pragmatic voters. They want stability, functioning institutions, and governments capable of governing.

They do not want another constitutional crisis.

They do not want government supply weaponised.

And they do not want Parliament transformed into a permanent hostage negotiation between major governments and minor parties seeking disproportionate influence.

The Senate is a house of review — not a shadow executive, not an ideological checkpoint, and certainly not a platform for political blackmail.

Barnaby Joyce may see a glorious future in Senate leverage politics. But Australians remember what happens when parliamentary gamesmanship overtakes democratic responsibility.

The country paid a heavy price once before.

It should not be asked to pay it again.

National Herald

I’‘ve been hoping that his alcohol habit would have killed him off by now.

Bogsnorkler said:

National Herald

Barnaby Joyce’s Senate Fantasy Risks Reopening Australia’s Darkest Constitutional Chapter
Australia has seen this movie before, and it did not end well.

When former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce openly declares that One Nation should become primarily a “Senate party,” Australians should hear the warning bells ringing across Parliament House.

Joyce’s reported ambition to run for the Senate in New South Wales in 2028 under the One Nation banner is not merely another act in the long-running theatre of populist politics. It is part of a deeper and more troubling strategy: the deliberate pursuit of balance-of-power leverage in the Senate, where a minor party can hold governments hostage without ever winning a national mandate.

The language may sound procedural and respectable — “review,” “accountability,” “confidence and supply” — but the political logic behind it is unmistakable. A Senate bloc wielding the power to obstruct budgets, stall legislation, and threaten governments unless demands are met is not healthy parliamentary scrutiny. It is coercive politics dressed up as constitutional virtue. Its political blackmail

Australia learned this lesson painfully in 1975.

During the constitutional crisis engineered by Malcolm Fraser and Senate leader Reg Withers, the Coalition blocked supply to the elected government of Gough Whitlam despite Labor retaining a majority in the House of Representatives. Withers famously declared that the Senate possessed its own democratic mandate — a claim technically defensible perhaps, but politically catastrophic.

The result was paralysis, institutional breakdown, and one of the most divisive moments in Australian political history.
Now, five decades later, echoes of that same mentality are resurfacing from the One Nation party and particularly from Barnaby Joyce .

Joyce’s remarks suggest a vision in which One Nation does not necessarily seek to govern from the House of Representatives but instead seeks power without responsibility by governing from the Senate chamber. The objective is obvious: use proportional representation to secure enough Upper House seats to dictate terms to whichever major party forms government.

Whether the government of the day is Labor or Liberal would almost become secondary. The real contest would be over who could satisfy the demands of a populist balance-of-power bloc capable of threatening legislative deadlock at every turn.

That is not democratic renewal.

It is parliamentary ransom.

There is nothing illegitimate about minor parties winning Senate seats. The Senate exists precisely to review legislation and represent diverse political voices. But there is a profound difference between review and veto politics, between scrutiny and sabotage.

The danger lies not in One Nation participating in democracy, but in openly aspiring to become a permanent political gatekeeper capable of extracting concessions under threat of obstruction and political bloody mindedness.
Australians do not elect governments expecting them to queue outside Pauline Hanson’s office seeking permission to govern.

Nor do Australians want a system where national budgets, economic policy, or urgent reforms are contingent upon satisfying the demands of ideological holdouts chasing nostalgia for a vanished Australia that never truly existed in the first place.

The romanticism that fuels sections of One Nation’s movement — the longing for an imagined simpler past, the politics of grievance, the constant rhetoric of betrayal by elites — may energise a passionate political base. But nostalgia is not a governing philosophy.

And perpetual obstruction is not statesmanship.

One Nation’s recent victory in Farrer has understandably emboldened the party. Yet a single Lower House breakthrough should not be mistaken for a national endorsement of Senate brinkmanship. Most Australians remain pragmatic voters. They want stability, functioning institutions, and governments capable of governing.

They do not want another constitutional crisis.

They do not want government supply weaponised.

And they do not want Parliament transformed into a permanent hostage negotiation between major governments and minor parties seeking disproportionate influence.

The Senate is a house of review — not a shadow executive, not an ideological checkpoint, and certainly not a platform for political blackmail.

Barnaby Joyce may see a glorious future in Senate leverage politics. But Australians remember what happens when parliamentary gamesmanship overtakes democratic responsibility.

The country paid a heavy price once before.

It should not be asked to pay it again.

National Herald

Fair comment.

roughbarked said:

Bogsnorkler said:

National Herald

Barnaby Joyce’s Senate Fantasy Risks Reopening Australia’s Darkest Constitutional Chapter
Australia has seen this movie before, and it did not end well.

When former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce openly declares that One Nation should become primarily a “Senate party,” Australians should hear the warning bells ringing across Parliament House.

Joyce’s reported ambition to run for the Senate in New South Wales in 2028 under the One Nation banner is not merely another act in the long-running theatre of populist politics. It is part of a deeper and more troubling strategy: the deliberate pursuit of balance-of-power leverage in the Senate, where a minor party can hold governments hostage without ever winning a national mandate.

The language may sound procedural and respectable — “review,” “accountability,” “confidence and supply” — but the political logic behind it is unmistakable. A Senate bloc wielding the power to obstruct budgets, stall legislation, and threaten governments unless demands are met is not healthy parliamentary scrutiny. It is coercive politics dressed up as constitutional virtue. Its political blackmail

Australia learned this lesson painfully in 1975.

During the constitutional crisis engineered by Malcolm Fraser and Senate leader Reg Withers, the Coalition blocked supply to the elected government of Gough Whitlam despite Labor retaining a majority in the House of Representatives. Withers famously declared that the Senate possessed its own democratic mandate — a claim technically defensible perhaps, but politically catastrophic.

The result was paralysis, institutional breakdown, and one of the most divisive moments in Australian political history.
Now, five decades later, echoes of that same mentality are resurfacing from the One Nation party and particularly from Barnaby Joyce .

Joyce’s remarks suggest a vision in which One Nation does not necessarily seek to govern from the House of Representatives but instead seeks power without responsibility by governing from the Senate chamber. The objective is obvious: use proportional representation to secure enough Upper House seats to dictate terms to whichever major party forms government.

Whether the government of the day is Labor or Liberal would almost become secondary. The real contest would be over who could satisfy the demands of a populist balance-of-power bloc capable of threatening legislative deadlock at every turn.

That is not democratic renewal.

It is parliamentary ransom.

There is nothing illegitimate about minor parties winning Senate seats. The Senate exists precisely to review legislation and represent diverse political voices. But there is a profound difference between review and veto politics, between scrutiny and sabotage.

The danger lies not in One Nation participating in democracy, but in openly aspiring to become a permanent political gatekeeper capable of extracting concessions under threat of obstruction and political bloody mindedness.
Australians do not elect governments expecting them to queue outside Pauline Hanson’s office seeking permission to govern.

Nor do Australians want a system where national budgets, economic policy, or urgent reforms are contingent upon satisfying the demands of ideological holdouts chasing nostalgia for a vanished Australia that never truly existed in the first place.

The romanticism that fuels sections of One Nation’s movement — the longing for an imagined simpler past, the politics of grievance, the constant rhetoric of betrayal by elites — may energise a passionate political base. But nostalgia is not a governing philosophy.

And perpetual obstruction is not statesmanship.

One Nation’s recent victory in Farrer has understandably emboldened the party. Yet a single Lower House breakthrough should not be mistaken for a national endorsement of Senate brinkmanship. Most Australians remain pragmatic voters. They want stability, functioning institutions, and governments capable of governing.

They do not want another constitutional crisis.

They do not want government supply weaponised.

And they do not want Parliament transformed into a permanent hostage negotiation between major governments and minor parties seeking disproportionate influence.

The Senate is a house of review — not a shadow executive, not an ideological checkpoint, and certainly not a platform for political blackmail.

Barnaby Joyce may see a glorious future in Senate leverage politics. But Australians remember what happens when parliamentary gamesmanship overtakes democratic responsibility.

The country paid a heavy price once before.

It should not be asked to pay it again.

National Herald

I’‘ve been hoping that his alcohol habit would have killed him off by now.

It’s a dark and dreary night
Seems like nothing’s going right
Won’t you tell me honey
How can I go on here without you?

Yes I’m down and feeling blue
And I don’t know what to do, oh-oh
Ring, ring, why don’t you give me a call?
Ring, ring, the happiest sound of them all

After failing to catch anyone by surprise with the budget, Anthony Albanese had another trick up his sleeve.

The prime minister stepped into the courtyard on Thursday with an unlikely new friend by his side: Tasmanian senator Tammy Tyrrell, adding another defector to Labor’s ranks.

“People across Tasmania know her as a fighter,” Albanese said. Tyrrell made no apologies for trading the crossbench for a place in the good ship government, declaring she was “proud to be a Labor girl”.

Tyrrell was elected to parliament in 2022 under the Jacqui Lambie Network banner, vanquishing long-time Liberal Eric Abetz. Before her election, she was Lambie’s office manager. The pair were a team, she said, until they had a falling out two years ago and she left for the crossbench.

The Nationals approached her last year. At the time, she said jumping into a party relationship would compromise her ability to “stay true to moral compass”.

“I’d rather just stay as a single divorcee over here,” she’d told The Australian.

roughbarked said:

After failing to catch anyone by surprise with the budget, Anthony Albanese had another trick up his sleeve.

The prime minister stepped into the courtyard on Thursday with an unlikely new friend by his side: Tasmanian senator Tammy Tyrrell, adding another defector to Labor’s ranks.

“People across Tasmania know her as a fighter,” Albanese said. Tyrrell made no apologies for trading the crossbench for a place in the good ship government, declaring she was “proud to be a Labor girl”.

Tyrrell was elected to parliament in 2022 under the Jacqui Lambie Network banner, vanquishing long-time Liberal Eric Abetz. Before her election, she was Lambie’s office manager. The pair were a team, she said, until they had a falling out two years ago and she left for the crossbench.

The Nationals approached her last year. At the time, she said jumping into a party relationship would compromise her ability to “stay true to moral compass”.

“I’d rather just stay as a single divorcee over here,” she’d told The Australian.

Welcome back to your weekly federal politics update, where Courtney Gould gets you up to speed on the happenings from Parliament House

Bogsnorkler said:

National Herald

Barnaby Joyce’s Senate Fantasy Risks Reopening Australia’s Darkest Constitutional Chapter
Australia has seen this movie before, and it did not end well.

When former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce openly declares that One Nation should become primarily a “Senate party,” Australians should hear the warning bells ringing across Parliament House.

Joyce’s reported ambition to run for the Senate in New South Wales in 2028 under the One Nation banner is not merely another act in the long-running theatre of populist politics. It is part of a deeper and more troubling strategy: the deliberate pursuit of balance-of-power leverage in the Senate, where a minor party can hold governments hostage without ever winning a national mandate.

The language may sound procedural and respectable — “review,” “accountability,” “confidence and supply” — but the political logic behind it is unmistakable. A Senate bloc wielding the power to obstruct budgets, stall legislation, and threaten governments unless demands are met is not healthy parliamentary scrutiny. It is coercive politics dressed up as constitutional virtue. Its political blackmail

Australia learned this lesson painfully in 1975.

During the constitutional crisis engineered by Malcolm Fraser and Senate leader Reg Withers, the Coalition blocked supply to the elected government of Gough Whitlam despite Labor retaining a majority in the House of Representatives. Withers famously declared that the Senate possessed its own democratic mandate — a claim technically defensible perhaps, but politically catastrophic.

The result was paralysis, institutional breakdown, and one of the most divisive moments in Australian political history.
Now, five decades later, echoes of that same mentality are resurfacing from the One Nation party and particularly from Barnaby Joyce .

Joyce’s remarks suggest a vision in which One Nation does not necessarily seek to govern from the House of Representatives but instead seeks power without responsibility by governing from the Senate chamber. The objective is obvious: use proportional representation to secure enough Upper House seats to dictate terms to whichever major party forms government.

Whether the government of the day is Labor or Liberal would almost become secondary. The real contest would be over who could satisfy the demands of a populist balance-of-power bloc capable of threatening legislative deadlock at every turn.

That is not democratic renewal.

It is parliamentary ransom.

There is nothing illegitimate about minor parties winning Senate seats. The Senate exists precisely to review legislation and represent diverse political voices. But there is a profound difference between review and veto politics, between scrutiny and sabotage.

The danger lies not in One Nation participating in democracy, but in openly aspiring to become a permanent political gatekeeper capable of extracting concessions under threat of obstruction and political bloody mindedness.
Australians do not elect governments expecting them to queue outside Pauline Hanson’s office seeking permission to govern.

Nor do Australians want a system where national budgets, economic policy, or urgent reforms are contingent upon satisfying the demands of ideological holdouts chasing nostalgia for a vanished Australia that never truly existed in the first place.

The romanticism that fuels sections of One Nation’s movement — the longing for an imagined simpler past, the politics of grievance, the constant rhetoric of betrayal by elites — may energise a passionate political base. But nostalgia is not a governing philosophy.

And perpetual obstruction is not statesmanship.

One Nation’s recent victory in Farrer has understandably emboldened the party. Yet a single Lower House breakthrough should not be mistaken for a national endorsement of Senate brinkmanship. Most Australians remain pragmatic voters. They want stability, functioning institutions, and governments capable of governing.

They do not want another constitutional crisis.

They do not want government supply weaponised.

And they do not want Parliament transformed into a permanent hostage negotiation between major governments and minor parties seeking disproportionate influence.

The Senate is a house of review — not a shadow executive, not an ideological checkpoint, and certainly not a platform for political blackmail.

Barnaby Joyce may see a glorious future in Senate leverage politics. But Australians remember what happens when parliamentary gamesmanship overtakes democratic responsibility.

The country paid a heavy price once before.

It should not be asked to pay it again.

National Herald

I’m not sure I entirely agree with this assessment – I mean ON is a legitimate political party, just like The Greens and the Australian Democrats before them. Any party wanting to govern will have to do so through consensus – it’s not rocket science.

diddly-squat said:

I’m not sure I entirely agree with this assessment – I mean ON is a legitimate political party, just like The Greens and the Australian Democrats before them. Any party wanting to govern will have to do so through consensus – it’s not rocket science.

To be honest, ONP should well be aiming to be the opposition party.

more teams

My suggestion for Barnaby Joyce, is put it in a cannon and fire into the sun.

I thought Angus Taylor’s budget speech in reply was terrific.

Peak Warming Man said:

I thought Angus Taylor’s budget speech in reply was terrific.

You might have been the only one watching

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I thought Angus Taylor’s budget speech in reply was terrific.

You might have been the only one watching

:)))

ruby said:

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I thought Angus Taylor’s budget speech in reply was terrific.

You might have been the only one watching

:)))

I’m watching the footy here :)

Peak Warming Man said:

I thought Angus Taylor’s budget speech in reply was terrific.

Who?

Kingy said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I thought Angus Taylor’s budget speech in reply was terrific.

Who?

Apparently he is the leader of some minor political party which managed to get a few seats in parliament.

The Rev Dodgson said:

Kingy said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I thought Angus Taylor’s budget speech in reply was terrific.

Who?

Apparently he is the leader of some minor political party which managed to get a few seats in parliament.

Oh, OK, is he one of the right wing dickheads in the One Neuron Party?

The Rev Dodgson said:

Kingy said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I thought Angus Taylor’s budget speech in reply was terrific.

Who?

Apparently he is the leader of some minor political party which managed to get a few seats in parliament.

chuckle
It’s funny cos it’s true….

ruby said:

party_pants said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I thought Angus Taylor’s budget speech in reply was terrific.

You might have been the only one watching

:)))

Well we weren’t. We watched a couple of episodes of Elementary. Because the first one seemed unfinished. But apparently we aren’t to know how the computer answered his question. (The episode was called “Bella” about an AI computer)

party_pants said:

I’m watching the footy here :)

I’m nunfa in me footy tips. :(

Kingy said:

Peak Warming Man said:

I thought Angus Taylor’s budget speech in reply was terrific.

Who?

Maccas named a burger after him.

ruby said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

Kingy said:

Who?

Apparently he is the leader of some minor political party which managed to get a few seats in parliament.

chuckle
It’s funny cos it’s true….

WIll be even more truer after the next election.

Woodie said:

party_pants said:

I’m watching the footy here :)

I’m nunfa in me footy tips. :(

I’m one-fa, but nowhere near the margin.

Census year, so that’s fun. Be interested to see the religion stats.

I’m old enough to remember the 1990s when people were saying that the pentecostals like Assembly of God (now called ACC) were fast growing and would overtake the mainline denominations.

They are still at around 1% of the population.

Catholics make up about half of Christians in Australia now.

dv said:

Census year, so that’s fun. Be interested to see the religion stats.

I’m old enough to remember the 1990s when people were saying that the pentecostals like Assembly of God (now called ACC) were fast growing and would overtake the mainline denominations.

They are still at around 1% of the population.

Catholics make up about half of Christians in Australia now.

Most of those Catholics are nominal Catholics. Based on the churches own figures only around 15% of those numbers turn u[ regularly to mass or participate in their local church community. The same goes for those that say Anglican.

party_pants said:

dv said:

Census year, so that’s fun. Be interested to see the religion stats.

I’m old enough to remember the 1990s when people were saying that the pentecostals like Assembly of God (now called ACC) were fast growing and would overtake the mainline denominations.

They are still at around 1% of the population.

Catholics make up about half of Christians in Australia now.

Most of those Catholics are nominal Catholics. Based on the churches own figures only around 15% of those numbers turn u

It’s more an identifier of what you’re not.

Nominally, i could say that i’m RC, but if i was to try to enter a RC church these days, i’d probably be struck down by lightning at the threshold.

By saying ‘i’m RC’, i’d really be saying i’m not Protestant, not Muslim, not Buddhist, not Eastern Orthodox, not Shinto, etc. etc. etc.

I’m not really RC, either, but i’m maybe slightly less not-RC than i am not-any of the others.

party_pants said:

dv said:

Census year, so that’s fun. Be interested to see the religion stats.

I’m old enough to remember the 1990s when people were saying that the pentecostals like Assembly of God (now called ACC) were fast growing and would overtake the mainline denominations.

They are still at around 1% of the population.

Catholics make up about half of Christians in Australia now.

Most of those Catholics are nominal Catholics. Based on the church’s own figures only around 15% of those numbers turn up regularly to mass or participate in their local church community. The same goes for those that say Anglican.

corrected for spelling

party_pants said:

dv said:

Census year, so that’s fun. Be interested to see the religion stats.

I’m old enough to remember the 1990s when people were saying that the pentecostals like Assembly of God (now called ACC) were fast growing and would overtake the mainline denominations.

They are still at around 1% of the population.

Catholics make up about half of Christians in Australia now.

Most of those Catholics are nominal Catholics. Based on the churches own figures only around 15% of those numbers turn u

Lip service Christians

apologies for stuffing up the formatting

party_pants said:

apologies for stuffing up the formatting

S’ok.

You good kid.

party_pants said:

apologies for stuffing up the formatting

I remember Baby’s First Census. We had to list her occupation, her marital status, and whether she required help feeding and dressing herself.

24 Does the person ever need someone to help with, or be with them for, self-care activities?• For example: doing everyday activities such as eating, showering, dressing or toileting.

25 Does the person ever need someone to help with, or be with them for, body movement activities?• For example: getting out of bed, moving around at home or at places away from home.

26 Does the person ever need someone to help with, or be with them for, communication activities?• For example: understanding, or being understood by, others

captain_spalding said:

party_pants said:

dv said:

Census year, so that’s fun. Be interested to see the religion stats.

I’m old enough to remember the 1990s when people were saying that the pentecostals like Assembly of God (now called ACC) were fast growing and would overtake the mainline denominations.

They are still at around 1% of the population.

Catholics make up about half of Christians in Australia now.

Most of those Catholics are nominal Catholics. Based on the churches own figures only around 15% of those numbers turn u

It’s more an identifier of what you’re not.

Nominally, i could say that i’m RC, but if i was to try to enter a RC church these days, i’d probably be struck down by lightning at the threshold.

By saying ‘i’m RC’, i’d really be saying i’m not Protestant, not Muslim, not Buddhist, not Eastern Orthodox, not Shinto, etc. etc. etc.

I’m not really RC, either, but i’m maybe slightly less not-RC than i am not-any of the others.

Baptized RC was sent to catholic shools. Am not a practicing catholic. No longer put RC on census forms.

Looking through records, I can see my Opa was staying with us on census night in 1981. My sister wouldn’t have been born yet.

Cymek said:

party_pants said:

dv said:

Census year, so that’s fun. Be interested to see the religion stats.

I’m old enough to remember the 1990s when people were saying that the pentecostals like Assembly of God (now called ACC) were fast growing and would overtake the mainline denominations.

They are still at around 1% of the population.

Catholics make up about half of Christians in Australia now.

Most of those Catholics are nominal Catholics. Based on the churches own figures only around 15% of those numbers turn u

Lip service Christians

As my father said of them, “They appear at church on Sundays for show, walk out spit on the street and go back to their own ways”.

party_pants said:

dv said:

Census year, so that’s fun. Be interested to see the religion stats.

I’m old enough to remember the 1990s when people were saying that the pentecostals like Assembly of God (now called ACC) were fast growing and would overtake the mainline denominations.

They are still at around 1% of the population.

Catholics make up about half of Christians in Australia now.

Most of those Catholics are nominal Catholics. Based on the churches own figures only around 15% of those numbers turn u

maybe that’s why the catholic church is struggling financially.. .. . … . . .

According to the ABS, 122,494 people were experiencing homelessness on the last census night. Let’s see how that has changed in the past five years.

I don’t expect sovcits fill out government forms such as the census.

what the hell p_p??

Oh goody! My first Census in Australia for ages! The 2006 Census was my last one.

Arts said:

what the hell p_p??

I have clumsy fingers. The P and the square bracket buttons are right next to each other on the laptop keyboard. I don’t always proof read.

party_pants said:

Arts said:

what the hell p_p??

I have clumsy fingers. The P and the square bracket buttons are right next to each other on the laptop keyboard. I don’t always proof read.

Why aren’t you at work, Mr p_p?

kii said:

party_pants said:

Arts said:

what the hell p_p??

I have clumsy fingers. The P and the square bracket buttons are right next to each other on the laptop keyboard. I don’t always proof read.

Why aren’t you at work, Mr p_p?

Why aren’t you paying attention?

Divine Angel said:

According to the ABS, 122,494 people were experiencing homelessness on the last census night. Let’s see how that has changed in the past five years.

I don’t expect sovcits fill out government forms such as the census.

Higher I imagine

kii said:

party_pants said:

Arts said:

what the hell p_p??

I have clumsy fingers. The P and the square bracket buttons are right next to each other on the laptop keyboard. I don’t always proof read.

Why aren’t you at work, Mr p_p?

I don’t work on Fridays any more. We do a four day week working longer days and take Friday off.

party_pants said:

kii said:

party_pants said:

I have clumsy fingers. The P and the square bracket buttons are right next to each other on the laptop keyboard. I don’t always proof read.

Why aren’t you at work, Mr p_p?

I don’t work on Fridays any more. We do a four day week working longer days and take Friday off.

That sounds like a good plan

Cymek said:

party_pants said:

kii said:

Why aren’t you at work, Mr p_p?

I don’t work on Fridays any more. We do a four day week working longer days and take Friday off.

That sounds like a good plan

It is top notch. A long weekend every weekend.

Witty Rejoinder said:

kii said:

party_pants said:

I have clumsy fingers. The P and the square bracket buttons are right next to each other on the laptop keyboard. I don’t always proof read.

Why aren’t you at work, Mr p_p?

Why aren’t you paying attention?

Now what have I done wrong, according to your rules?

party_pants said:

kii said:

party_pants said:

I have clumsy fingers. The P and the square bracket buttons are right next to each other on the laptop keyboard. I don’t always proof read.

Why aren’t you at work, Mr p_p?

I don’t work on Fridays any more. We do a four day week working longer days and take Friday off.

Thanks, Mr p_p.
So, you’re in here causing trouble with the p key and the [ key and stuff?

roughbarked said:

As my father said of them, “They appear at church on Sundays for show, walk out spit on the street and go back to their own ways”.

aka sunday christians

Cymek said:

party_pants said:

kii said:

Why aren’t you at work, Mr p_p?

I don’t work on Fridays any more. We do a four day week working longer days and take Friday off.

That sounds like a good plan

I tried that many, many years ago. Even though I was young at the time, the later patients in the day were definitely not getting the best version of me. I think only did it for a month or so.

kii said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

kii said:

Why aren’t you at work, Mr p_p?

Why aren’t you paying attention?

Now what have I done wrong, according to your rules?

This might be in the quiz.

buffy said:

Cymek said:

party_pants said:

I don’t work on Fridays any more. We do a four day week working longer days and take Friday off.

That sounds like a good plan

I tried that many, many years ago. Even though I was young at the time, the later patients in the day were definitely not getting the best version of me. I think only did it for a month or so.

I used to take Fridays off.

Still turned up at work, but didn’t do anything.

party_pants said:

kii said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Why aren’t you paying attention?

Now what have I done wrong, according to your rules?

This might be in the quiz.

Quiz? Another quiz? I got 6/10 for the weekly ABC one. What else do I need to study for?

I’m already caught up in the daily Wordle thing. I’m trying to beat btm and dv’s daily attempts – their use of the “thane and pious” method confuddles me. I’m using my tried and true method of psychic interpretation.

kii said:

party_pants said:

kii said:

Now what have I done wrong, according to your rules?

This might be in the quiz.

Quiz? Another quiz? I got 6/10 for the weekly ABC one. What else do I need to study for?

I’m already caught up in the daily Wordle thing. I’m trying to beat btm and dv’s daily attempts – their use of the “thane and pious” method confuddles me. I’m using my tried and true method of psychic interpretation.

The federal government wants to use AI to speed up drug and housing approvals. Can we trust it?

roughbarked said:

The federal government wants to use AI to speed up drug and housing approvals. Can we trust it?

No.

Can’t trust AI (yet) to make the right decisions.
Can’t trust any foreign owned tech company doing the AI, whether Chinese or American. They are a long term security vulnerability if they become too deeply embedded in the day-to-day operations of the government.

More than 20 years into the political career of Nick Adams, I do no know whether he is sincere about anything or this whole thing has been a joke.

He went to an expensive private school so it might not be surprising if he really were conservative. At the age of 21 he became deputy mayor of Ashfield, a municipality in Sydney’s inner west. This might have been an auspicious start to a political career, but he scarcely attended council meetings because he was often on the road trying to launch a motivational speaking career. When he did show up it was often with some dumb idea to keep his name in the local papers, like his proposal to somehow ban pigeons from the municipality. He engaged in a bit of lowkey fraud: nothing over the top, just inappropriate use of council funds for private purposes. He also engaged in a bit of lowkey racist dogwhistling: again, nothing too over the top.

He moved to the US and by 2015 had found a niche in tea-partyish rightwing circles. Turning Point USA published his screeds. His book Retaking America did okay and he got noticed by the newly elected President Trump. In DJT’s first term he appointed Adams to the board of the Wilson Center. In his second, he made him US ambassador to Malaysia, and then invented a new envoy position for him, “Special Presidential Envoy for American Tourism, Exceptionalism, and Values”.

This seems like a normal kind of arc for a conservative influencer, but sometimes he says things that are just so daft that you’d think he must be taking the piss. The primo example was when he posted “If you have to say you’re an alpha male, you aren’t an alpha male”, on his X account which was named Nick Adams (Alpha Male).

If he is serious, then wth? If this really is a joke, then it’s the most glorious joke ever performed, taking him all the way to an outer cabinet position in the US of A.

dv said:

More than 20 years into the political career of Nick Adams, I do no know whether he is sincere about anything or this whole thing has been a joke.

He went to an expensive private school so it might not be surprising if he really were conservative. At the age of 21 he became deputy mayor of Ashfield, a municipality in Sydney’s inner west. This might have been an auspicious start to a political career, but he scarcely attended council meetings because he was often on the road trying to launch a motivational speaking career. When he did show up it was often with some dumb idea to keep his name in the local papers, like his proposal to somehow ban pigeons from the municipality. He engaged in a bit of lowkey fraud: nothing over the top, just inappropriate use of council funds for private purposes. He also engaged in a bit of lowkey racist dogwhistling: again, nothing too over the top.

He moved to the US and by 2015 had found a niche in tea-partyish rightwing circles. Turning Point USA published his screeds. His book Retaking America did okay and he got noticed by the newly elected President Trump. In DJT’s first term he appointed Adams to the board of the Wilson Center. In his second, he made him US ambassador to Malaysia, and then invented a new envoy position for him, “Special Presidential Envoy for American Tourism, Exceptionalism, and Values”.

This seems like a normal kind of arc for a conservative influencer, but sometimes he says things that are just so daft that you’d think he must be taking the piss. The primo example was when he posted “If you have to say you’re an alpha male, you aren’t an alpha male”, on his X account which was named Nick Adams (Alpha Male).

If he is serious, then wth? If this really is a joke, then it’s the most glorious joke ever performed, taking him all the way to an outer cabinet position in the US of A.

maybe his account was hacked

Premier Jacinta Allan said the government had always supported a pay rise for educators.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-15/victorian-government-settles-teacher-wages-dispute/106684434

Gosh Helen Dalton. You are one who wants to own the water and yet you are skipping over the fact that you can make a lot of money from mud and none from dust. Who would complain about free water?

The festival of by elections comes today, with Stafford in Qld. Probably a foregone conclusion that this seat will remain with Labor but we might glean something from the swing.

Now having six members of the full parliament, One Nation is the fourth biggest party.

Without looking it up, what is the name of the deputy leader?

dv said:

Now having six members of the full parliament, One Nation is the fourth biggest party.

Without looking it up, what is the name of the deputy leader?

Is it Barnaby?

party_pants said:

dv said:

Now having six members of the full parliament, One Nation is the fourth biggest party.

Without looking it up, what is the name of the deputy leader?

Is it Barnaby?

trick question, they do not have one

dv said:

party_pants said:

dv said:

Now having six members of the full parliament, One Nation is the fourth biggest party.

Without looking it up, what is the name of the deputy leader?

Is it Barnaby?

trick question, they do not have one

That makes sense somehow. Don’t want anyone else being the mouthpiece for the party.

dv said:

Now having six members of the full parliament, One Nation is the fourth biggest party.

Without looking it up, what is the name of the deputy leader?

Barnaby Joyce? I have no idea!

dv said:

The festival of by elections comes today, with Stafford in Qld. Probably a foregone conclusion that this seat will remain with Labor but we might glean something from the swing.

Pollbludger.net is also projecting an ALP win 50.7 – 49.3 but o matter how you slice it it’s a great day at the office for the LNP.

A 6% swing towards the sitting government is a strong endorserment.

ALP might get over the line here but I doubt there’ll be much champagne flowing.

dv said:

dv said:

The festival of by elections comes today, with Stafford in Qld. Probably a foregone conclusion that this seat will remain with Labor but we might glean something from the swing.

Pollbludger.net is also projecting an ALP win 50.7 – 49.3 but o matter how you slice it it’s a great day at the office for the LNP.

A 6% swing towards the sitting government is a strong endorserment.

ALP might get over the line here but I doubt there’ll be much champagne flowing.

That one slipped under the radar.

So what do you think about this bracket creep thing?

I think the Labs should say, yeah, good idea, we’ll do that at the next budget.

Including the rate increases required to maintain the budget balance.

The Rev Dodgson said:

So what do you think about this bracket creep thing?

I think the Labs should say, yeah, good idea, we’ll do that at the next budget.

Including the rate increases required to maintain the budget balance.

we thought bracket drift was a feature not a bug

SCIENCE said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

So what do you think about this bracket creep thing?

I think the Labs should say, yeah, good idea, we’ll do that at the next budget.

Including the rate increases required to maintain the budget balance.

we thought bracket drift was a feature not a bug

Angus Taylor’s plan to index tax brackets to inflation could cost $35 billion in the first four years, higher than the $23 billion figure the Coalition has been using, and would cost the budget $44 billion every year by the end of the decade.

The opposition leader unveiled a plan yesterday to eliminate “bracket creep”, the feature of Australia’s income tax system that causes taxpayers to pay more over time because tax brackets are not adjusted for inflation.

Mr Taylor initially distanced himself from a $22.5 billion cost over four years in an interview on the ABC’s 7.30 after his budget reply speech. But the figure was offered by deputy Liberal leader Jane Hume on ABC Radio National, who said the policy had been “fully costed”.
Finally, a tax fight that actually means something
Angus Taylor and Anthony Albanese in a composite image. Both are in suits

Labor and the Liberals are offering imperfect but undeniably bold alternative visions for the tax system. It’s nice to have something to talk about.

Today, Mr Taylor told the ABC’s AM it was “over $20 billion” in the first four years, and framing this amount as the “sneaky” extra tax Labor was imposing on taxpayers by allowing bracket creep to run unchecked.

“Labor is proposing to raise taxes by over $20 billion over four years, and we will give that back. We will prevent those taxes from going up,” he said.

He also conceded the Coalition would need to find spending cuts to match the more than $20 billion cost to the budget, saying he had identified “significant savings” already from “waste” but declining to say whether they would fully offset his proposal.

But the ABC has confirmed the likely amount the Coalition would need to offset over the first four years of its policy, which would start if elected in 2028-29, is $35.3 billion, more than 50 per cent higher.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-15/coalition-tax-plan-could-cost-more-than-suggested/106685090

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

So what do you think about this bracket creep thing?

I think the Labs should say, yeah, good idea, we’ll do that at the next budget.

Including the rate increases required to maintain the budget balance.

we thought bracket drift was a feature not a bug

The opposition leader unveiled a plan yesterday to eliminate “bracket creep”, the feature of Australia’s income tax system that causes taxpayers to pay more over time because tax brackets are not adjusted for inflation. Labor and the Liberals are offering imperfect but undeniably bold alternative visions for the tax system. It’s nice to have something to talk about.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-15/coalition-tax-plan-could-cost-more-than-suggested/106685090

good

roughbarked said:

He also conceded the Coalition would need to find spending cuts to match the more than $20 billion cost to the budget, saying he had identified “significant savings” already from “waste” but declining to say whether they would fully offset his proposal.

The devils hides in the detail here.

I am suspicious of any party that says it can fund its promises by cutting waste without cutting services. I just don’t think that waste exists to such an extreme extent in the general civil service.

Department of Defence however, is a different story, but you can’t cut waste from them without being accused of endangering the country. No party would ever reform the Defence bureaucracy.

party_pants said:

roughbarked said:

He also conceded the Coalition would need to find spending cuts to match the more than $20 billion cost to the budget, saying he had identified “significant savings” already from “waste” but declining to say whether they would fully offset his proposal.

The devils hides in the detail here.

I am suspicious of any party that says it can fund its promises by cutting waste without cutting services. I just don’t think that waste exists to such an extreme extent in the general civil service.

Sounds like DOGE.

Divine Angel said:

party_pants said:

roughbarked said:

He also conceded the Coalition would need to find spending cuts to match the more than $20 billion cost to the budget, saying he had identified “significant savings” already from “waste” but declining to say whether they would fully offset his proposal.

The devils hides in the detail here.

I am suspicious of any party that says it can fund its promises by cutting waste without cutting services. I just don’t think that waste exists to such an extreme extent in the general civil service.

Sounds like DOGE.

A bit. I think it’s a myth. But a common one.

I am however, very much against the idea of replacing humans with AI. Especially if that AI is based or controlled overseas. Right now the only options are the US or China for AI. I don’t want us to get involved with China, and I don’t see the US as being reliable over the long term. So unless we build and manage our own data centres here in Australia I am against widespread adoption of AI for government services.

party_pants said:

Divine Angel said:

party_pants said:

The devils hides in the detail here.

I am suspicious of any party that says it can fund its promises by cutting waste without cutting services. I just don’t think that waste exists to such an extreme extent in the general civil service.

Sounds like DOGE.

A bit. I think it’s a myth. But a common one.

I am however, very much against the idea of replacing humans with AI. Especially if that AI is based or controlled overseas. Right now the only options are the US or China for AI. I don’t want us to get involved with China, and I don’t see the US as being reliable over the long term. So unless we build and manage our own data centres here in Australia I am against widespread adoption of AI for government services.

AI psychosis is on the rise and experts are sounding the alarm

Seven years since Bob Hawke died.

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

Divine Angel said:

Sounds like DOGE.

A bit. I think it’s a myth. But a common one.

I am however, very much against the idea of replacing humans with AI. Especially if that AI is based or controlled overseas. Right now the only options are the US or China for AI. I don’t want us to get involved with China, and I don’t see the US as being reliable over the long term. So unless we build and manage our own data centres here in Australia I am against widespread adoption of AI for government services.

AI psychosis is on the rise and experts are sounding the alarm

“Whether chatbots are causing these delusions remains to be seen”

I don’t think there’s any doubt AI chatbots are exacerbating mental health conditions. Before AI, these conditions manifested differently. AI responds with what it thinks you want to hear, and there’s certainly platforms which don’t keep track of your chat history in the way ChatGPT does.

I’ve mentioned here before, a classmate of Mini Me lost his mum to cancer three years ago. His dad coded his own AI chatbot, named it after his deceased wife, and it responds in the same manner his wife would to whatever he says. Or rather, responds to what he would want her to say. Since the last time I spoke to him at a birthday party a couple of years ago, he’s made a second AI wife, with his deceased wife’s middle name. The kid now says he has two robot mothers :/ Apparently he spends all his time chatting to these bots, as well as making AI generated music which he releases on YouTube.

kii said:

Seven years since Bob Hawke died.

There was no increase in sentimentality towards the labor party due to Bob Hawkes death.
He died during the 2019 federal election which the coalition won handsomely.

Peak Warming Man said:

kii said:

Seven years since Bob Hawke died.

There was no increase in sentimentality towards the labor party due to Bob Hawkes death.
He died during the 2019 federal election which the coalition won handsomely.

It’s a joke, PWM.

Peak Warming Man said:

kii said:

Seven years since Bob Hawke died.

There was no increase in sentimentality towards the labor party due to Bob Hawkes death.
He died during the 2019 federal election which the coalition won handsomely.

Still talking in imperial.

SCIENCE said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

So what do you think about this bracket creep thing?

I think the Labs should say, yeah, good idea, we’ll do that at the next budget.

Including the rate increases required to maintain the budget balance.

we thought bracket drift was a feature not a bug

That seems to be the Lab approach.

Anxious T has seen the light and loudly disagrees.

Dr Kev Bonham says

“So this is the best swing for a Queensland government in a classic 2PP by-election for at least 46 years and I wouldn’t be surprised if for longer. “

roughbarked said:

party_pants said:

Divine Angel said:

Sounds like DOGE.

A bit. I think it’s a myth. But a common one.

I am however, very much against the idea of replacing humans with AI. Especially if that AI is based or controlled overseas. Right now the only options are the US or China for AI. I don’t want us to get involved with China, and I don’t see the US as being reliable over the long term. So unless we build and manage our own data centres here in Australia I am against widespread adoption of AI for government services.

AI psychosis is on the rise and experts are sounding the alarm

In the Big Beautiful Bill it was discussed that there would be no limitations on AI for a decade. I don’t know if it went through but I found that concerning.

roughbarked said:

SCIENCE said:

The Rev Dodgson said:

So what do you think about this bracket creep thing?

I think the Labs should say, yeah, good idea, we’ll do that at the next budget.

Including the rate increases required to maintain the budget balance.

we thought bracket drift was a feature not a bug

Angus Taylor’s plan to index tax brackets to inflation could cost $35 billion in the first four years, higher than the $23 billion figure the Coalition has been using, and would cost the budget $44 billion every year by the end of the decade.

The opposition leader unveiled a plan yesterday to eliminate “bracket creep”, the feature of Australia’s income tax system that causes taxpayers to pay more over time because tax brackets are not adjusted for inflation.

Mr Taylor initially distanced himself from a $22.5 billion cost over four years in an interview on the ABC’s 7.30 after his budget reply speech. But the figure was offered by deputy Liberal leader Jane Hume on ABC Radio National, who said the policy had been “fully costed”.
Finally, a tax fight that actually means something
Angus Taylor and Anthony Albanese in a composite image. Both are in suits

Labor and the Liberals are offering imperfect but undeniably bold alternative visions for the tax system. It’s nice to have something to talk about.

Today, Mr Taylor told the ABC’s AM it was “over $20 billion” in the first four years, and framing this amount as the “sneaky” extra tax Labor was imposing on taxpayers by allowing bracket creep to run unchecked.

“Labor is proposing to raise taxes by over $20 billion over four years, and we will give that back. We will prevent those taxes from going up,” he said.

He also conceded the Coalition would need to find spending cuts to match the more than $20 billion cost to the budget, saying he had identified “significant savings” already from “waste” but declining to say whether they would fully offset his proposal.

But the ABC has confirmed the likely amount the Coalition would need to offset over the first four years of its policy, which would start if elected in 2028-29, is $35.3 billion, more than 50 per cent higher.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-15/coalition-tax-plan-could-cost-more-than-suggested/106685090

Setting the overall taxation amount, and adjusting the levels where tax rates increase, are two quite separate things.

If there is a policy decision that total taxation should increase faster than wage income, then that decision should be made, announced, and implemented by adjusting the tax rates.

The steps where tax rates increase should be automatically adjusted in line with price inflation, with further adjustments either up or down only being done when there is a clear need to do so.

dv said:

Dr Kev Bonham says

“So this is the best swing for a Queensland government in a classic 2PP by-election for at least 46 years and I wouldn’t be surprised if for longer. “

Mr Bleijie said the results raised questions over Mr Miles’s leadership of the opposition.

“Steven Miles is out of depth in leadership, and he just cannot read the room,” he said.

“ first vote’s not going to be in parliament … He’s going to vote for the Labor Party spill motion that inevitably will happen.”

roughbarked said:

dv said:

Dr Kev Bonham says

“So this is the best swing for a Queensland government in a classic 2PP by-election for at least 46 years and I wouldn’t be surprised if for longer. “

Mr Bleijie said the results raised questions over Mr Miles’s leadership of the opposition.

“Steven Miles is out of depth in leadership, and he just cannot read the room,” he said.

“Luke Richmond’s first vote’s not going to be in parliament … He’s going to vote for the Labor Party spill motion that inevitably will happen.”

removed copied brackets.

dv said:

so aside from the particulars he’s 25 years late

well yeah, damn fkn trash economic managers that communist Labor are

“The fact that interest rates are high in Australia reflects the fact that actually economy is performing better,” said Christina Leung, deputy chief executive at the NZ Institute of Economic Research.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2026-05-18/why-is-australias-interest-rate-high-compared-to-other-countries/106655098

Today’s Newspoll, the first to be completely conducted in the post, the budget period, has Labor ahead of the Lishun 54-46, or 53-47 ahead of ON.

This is basically a status quo result, despite reaction to the
budget mainly being negative.

Albanese retains his lead as preferred Prime Minister. 46 – 38.

dv said:

Today’s Newspoll, the first to be completely conducted in the post, the budget period, has Labor ahead of the Lishun 54-46, or 53-47 ahead of ON.

This is basically a status quo result, despite reaction to the
budget mainly being negative.

Albanese retains his lead as preferred Prime Minister. 46 – 38.

Still, having almost half the population preferring One Notion to Labour is more than a bit disturbing.

The Rev Dodgson said:

dv said:

Today’s Newspoll, the first to be completely conducted in the post, the budget period, has Labor ahead of the Lishun 54-46, or 53-47 ahead of ON.

This is basically a status quo result, despite reaction to the
budget mainly being negative.

Albanese retains his lead as preferred Prime Minister. 46 – 38.

Still, having almost half the population preferring One Notion to Labour is more than a bit disturbing.

I have to say I don’t think I’ve ever seen so rapid a shift as this.
The primary polling was 27% for ONP and 20% for the Coalition.
I’d be interested in seeing the Coalition vs ONP figures.
Actually I’d be interested in seeing a full breakdown into six preference categories.
Maybe I should start a polling agency.

When I’m in the Governor General’s residence, I will correctly use the Constitution, sections 51, 61 – 70, 81, 109, and other sections, to implement the most powerful and effective ‘Economic Vision’ Australia has ever experienced.

1. Control the RBA, effective monetary policy.

2. New Banking Law, 1% RBA lending rates, 2% home loans, 5% personal loans, cash remains, more face to face banking and ATM’s. Optional Digital ID.

3. New Tax Law, abolish tax return system, abolish all taxes except GST. New bank transaction tax system, 2% individuals, 4% sole traders, 6% partnerships, 8% companies and trusts. Exemptions over aged 65.

4. Cost of Living Law, economic caps on essential services, gas, electricity, water, base rates and supply charges. Economic caps on petrol, diesel, home-owner rates, postage services, telecommunications, state govt charges and fees, licencing fees, vehicle registrations, professional and trades registrations, passports, court filing fees, insurances, inspection fees, real-estate fees, council fees and charges, parking fees, business fees, property transfer fees. Abolish vehicle roadworthy certificate requirements. Minimum quarterly (3 monthly) billing only.

5. Abolish Fines and Tolls.

6. New Health Care Law, pay doctors the same way we pay teachers. Doctors can’t charge for health services. Doctors funds for staff, equipment, offices, etc.

7. Drill, extract oil, rebuild fuel (petrol and diesel) refineries, 1 in every state/territory = 8 refineries.

8. Bill of Rights Law, property rights, subdivision minimum 500sqm, by-pass councils, subdivision and building plans signed off by registered builder, surveyor, architect, or other construction professionals, and then subdivide/build.
No council approvals for building extra rooms, houses, granny flats, pools, pergolas, water-tanks, sheds, renovations, caravans, etc.

9. Build 1 million homes for Australian born/citizens 20+ years, across Australian country towns, using the banking system ($200 billion home loans cost, based on $250,000 house).

10. Jobs Grants Commission $50 billion a year, $250,000 grants to small business, community groups, small companies, 200,000 grants × 3 jobs = 600,000 jobs a year.

11. Abolish ASIC, New ‘National Economics Board’ to support Australian small business and companies develop, grow, thrive, and create jobs. Trash most govt regulations.

12. Australian Owned & Made Law, applied to businesses, farms, manufacturing, industries, oil, agriculture, ports, energy resources, mines, coal, gas, home-ownership, etc. Export excess for profit. Ban wind-turbines and NetZero.
Corrections in video, between 7 and 30 politicians in ‘Federal Executive Council’, and RBA lending rates 1%, home loans 2%, personal loans 5%.

Bogsnorkler said:

When I’m in the Governor General’s residence, I will correctly use the Constitution, sections 51, 61 – 70, 81, 109, and other sections, to implement the most powerful and effective ‘Economic Vision’ Australia has ever experienced.

1. Control the RBA, effective monetary policy.

2. New Banking Law, 1% RBA lending rates, 2% home loans, 5% personal loans, cash remains, more face to face banking and ATM’s. Optional Digital ID.

3. New Tax Law, abolish tax return system, abolish all taxes except GST. New bank transaction tax system, 2% individuals, 4% sole traders, 6% partnerships, 8% companies and trusts. Exemptions over aged 65.

4. Cost of Living Law, economic caps on essential services, gas, electricity, water, base rates and supply charges. Economic caps on petrol, diesel, home-owner rates, postage services, telecommunications, state govt charges and fees, licencing fees, vehicle registrations, professional and trades registrations, passports, court filing fees, insurances, inspection fees, real-estate fees, council fees and charges, parking fees, business fees, property transfer fees. Abolish vehicle roadworthy certificate requirements. Minimum quarterly (3 monthly) billing only.

5. Abolish Fines and Tolls.

6. New Health Care Law, pay doctors the same way we pay teachers. Doctors can’t charge for health services. Doctors funds for staff, equipment, offices, etc.

7. Drill, extract oil, rebuild fuel (petrol and diesel) refineries, 1 in every state/territory = 8 refineries.

8. Bill of Rights Law, property rights, subdivision minimum 500sqm, by-pass councils, subdivision and building plans signed off by registered builder, surveyor, architect, or other construction professionals, and then subdivide/build.
No council approvals for building extra rooms, houses, granny flats, pools, pergolas, water-tanks, sheds, renovations, caravans, etc.

9. Build 1 million homes for Australian born/citizens 20+ years, across Australian country towns, using the banking system ($200 billion home loans cost, based on $250,000 house).

10. Jobs Grants Commission $50 billion a year, $250,000 grants to small business, community groups, small companies, 200,000 grants × 3 jobs = 600,000 jobs a year.

11. Abolish ASIC, New ‘National Economics Board’ to support Australian small business and companies develop, grow, thrive, and create jobs. Trash most govt regulations.

12. Australian Owned & Made Law, applied to businesses, farms, manufacturing, industries, oil, agriculture, ports, energy resources, mines, coal, gas, home-ownership, etc. Export excess for profit. Ban wind-turbines and NetZero.
Corrections in video, between 7 and 30 politicians in ‘Federal Executive Council’, and RBA lending rates 1%, home loans 2%, personal loans 5%.

What about the ABC and SBS?

Neophyte said:

Bogsnorkler said:

When I’m in the Governor General’s residence, I will correctly use the Constitution, sections 51, 61 – 70, 81, 109, and other sections, to implement the most powerful and effective ‘Economic Vision’ Australia has ever experienced.

1. Control the RBA, effective monetary policy.

2. New Banking Law, 1% RBA lending rates, 2% home loans, 5% personal loans, cash remains, more face to face banking and ATM’s. Optional Digital ID.

3. New Tax Law, abolish tax return system, abolish all taxes except GST. New bank transaction tax system, 2% individuals, 4% sole traders, 6% partnerships, 8% companies and trusts. Exemptions over aged 65.

4. Cost of Living Law, economic caps on essential services, gas, electricity, water, base rates and supply charges. Economic caps on petrol, diesel, home-owner rates, postage services, telecommunications, state govt charges and fees, licencing fees, vehicle registrations, professional and trades registrations, passports, court filing fees, insurances, inspection fees, real-estate fees, council fees and charges, parking fees, business fees, property transfer fees. Abolish vehicle roadworthy certificate requirements. Minimum quarterly (3 monthly) billing only.

5. Abolish Fines and Tolls.

6. New Health Care Law, pay doctors the same way we pay teachers. Doctors can’t charge for health services. Doctors funds for staff, equipment, offices, etc.

7. Drill, extract oil, rebuild fuel (petrol and diesel) refineries, 1 in every state/territory = 8 refineries.

8. Bill of Rights Law, property rights, subdivision minimum 500sqm, by-pass councils, subdivision and building plans signed off by registered builder, surveyor, architect, or other construction professionals, and then subdivide/build.
No council approvals for building extra rooms, houses, granny flats, pools, pergolas, water-tanks, sheds, renovations, caravans, etc.

9. Build 1 million homes for Australian born/citizens 20+ years, across Australian country towns, using the banking system ($200 billion home loans cost, based on $250,000 house).

10. Jobs Grants Commission $50 billion a year, $250,000 grants to small business, community groups, small companies, 200,000 grants × 3 jobs = 600,000 jobs a year.

11. Abolish ASIC, New ‘National Economics Board’ to support Australian small business and companies develop, grow, thrive, and create jobs. Trash most govt regulations.

12. Australian Owned & Made Law, applied to businesses, farms, manufacturing, industries, oil, agriculture, ports, energy resources, mines, coal, gas, home-ownership, etc. Export excess for profit. Ban wind-turbines and NetZero.
Corrections in video, between 7 and 30 politicians in ‘Federal Executive Council’, and RBA lending rates 1%, home loans 2%, personal loans 5%.

What about the ABC and SBS?

first up against the wall.

Bogsnorkler said:

Neophyte said:

Bogsnorkler said:

When I’m in the Governor General’s residence, I will correctly use the Constitution, sections 51, 61 – 70, 81, 109, and other sections, to implement the most powerful and effective ‘Economic Vision’ Australia has ever experienced.

1. Control the RBA, effective monetary policy.

2. New Banking Law, 1% RBA lending rates, 2% home loans, 5% personal loans, cash remains, more face to face banking and ATM’s. Optional Digital ID.

3. New Tax Law, abolish tax return system, abolish all taxes except GST. New bank transaction tax system, 2% individuals, 4% sole traders, 6% partnerships, 8% companies and trusts. Exemptions over aged 65.

4. Cost of Living Law, economic caps on essential services, gas, electricity, water, base rates and supply charges. Economic caps on petrol, diesel, home-owner rates, postage services, telecommunications, state govt charges and fees, licencing fees, vehicle registrations, professional and trades registrations, passports, court filing fees, insurances, inspection fees, real-estate fees, council fees and charges, parking fees, business fees, property transfer fees. Abolish vehicle roadworthy certificate requirements. Minimum quarterly (3 monthly) billing only.

5. Abolish Fines and Tolls.

6. New Health Care Law, pay doctors the same way we pay teachers. Doctors can’t charge for health services. Doctors funds for staff, equipment, offices, etc.

7. Drill, extract oil, rebuild fuel (petrol and diesel) refineries, 1 in every state/territory = 8 refineries.

8. Bill of Rights Law, property rights, subdivision minimum 500sqm, by-pass councils, subdivision and building plans signed off by registered builder, surveyor, architect, or other construction professionals, and then subdivide/build.
No council approvals for building extra rooms, houses, granny flats, pools, pergolas, water-tanks, sheds, renovations, caravans, etc.

9. Build 1 million homes for Australian born/citizens 20+ years, across Australian country towns, using the banking system ($200 billion home loans cost, based on $250,000 house).

10. Jobs Grants Commission $50 billion a year, $250,000 grants to small business, community groups, small companies, 200,000 grants × 3 jobs = 600,000 jobs a year.

11. Abolish ASIC, New ‘National Economics Board’ to support Australian small business and companies develop, grow, thrive, and create jobs. Trash most govt regulations.

12. Australian Owned & Made Law, applied to businesses, farms, manufacturing, industries, oil, agriculture, ports, energy resources, mines, coal, gas, home-ownership, etc. Export excess for profit. Ban wind-turbines and NetZero.
Corrections in video, between 7 and 30 politicians in ‘Federal Executive Council’, and RBA lending rates 1%, home loans 2%, personal loans 5%.

What about the ABC and SBS?

first up against the wall.

No one expects a Spanish Inqusuition!

roughbarked said:

Bogsnorkler said:

Neophyte said:

What about the ABC and SBS?

first up against the wall.

No one expects a Spanish Inqusuition!

Cut and pasted from Theresa van Lieshout’s Voter’s Rights Party. Hmmm…..

(She will be Australia’s next Governor-General, under God Almighty)

Neophyte said:

roughbarked said:

Bogsnorkler said:

first up against the wall.

No one expects a Spanish Inqusuition!

Cut and pasted from Theresa van Lieshout’s Voter’s Rights Party. Hmmm…..

(She will be Australia’s next Governor-General, under God Almighty)

Yes, I am not worthy to be GG.

Neophyte said:

roughbarked said:

Bogsnorkler said:

first up against the wall.

No one expects a Spanish Inqusuition!

Cut and pasted from Theresa van Lieshout’s Voter’s Rights Party. Hmmm…..

(She will be Australia’s next Governor-General, under God Almighty)

Gosh.

Bogsnorkler said:

Neophyte said:

roughbarked said:

No one expects a Spanish Inqusuition!

Cut and pasted from Theresa van Lieshout’s Voter’s Rights Party. Hmmm…..

(She will be Australia’s next Governor-General, under God Almighty)

Yes, I am not worthy to be GG.

Hear hear.

Bogsnorkler said:

Neophyte said:

roughbarked said:

No one expects a Spanish Inqusuition!

Cut and pasted from Theresa van Lieshout’s Voter’s Rights Party. Hmmm…..

(She will be Australia’s next Governor-General, under God Almighty)

Yes, I am not worthy to be GG.

Goodness, she’s quite the nutter. I’d not heard of her.

buffy said:

Bogsnorkler said:

Neophyte said:

Cut and pasted from Theresa van Lieshout’s Voter’s Rights Party. Hmmm…..

(She will be Australia’s next Governor-General, under God Almighty)

Yes, I am not worthy to be GG.

Goodness, she’s quite the nutter. I’d not heard of her.

Hope to not hear any more of her.

buffy said:

Bogsnorkler said:

Neophyte said:

Cut and pasted from Theresa van Lieshout’s Voter’s Rights Party. Hmmm…..

(She will be Australia’s next Governor-General, under God Almighty)

Yes, I am not worthy to be GG.

Goodness, she’s quite the nutter. I’d not heard of her.

Troubled lady. Apparently she is genuinely delusional but has campaigned to have psychiatry banned.