More Women's Troubles

At the risk of repeating myself Abbott is having Women Troubles. Again. As I had suspected he has only one women in his cabinet and this is Julia Bishop, the Foreign Affairs Minister. So she will be away for a fair amount of the year.

If this is not bad enough, and it is pretty bad, he has appointed himself as Minister of Women's Affairs. As a woman I find this outrageous.

Here are some reasons:

“Abortion is the easy way out. It’s hardly surprising that people should choose the most convenient exit from awkward situations.” March 17th, 2004

“While I think men and women are equal, they are also different and I think it's inevitable and I don't think it's a bad thing at all that we always have, say, more women doing things like physiotherapy and an enormous number of women simply doing housework.” 2010

“The problem with the Australian practice of abortion is that an objectively grave matter has been reduced to a question of the mother’s convenience.” March 17th 2004

“I won't be rushing out to get my daughters vaccinated [for cervical cancer], maybe that's because I'm a cruel, callow, callous, heartless bastard but, look, I won't be.” November 9th, 2006

“I would say to my daughters if they were to ask me this question... [their virginity] is the greatest gift that you can give someone, the ultimate gift of giving and don't give it to someone lightly, that's what I would say.” January 27th 2010

Sources: tonyabbott.com, Herald Sun News, The Sydney Morning Herald, theaustralian.com, abc.net

Also:  http://www.huffpost.com/uk/entry/3885263

The general reaction from women is hardly surprising under the circumstances.

A few tweets included:

@Kon__K: Putting @tonyabbottmhr in charge of Women's Affairs is like asking Pauline Hanson to run #Refugee Week. #auspol

@EvaBuzo: Tony help! As Minister for Women can you help me with my mascara? @TonyAbbottMHR http://twitter.com/EvaBuzo/status/381247895715864577/photo/1

@GoldCoaster13: What better way to keep women down is to put yourself in charge of them @tonyabbottmhr #auspol #qldpol

And those were just a few of many.
I am interested in hearing others views.

Right now I'm just disappointed, but not surprised.

Religion over science? Not that simple

I wrote this piece after learning that Abbott had dumped the Ministry of Science from the Cabinet. Many people have been saying that it's simply a case of religion over science. I believe, in general, religion and science can co-exist, but religion has no place in Parliament. Abbott made his personal views about Climate Change known long before the election and they have little to do with religion, but was anyone really listening?

It might surprise you to learn that I am a Christian. At the moment it seems as if many Christians have gone to the right side of politics. I however believe Christianity is founded on the principles of love and kindness towards fellow human beings - 'lefty' principles. For example I, like many Christians, am for equal marriage. It is interesting to me that despite what most people think Christians believe the Facebook group "Christians for Gay Marriage " has far more people in it than the one against gay marriage. It is unfortunate that most people just listen to the loudest voice, that of Cardinal Pell or Abbott.

I got into trouble once in a Facebook group for saying that I "believe in" science as well as religion. Science the respondent said was not something you believed in, it was fact. And this is true to a large degree. A proven scientific fact is just that - fact. Most Christians, such as myself have no problem with this. We don't actually believe in Adam and Eve and Noah's Ark. There is no conflict between religion and science. For me both exist.

But we must have a separation of Church and State. Our society is multicultural and multi-faith and becoming more and more secular. The prayers said at the beginning of Parliament are meaningless. For example they say a prayer before ripping into each other in Question Time -not the forgiving Christian attitude I was brought up on. But this isn't even the main reason. Our ethics, standards and laws cannot be simply based on one religion, or worse one person's interpretation of that religion. We need to be inclusive - as inclusive as our broad society.

Some have argued that religion is to blame for all the evils in the world. I obviously do not believe this to be the case. Certainly religion has been used as an excuse for a lot of evil and the covering up of a lot of evil. I don't condone any of that. Neither do I wish to go into my disgust over that in detail here. Suffice to say that it is an excuse, not the cause and it certainly doesn't excuse. There is plenty of evil in the world unrelated to religion. I don't think Murdoch is particularly religious.

As recently as July 2009 Tony Abbott said "I think the climate change science is far from settled." Source  Although whether he actually knows it exists is debatable. Now he has rid us of the Ministry's of Science and Climate Change. Is religion at fault here? Possibly he bases his personal views on his own version of religious beliefs. Whatever they are. But whatever they are they should NOT have any bearing on his Parliamentary decision making process. We, all of us have our belief systems, not all are based on religion, but it the duty of our elected officials to represent the majority. The majority of Scientists, indeed the majority of Australians agree that Climate Change is a huge issue - one of the biggest we face. Whatever Abbott's personal beliefs and whatever they are based on, he has a duty to represent us. Plenty of very religious people KNOW Climate Change exists and KNOW we are responsible. If he does not know, it is not religion, it is just him.

As I said before I am a Christian. But I am not Tony Abbott and Abbott does not share my views of even being Christian to a very large extent. Before you get judgmental on all religion, remember we aren't all like Tony Abbott (or Cardinal Pell.)

I know many of you could vehemently disagree with me. Remember I am NOT in any way condoning the acts of religious organizations in covering up systemic  crime. I will leave that to Cardinal Pell.  Crime should be punished, whenever and wherever it exists.

Changing Minds

Appealing to Liberal Voters

I should say that the opinions stated in this post are my own and are not those of any political party.

I read in an article recently a general description of Green voters compared to Liberal voters. A very general description and not supposed to depict every voter.

Green voters, the author said were more likely to be academic, socially conscious and logically minded. This is why they argue points with a lot of facts and data. Liberal voters on the other hand are emotionally minded. This does not mean that they are likely to change their votes, but rather that they respond better to strongly worded arguments, for example "Stop the Boats" or "repeal the x tax".

If this is the case and there is a fundamental difference in thinking, then it is no wonder it is difficult for a Green voter to change the mind of a Liberal voter. A Green voter, such as myself, will try a logical argument which Liberal will dismiss as more lefty nonsense.
I believe it is a mistake to, as some of my 'lefty' friends do, call Liberal voters idiots or worse. We are unlikely to convince people by calling them names. However if logical argument does not work and we do not wish to use the 'three word slogan' ourselves, it is unclear how to convince Liberal voters.

I am open to ideas.

Tony's Women Troubles

Tony Abbott has a lot of women troubles. He caused controversy during the election by saying that the then candidate, now MP Fiona Scott had "sex appeal" and telling the Big Brother housemates he was the one with the "good looking daughters. " But this time it isn't what he has said that's an issue but the women in his new cabinet - or rather the lack of them. 

With Sofie Mirabella unlikely to win her seat and Bronwyn Bishop probably  moving to the position of speaker, Concetta Fierravanti-Wells out of favour (partly due to her backing the failed Liberal candidate Jaymes Diaz) it is looking increasingly likely that the only woman to hold a seat in a new Abbott cabinet will be Julie Bishop.

There are a couple of less likely contenders. They include right-leaning  West Australian Senator Michaelia Cash, Victorian MP Kelly O'Dwyer and NSW senator Marise Payne.

Senator Cash made headlines recently calling out the Labor 'sisterhood ', yelling in the Senate chamber:

"I wonder how loud former prime minister Gillard screamed when her own sisterhood knifed her in the back,"

Ms O'Dwyer was elected into Parliament in a 2009 by-election and has little front bench experience.

Senator Payne is a party moderate and  has served on numerous parliamentary committees. She is particularly strong experience in defence, trade and foreign affairs.

Election Mandate

As Prime Minister, one of Kevin Rudd's first actions was to ratify the Kyoto protocol. The first action of Tony Abbott as Prime Minister seems to be to dismantle the Carbon Tax. I personally find this change disturbing. He has also begun his 'Stop the Boats' policy despite International Law and Mahfudz Siddiq, head of the Indonesian parliament's foreign affairs commission being quite scathing about the 'boat buy back' scheme saying "Obviously he (Abbott) doesn't understand diplomacy or bilateral cooperation... Indonesia is not Australia's colony whose people can be bought for another country's interest."
Abbott's Indonesia Gaffe

Some commentators and those within the Labor party have complained that Abbott has stated he has a mandate for these types of changes. It was certain that he himself similarly complained just after the 2007 election when the Labor government said it had a mandate for change.

So does an incoming government have a mandate? It has been suggested that as the Liberal Party in itself received less than 50% of the vote that Abbott has no mandate. However the Liberal Party is a part of the Liberal National Party - a coalition. The Liberal Party does not field candidates in seats where there is  National candidate and vise versa. This is completely different with Labor and the Greens who will both field a candidate in an electorate. In fact the leader of The Greens, Christine Milne has said that we are not in the business of giving votes to Labor.

Another comment has been that The LNP only got into government on preferences. We have a two party preferred system however and while much of the Australian population doesn't understand exactly how it works, they do take it into consideration when they vote. For example many Green voters would most likely have voted differently if only the first preference counted and this would be the same for other minor parties - Palmer United and Family First.

So as much as I, and many, many others don't like it Australia did vote in the LNP and with a fairly substantial majority.  Does this mean we stop fighting for the things we believe in? Of course not! If we believe Australia will be a better place when asylum seekers are treated fairly and when there is action on climate change, we should fight for it - no matter what the Australian public voted for. And to that end I urge you to sign these petitions. We can still make a difference.

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/the-liberal-party-of-australia-reconsider-your-plan-for-a-fttn-nbn-in-favour-of-a-superior-ftth-nbn

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/tony-abbott-and-the-lnp-save-the-school-kids-bonus

http://www.communityrun.org/petitions/campaign-for-carbon-pricing

I'm a liberal.

No, I haven't gone strange. There is a substantial difference between a 'l' liberal and 'L' Liberal. A liberal believes in the principles of liberty and equally (equal rights, free trade, civil rights...) a Liberal is a member of a conservative political party. I am not a conservative. I am not a Liberal.

I don't blindly believe the policies and statements from one party to the exclusion of the other. Neither do I agree with every policy from the party I ultimately voted for. I did do the VoteCompass on the ABC website and my results were fairly as expected:
Australian Greens 83%
Australian Labor 74%
Liberal / National 33%

In order in keep my promise of positivity from my last blog, I will not discuss negative aspects of the coalition, but rather what I support. Not all of these are policies of the Labor or Greens but I think after reading you will know where my allegiances lie. These are my beliefs though, not any party doctrine.

* I support a carbon price and a move from environmentally harmful energy sources to climate friendly ones.
* I support better conditions and freedom from detention for asylum seekers.
* I support a National Broadband Network.
* I support workers rights and their right to participate in a union and for unions to negotiate contracts.
* I support equal marriage.
* I support women's rights .
* I support disability care.

Back to Reality

I have been reading quite a few strange posts after the election. Someone said Labor should block every bill in the Senate and take the coalition to court over the results of the election as they were illegal. Why? Because it released it's costings after the media blackout leaving other parties no right of reply. Others have even said that, in various areas Labor out-polled the coalition. 

I don't find this kind of discussion very helpful.  It doesn't help,  as Jesse Richardson put in his Open Letter (http://dontbeafuckingidiot.com/open-letter.html ), to go off on 'sweary rants' As he writes we need to convince people  and persuade them that a progressive government is better than a conservative one. 

With this in mind, in my blog, I will attempt to be persuasive and positive where possible. I believe the facts and just the facts will be more than convincing enough without resorting to 'sweary rants'.

Election Hangover

Today Australia has a new PM and God help us. Tony Abbott will be the worst PM Australia has ever had.  Australia what were you thinking?  As much as I wish to spend the next three years hibernating or calling  myself a kiwi, I will instead be keeping an at least weekly blog containing Abbott's gaffes,  errors,  lies and poor judgements. I am sure I will have a wealth of information to choose from.

So how did we elect such an idiot?
Maybe it's because we have a population more interested in voting for 'Australia's got Talent' than for their national leader, for the way their country will be run for the next three or more years.
Maybe it's the people who base their voting decisions on who provides them with a good sausage sizzle or has a good sounding name on the card.
Maybe people just believe everything they read in Murdoch's papers.
Maybe people were so concerned about perceived failings of one party they didn't check the failings of the other.
Maybe people would rather complain when things go wrong, than make an informed decision.

For the record I campaigned against Howard in 2007 and again against Abbott in this election. I have patches of sunburn and my legs are sore.  But my electorate was one of the few to increase its Labor vote.
I am really hoping Abbott will be a one term PM (or less) and I hope you will join me on working to make that happen.

More news to come.
J