PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Jet Blast (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast-16/)
-   -   War in Australia (any Oz Politics): the Original (https://www.pprune.org/jet-blast/477678-war-australia-any-oz-politics-original.html)

RJM 5th Jun 2015 16:18

I agree with you in general about Xenophon, hemps. His 'Xenophon Party' outpolled the LNP in the South Australian upper house in the last election, while the man himself was in the federal parliament! Our LNP is a bit weak, though.

As to me being a childish name caller, Ethel, if that's what you're suggesting, have a close look at the targets. SHY deserves the approving she gets, for a start.

Ethel the Aardvark 6th Jun 2015 03:00

Hey RJ, just find it amusing the hipocrisy of its ok for us too use naughty names but not the other lot. Mind you my six year old could come up with more amusing names than raven or dodo but pls keep up the good work!!
Anyone know if Pyney has had his Jesus moment and owned up to the cabinet leak. What a lovely bunch they have turned out to be.

SOPS 6th Jun 2015 03:15

Human Rights Commission chief Gillian Triggs refuses to back down, criticises foreign fighter, data retention laws that 'expand ministerial powers' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Please, please, please can we get rid of this women? Please Tony, sack her in the morning.

alisoncc 6th Jun 2015 08:20

Sorry SOPS, but I strongly disagree. As the Human Rights Commissioner she has every right to speak out on these issues. For two of the most basic reasons in my book. 1) A person is innocent until proven guilt - so surveillance of my activities via data retention laws is wholly unacceptable. And 2) Separation of Powers - Parliament legislates and the Judiciary determines transgressions - not some pea brain politician with delusions of grandeur. Ministers deciding punishments with no court of appeal - no way.

Takan Inchovit 6th Jun 2015 09:38

... agreed, it was bad enough having 'ministers' changing the meaning of certain words.

bosnich71 6th Jun 2015 10:40

Alison ... Agreed but I don't really think that Triggs would be that bothered about the human rights of the great majority of Australian citizens.

Saltie 6th Jun 2015 12:17

Anyone else notice that Ethel and Hempy make the same grammatical errors over and over again on their posts? Could it be that both are products of the same flawed educashun (sic) system... Or could there be another reason?

Hempy 6th Jun 2015 12:26

Happy to be educated saltie. Please point out my errors so I can learn from you... :rolleyes:

Oh, and if you are suggesting that Ethel and I are one in the same person simply because we don't join in your right-wing circle jerk, you're pretty paranoid. Better put the tinfoil hat back on...

Ken Borough 6th Jun 2015 13:34


As the Human Rights Commissioner she has every right to speak out on these issues.
Too bloody right, and thank God she does. The way these RWNJs are going, Australia will soon be a fascist state. The fact that Abbott, Dutton and the rest of the loons are so dismissive of Triggs and other rational people gives a strong signal that the latter are correct. And what does the self-described Freedom Commissioner, aka Tim Wilson, have to say on Abbott's proposals?

Dutton loves to be seen next to the rather large emblem for Australia Border Force, or whatever he deems to call it today. Will it be a matter of time before we see him in a funny hat and khaki/brown uniform compleat with gold braid, a coloured sash and sword at his side? What a sight for sore eyes, coming to a place near you?

RJM 6th Jun 2015 14:02

Ethel, I personally try not to use silly, derogatory names for Labor figures. Doing so adds nothing to a rational argument.

In my last post about SHY (not a derogatory diminutive) I wrote 'she deserves the opprobrium she gets' but it came out 'approval' - quite different!

As for Gillian Triggs - I think she has a case to answer. Holding a statutory position, she cannot be removed by Parliament. She is supposed to be apolitical, but it is clear she has an anti-Liberal agenda.

Why else would she ignore the issue of children in detention when under Labor there were 2000 in detention, and only make a fuss when there the number is 150 and falling under the LNP?

Why else would she lie to the Senate committee about her discussions with Labor heads about timing her intervention on the children in detention issue?

Why else would she try to link Abbott's boat policy with the death sentences for the 'Bali 2'?

Why does she recommend huge compensation payouts to people the government generally views as public enemies?

Triggs is behaving not as a public servant, under the ultimate control of her minister, but as if her unique position as president of the Australian Human Rights Commission places her above, or at least to one side, of the elected government. She appears to believe that she is an autonomous agent, responsible only to her own ideas of 'human rights'.

That is not her job description. She is not given - at public expense - a large staff, a multi-million budget and the ability to decide what issues she pursues and when, just to indulge her personal prejudices and implement her personal agenda.

Unfortunately, that is exactly what she does. She appears to be one of several Gillard appointees to influential who is cemented in place, and not responsible to anyone. In a democratic society, this presents a problem.

Ken Borough 6th Jun 2015 14:13


Holding a statutory position, she cannot be removed by Parliament.
Erm, *cough*, I don't think that's correct. She can't be terminated by the Executive but statutory office holders can be terminated by the Parliament. It's too late for me to check this but I think I'm correct with my understanding of the law.

Saltie 6th Jun 2015 22:12

Triggs is a bit like the top people in the ABC. They appear to have set a clear course to taunt the Liberal government into sacking them so that they can then scream "fascist!".
They seem also confident that the Left-stacked judiciary will find in their favour on the inevitable appeals for unfair dismissal.
The Libs, in their reluctance so far to sack any of them, would seem to be of the same opinion.

bosnich71 7th Jun 2015 00:29

Now, now Kenneth, just because some on this blog don't think that Triggs is the epitome of fair minded opinion doesn't make them all RWNJs' any more than it makes you a LWNJ.

parabellum 7th Jun 2015 06:41


Triggs and other rational people
And therein lies part of the problem Ken, you are guilty of coining an oxymoron. :)

MTOW 8th Jun 2015 11:38

Greens senator Scott Ludlum wants Gillian Triggs nominated as Australian of the year.

Given some of the recent clearly inappropriate selections, maybe not as ridiculous as it damn well should be.

SOPS 8th Jun 2015 14:05

:mad: give me a break, next he will want Two Dads.:ugh:

RJM 8th Jun 2015 15:40


Erm, *cough*, I don't think that's correct. She can't be terminated by the Executive but statutory office holders can be terminated by the Parliament. It's too late for me to check this but I think I'm correct with my understanding of the law.
You may be right, Ken. I'll ask around.

As for Triggs, she seems invulnerable. Her appearance at the Senate hearing when she thought she had Morrison but discovered that he had her was enough for anyone of any political alleigance to question her suitability for such a high office.

Triggs claimed that the detention centre at Christmas Island, which she had visited 3 times, was patrolled by armed guards. Morrison assured her it was not. Triggs wouldn't admit her mistake, but said 'I'll check.'

Triggs claimed that 10 women at the detention centre had 'attempted suicide'. Morrison told her that there was only one case which could be called attempted suicide - a woman self-harming by swallowing some shampoo. That instance of self-harm followed, as they often do, a visit to the centre by SHY.

The Human Rights Commission last investigated the government's detention policies in 2004 - during Howard's government. Despite 1100 children in detention and deaths of around 1200 adults and children at sea during the Rudd/Gillard years, Triggs, a Gillard appointee, took no action. Only when there were just over 300 children (with that number reducing fast) under a Liberal government does Triggs get on the phone to a few ALP luminaries (which she denied until incontrovertible evidence emerged) and decides to go the Abbott government over the children in detention issue.

And how's this for moderate, reasoned language from Triggs? This was her opening salvo at the Senate hearing, directed at Morrison:

“How can you justify detaining children in these conditions for more than a year when there is no evidence that this is the policy that is stopping the boats but rather Operation Sovereign Borders, however you define it, with three-star generals or civilian authorities, whatever name you put to it, the reality is that physical force and power have stopped these boats?”

Triggs was clearly excited at her opportunity to hammer Morrison and practically spat the words at him. She was angry and she stayed angry, refusing to acknowledge a single error in her testimony despite Morrison correcting or disputing her assertions numerous times.

A good measure of how bad her performance was is the fact that the ABC in its various news and current affairs programs showed only the briefest footage of her appearance, although the ABC repeated some of her claims.

SOPS 8th Jun 2015 23:45

I repeat this again. Get rid of this person. Just like the people that run the ABC, she is so far to the left, she probably thinks the Communists were great people. She has to go.

rh200 9th Jun 2015 00:31


Greens senator Scott Ludlum wants Gillian Triggs nominated as Australian of the year.
They can nominate as much as they want.


Given some of the recent clearly inappropriate selections, maybe not as ridiculous as it damn well should be.
Another award that is fast become not worth the paper it is presented on, soft 4 ply might be better. A bit like some the international ones.

Ken Borough 9th Jun 2015 03:01

Hey, Boz, please play fair! Nowhere in my post did I suggest or otherwise imply that anyone here is a RWNJ.

As for Gillian Triggs, Dutton and company are on the wrong track. I think if lawyers and the law were better understood, then the reaction to her speech may be more subdued. We live in a society governed by the Rule of Law: it's obvious that few, including many in the Cabinet and Abbott Government, understand this most basic principle. The inexorable march to the far right is disturbing and damaging the fabric of our society.


All times are GMT. The time now is 21:54.


Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.