Senior members of the Commonwealth’s cop squad have been working overtime on coming up with fresh meanings for the phrase “national security”. To paraphrase Humpty Dumpty, it really means just what the government chooses it to mean, neither more nor less.

Certainly it covers things such as bugging the Timor-Leste ministerial offices, or soldiers shooting the wrong people in Afghanistan, or plans by spooky public servants to spy on the entire population.

All of that comes under the Humpty Dumpty definition, which really has nothing to do with national security at all, but more to do with government embarrassment – requiring Constable Plod to go through journalists’ socks and underwear drawers to get to the bottom of things.

In 1980, the High Court had something to say about embarrassment and national security in the famous “defence papers” case where the government wanted to stop Fairfax publishing early extracts from a forthcoming book by Richard Walsh and George Munster.

Talk about secrets, this book was chock-a-block full of them: classified documents concerning international treaties, foreign intelligence services and military bases, among other things.

It’s worth remembering today what Justice Anthony Mason wrote then:

“It can scarcely be a relevant detriment to the government that publication of material concerning its actions will merely expose it to public discussion and criticism. It is unacceptable in our democratic society that there should be a restraint on the publication of information relating to government when the only vice of that information is that it enables the public to discuss, review and criticise government action.”

Read more:

https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/opinion/diary/2019/06/15/gadfly-secu...

PM’s department in ‘laughable’ battle to suppress cabinet meeting dates

Senator Rex Patrick, who is trying to access navy chief’s diary, questions why dates are a secret, given government has previously released such details

The prime minister’s department is mounting a costly legal battle to keep secret information the government has previously released, a situation described as “laughable”.

The Centre Alliance senator Rex Patrick is trying to secure the release of the navy chief’s diary as part of his attempts to investigate why a $4bn arms contract was awarded to German shipbuilder Lürssen instead of Australian firm Austal.

But the Australian government has resisted his efforts, arguing the diary contains dates of cabinet meetings and would therefore reveal confidential cabinet information and is exempt from freedom of information law.

The Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet is so convinced the dates should be kept secret, it is mounting what could prove a costly case in the administrative appeals tribunal (AAT) to keep the diary from the public. Similar cases Patrick has been involved in have cost taxpayers $150,000.

But Guardian Australia has seen documents that show the government has previously released diaries containing the dates of cabinet meetings without objection. Earlier this year, the government released to Patrick the diaries of the resources minister, Matt Canavan, which contained the dates of numerous cabinet meetings. Neither the minister’s office or the prime minister’s department raised any objection to the publication of cabinet meeting dates.

Patrick said the information commissioner has already ruled that the navy chief’s diary should be published, finding cabinet dates were not exempt from release.

“I do not agree with the department that the documents include ‘advice that is proposed to be provided to the cabinet for the purposes of deliberation by a minister or the government of the commonwealth’,” the information commissioner, Angelene Falk, said. “It is my view that the entries recorded in the documents do not contain any opinion, advice, recommendations, consultations or deliberations that have taken place.”

Read more:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/jun/17/pms-department-in...

The Morrison government has been challenged by the European Union and by China about whether it can meet its Paris commitments given rising emissions, and about growing pollution from vehicles, ahead of a progress meeting about climate commitments in Bonn next week.

Nineteen countries, including Australia, will gather in Bonn on 24 and 25 Junefor a multilateral assessment of progress made under international climate commitments, and ahead of that session countries have submitted a range of questions about the performance of signatories in meeting their climate targets.

As well as questions about rising emissions, the EU and Canada have also queried the Morrison government’s decision to use carry-over credits from the Kyoto protocol in its latest carbon budget.

The Coalition is counting a 367 megatonne abatement from carry-over credits (an accounting system that allows countries to count carbon credits from exceeding their targets under the soon-to-be-obsolete Kyoto protocol periods against their Paris commitment for 2030) to help meet Australia’s 2030 target.

The EU in its questions to Australia points out that net emissions will grow during the period 2013 to 2020 and notes “Australia is also increasing coalmining, in particular for export”.

It has asked whether Australia considers its emissions profile, which has seen pollution rise since the repeal of the carbon price, to be “on a structural path of decrease in line with its commitments”. It has also flagged fossil fuel exports and asked whether they are sustainable “in the context of Paris agreement”.

Read more:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jun/18/australia-quizzed-by...

Note that most of Australia's Kyoto "carbon credits" were gained by Labor's "price on carbon policy" that moronic Tony Abbott called "the carbon tax" and repealed with the help of two-faced Clive Palmer... It was effective, unlike the expensive rubbish used by the Scummo government to fiddle the books.

Read from top.

See also:

It was an evidence-based show, with no panellists invited to contest the notion that the world is round.

and:

http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/33287

SO, WHAT ARE THE TENETS OF BEING A LIBERAL?

1. Opposition to Labor. Labor is bad. 

Labor is in bed with the unions and unions are bad. They demand better working conditions for all workers, including the illegal ones we, Liberal bosses, use on the sly... The socialist union mugs! As if we were made of honey! As if money grew on the work of workers, which it does but that beside the point. If there were no bosses with whips and sticks, workers would slack off... Workers would be poorer with nothing to do if we did not use them as slaves. Better conditions? Want a yacht in the Caribbeans as well? You're lucky to get food on the table. And when you get the sack, you don't deserve the dole... Money for nothing? you've got to be kidding!

2. Charity before social justice. 

Giving is good as long as it's tax deductible. Tax is not tax deductible... Charitable enterprises are good. They range from churches to medical supplies. All are designed to give that warm feeling of helping someone in need, as long as it's tax deductible and measured as not to impinge on the pocket money, stitched aside for those holidays in the Caribbeans. But charity should not help people help themselves too much, otherwise charity would tragically become obsolete... Mind you there is an endless supply of charitable causes to choose from.

3. Lower taxes, voluntary contribution or no tax if possible. 

Not giving (much) tax is good. Sharing equitably is bad. Taxes tend to slug the rich. Liberals are on the rich side of the fence, in general and get slugged... Hum... Tax deductions are good as they bring us rich people down to the same tax bracket level as the poor mugs who work their arse off. Anyway, tax should be replaced by charity — a measured discreet voluntary donation to Liberal mates, such as developers, entrepreneurs, those good people with the know how to build concrete roads and tall buildings with views, pushing the poor people — who are in the way of inevitable progress — out.

5. Freedom. 

Freedom to be ensnared by religious beliefs as long as these are Christian beliefs. Other beliefs might be tolerated but as long as they understand who's boss. Faith in the Christian god is good and gives the freedom to sin and be contrite, without the civil court bit —especially for priests. Freedom is highly valued and should be imposed on anyone who does not have the same rigourous ideal of freedom, unless they are powerful and have oil. These are our despotic Muslim friends. Saddam on the other hand was weak (that's why we lied he was strong, but we knew he was weak — otherwise we wouldn't have attacked him if he was strong) and had oil. A weak and poor country without freedom nor oil under a tyrant is basically uninteresting unless it can provide real estate for a military base... Thus the tyrant is pragmatically our friend because we need him to keep the restless natives from which we're acquiring the real estate, quiet or dead — which ever comes first. They would have died from malaria or from an unspeakable disease anyway. Some of us don't like bits of genitalia being cut of in the name of religious practice — not in this country anyway. Our friend the despots can do what they like though — including torture or kill the opposition — as long as we have the military base. We don't practice torture — unless we have to.

In this framework free enterprise is on a pedestal. Free enterprise means that one can sell snake oil as long as one can find customers for snake oil. Stealing is not recommended in the open especially since the Switzerland haven has become regulatory cumbersome. Competition is good as long as competitors can be shot down in a "friendly" way. Workers of course should not enjoy freedom otherwise they slack off. The Mafia is terrible especially when it competes on our exclusive turfs... Free market is good as long as customers pay for it...

6. War on everything that is not "liberal". 

Biffo is good. War is brilliant. Peace tends to limit the scope of selling snake oil and other goods. War is excellent as it tends to demand replacement goods by the sheer nature of explosion and demolition of supplies. On another front, the liberal arts ended with Picasso, thank goodness. Art has nothing to do with philosophy. Art is the way to buy and sell exclusive masterpieces to other rich people who want what you have, for twice as much as you paid for, usually in the millions but they don't really care since they have twice as many millions. 

7. Money before equity. 

Greed is good. If the stock market and the money market are roaring along it's the Liberals' doing. If the stock market and the money market take the plunge it's Labor's fault. And this can be seen clearly by the way Labor handled the economy during the last financial crisis. Giving money to the people rather than to the banks stank of socialism! Let the market decide that the poor shall stay poor, unemployed and debt ridden, while the government coffers should be filling up with money gouged from the sweat and tears of the rest of the still-at-work flogged workers. Banks are good and should they become insolvent because of Liberal bosses bonuses, they should be propped up by government before the people (who should never be propped up). Any Labor projects that is 99 per cent successful shall be declared a failure. Any Liberal project that is 70 per cent a failure shall be deemed a success. 

8. Exploitation of resources. Plundering is good. 

The earth belongs to the humans "race" (meaning the white fellows). Contrary to scientific beliefs, humans are not a species but we are the children of god (angels without wings) — a god who in his great wisdom gave the express order to breed and plunder as fast as possible the given goodies: the trees, the dirt, the minerals of the known universe — but especially, from this flat earth. Global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the communists to take over the world and stop us exploiting the cheap fuels... 99 per cent of the scientists are wrong. Our two shock jocks such as Alan Jones and Andrew Bolt are totally right on this subject. God did not write anything about global warming in the bible, thus it does not exist.

9. Regal born to rule privilege. 

Royalty is good. Although there are some traitors in the Liberal ranks who believe a republic could be better than a Queen in another country ruling over us, they still believe that the Liberals should be in charge of the loot due to breeding privileges. Most Liberals are royalists though. Support for the Anglican Queen or the future King (a bit too greenie for comfort though) is the optimum of undivided loyalty. We love the crumbs, such as lordships and honour badges to be collected on the way to brown-nosing privileges for having given charitably to our mates the developers. Gold, god and the Queen give the Liberals the exclusive right to rule this country. 

10. Never EVER compromise on anything, especially an ETS, or admit being wrong... Being wrong with elegant hypocrisy is an excellent way to be right. The freedom to be wrong is to be cherished, but the Liberals are always right, even if we're wrong. Labor is always wrong.

From: http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/10145

Read from top.

another great cartoon by Cathy Wilcox...

Read from top.

Remember: