Friday 26th of April 2024

Strange Bedfellows

The pending removal of workers rights/conditions seems to be moving quickly.

Only yesterday the news had reports that all State Labor Premiers would be united in opposing such change from a State perspective. Today's Courier Mail reports both Carr and Bracks are making deals with Howard already. Solidarity of one day, a new record perhaps.

Carr: Link.

Bracks: Link

On the other hand the Catholic Church is looking to support unions on this issue: Link

I'm getting confused. The Premiers obviously have one interest only, more money from Canberra but at who's cost?

MPs get a pay rise!

Firstly I must apologise for not having the technical knowledge to add the link to the article. I will endeavour to overcome this in the very near future. In the meantime I think the following news item is worthy of mention. Particularly in light of the fact that I have seen no further mention in regard to the substantial pay rise for MPs' which are to take effect from July. I have to agree with Bob Brown that the timing of the announcement is "sneaky" and in my view so typical of the underhand way in which this Government operates.

"The rise brings to 8 per cent the increase in MPs' slaries in 12months"

In the SMH online May 28, 2005. Also in Australia yesterday: MPs get a pay rise. By Mark Metherell.

To know that they have received an increase like this whilst absolutely crucifying the needy and underprivilaged of our community beggars belief.

how to link

Hey Heather, I can tell you how to produce links which show the whole URL address but I don't know how to make it so the URL address is hidden by a one word link.

To create the ugly links I am capable of all you need to do is have your browser open to the web page you want to link to.

You then right click on the URL address in the address line of your browser and select copy. This will copy the address on to your clipboard, a temporary storage facility.

You then go back to the post for Your Democracy or wherever else you want to record the link and right click in the spot you want the link to appear. Then select paste from the sub menu that appears when you right click. Voila! A link. Maybe Hamish can add how to make it a one or two word link hiding the URL as I haven't the info to do that as yet.

After pasting the link your cursor should be at the end of the URL link you have just pasted in to the post. Ensure you insert a space or a line break before adding any more words as, if you don't, the first word would be added to the link thus ruining the link.

Hope this is clear. Just say if it's not and someone will be more explicit for you.

Best.

Hamish: If you want to make a word or phrase a link, select the word or phrase then click the little button at the top that looks like a piece of chain (in between 'A' and '<>'). Then paste your 'ugly link' into the little box that pops up, where it says, 'URL'. Don't worry about the other fields - hit 'OK'. Link made.

customising hyperlinks

Hi Pegasus. I use a slightly different method but am able to 'customize' the link & incorporate it into whatever I'm writing along the way.

Steps are:

* open web-page

* open a word document & then select 'Insert' from the Word dashboard

* select 'Hyperlink' at the bottom of the menu

* then select 'browsed pages'

* select web-page from those on display (usually the one at the top of the list

* then customize link in the ‘text to display’ window at the top

* click OK

I put the links in as I write.

Cheers.

MPs get a pay rise!

Hi Hamish, thank you for your assistance. I am hoping that this has worked. If it has, this is the link to the article:

Pay Rises for Politicians

I cant help but think that Politicians pay rises are just "hush money". The more they earn the less likely they are to stray and to break away.

When ever there are issues, instead of being made to answer, held accountable and getting the sack - they get a promotion and/or a pay rise so its not worth their while to speak out.

Doesn't seem fair or right to me.

Re: Strange Bedfellows

I think most observers would agree that the federal ALP opposition and most (if not all) the Labor state and territory governments are controlled by the right wing of the party.

Some of these people seem hell bent on driving a wedge between what they see as "new Labor" and the left wing traditionalists of the party.  As well as with  with the union movement.

I think they are playing a dangerous game.  If the party were to split along those lines the conservatives would be rubbing their hands in glee!

It would make the DLP split look like a minor hiccup!

It would also probably mean there would be little chance the liberal/national coalition regime in Canberra would face a serious challenge on the federal scene for many years to come.

But having read the Bracks and Carr articles it seems to me that in both cases the respective journalists were putting their own particular spin on proceedings.

Both articles seemed to be more concerned with what wasn't said and reporting on that, than what actually was said.

The propaganda arm of the Howard government is already swinging into action!

One of the tactics the media will use to undermine any concerted opposition to Howard's attack on Australian workers will be to highlight any suggestion of disunity amongst those who oppose it.

And as usual they won't let the truth stand in the way of a good story. 

Wise words

You say wise words John. But could it be six of one and half a dozen of the other. If the left and unions are "controlled" and therefore muzzled by the right. What is the difference if there is a split? We see the same in the Government when the Liberals control the National Party. Living in the country type of electorate I have always wished the National Party would split with the Liberals so the Nationals would have a voice at Parliamentary level.

The Coalition did not face a serious challenge at the last Federal election.

But John there is disunity and there was disunity at the last election. The electorate has spotted the disunity. Just saying there is no disunity means that none exists. It does exist. You have just said so and millions know it exists because of the changes in the leadership of the Federal Labor Party. The electorate knows that Labor is in disaray as many Laborites don't want Kim Beazley as leader and he has been rejected before. The split must happen or Labor laying idle in the wilderness will continue.

Re: Wise words

Len, I live in a state electorate represented by a National party member.

The federal electorate I live in is represented by an independent who resigned from the National party because they were too "left wing" for him.

I believe the representation I have received from both gentlemen has been totally ineffective.

New Labor - LaborFirst?

Hey John, is the New Labor you mention named LaborFirst?

If so there's an item on Webdiary titled "Now is the time to come to the Party" in which some discussion of that faction is attempted. It's more like a recruitment poster.

I asked this of the author and got no response:

"I would like to see your goals achieved but I have to ask what happens to all those existing MP's who see themselves as leading the Party. Do you think they can adapt? No names but there are quite a few that seem bent on destruction of the party if they don't get their own way.

Are you planning to really start each pre-selection from scratch? How will that work?"

No answer although posts after that were answered. Seems to tell me all I needed to know.

Starting from scratch

Thanks for the hook, Pegasus. I'm not a unionist, but agree the right to collective representation is a vital part of our democracy. However, I know what James Jupp meant when he wrote in the Autumn/Winter issue of Dissent magazine ('Rebuilding from the wreckage') page 39 -

Few [Labor politicians and union officials] stop to ask whether militant unionists are also alienating suburban support.

I have been distracted by thoughts about the kinds of people I would be able to associate with, in a political party or any other organisation. Alan Ramsey reported on Hugh Mackay's advice to the ALP. The bit that caught my eye was:

The second trend is less attractive. It is heard in the growing voice of those who are not saying, 'I want to get my life under control', but 'I want to get your life under control'. This is the voice of regulation."

I recognise the broad Law 'n Order streak in myself, but I also hear John Howard's flagrant dog-whistling over the Corby case. 'I hear your pain, I understand, etc' is unspoken permission to act out and give voice to the very attitudes of overt racism pinged in the SMH editorial of May 28.

It is utterly dismaying that some of Corby's supporters resorted to blatantly racist slurs, discrediting the verdict in advance by demeaning the judges on racial grounds and, in some case, vilifying all Indonesians.

I wrote up my personal manifesto, and tried to pin it to the wall at another place. It didn't pass muster, for some unknown reason. Perhaps it summoned forth foul demons, I just don't know.

My volk is a small select group, who

1. Do not litter public areas with cigarette butts
2. Do not take their dogs out to poop in public places under the cover of darkness.
3. Do not let their governments collect taxes from poker machines, or any other sort of electronic gambling machines.
4. Do not use mobile phones while in control of motor vehicles.
5 Do not want their taxes used for industrialised violence, institutionalised addiction (nicotine), or injecting rooms for heroin addicts.
6. Restrain their children whilst in public
7. Keep their fingernails short
8. Have no interest in the bedroom antics of consenting adults, but want their adolescents given good education about sexual health.

I can't tell from here whether a group with those "policies" would want to add another layer of bricks to the Howard-Hanson fence between Oz and the people to our north, east and west, or would pull it down.

But, I think the venue for discussing values and ideas is becoming more central to the task. My conservative streak can't imagine effective discussions without a high degree of control from the front - an environment rather like that provided in a concert performance, or a Presbyterian church meeting. I can see, though, that kind of place excludes a lot of people - those who can't get out much, parents with little kids, carers who get 30 minutes respite every four hours, those with contagious diseases, those who suffer from depression and come to the surface a couple of hours a day, and on and on. This (YD) kind of virtual commons is designed to let in all comers, from home or work or on the road.

When I made some comments about browser compatibility, that's what I was referring to. The tools to access the Commons must be available for little cost, and not locked up by proprietorial greed. I would write about Firefox, but it will only be pointers to web references that are freely available. So, perhaps an Admin links page is the way to do it.

Laboring on

Hey all,

First, thanks Len for filling in on the background of that quote. I had it way back in memory but not in detail and I thank you for that.

For John, re: LaborFirst. I made the connection because of the post at Webdiary which details what the faction is trying to do which is rebuild Labor in their image from within. Good luck! I mentioned to them that any attempt to do so would simply split the vote a la DLP and their response was obvious. They don't see it although they acknowledge the split from DLP days.

Also my sympathies on your local member. I have a drover's dog in mine. Labor regardless of who stands so he has to do nothing and does that quite well.

What we are all looking for really is a split amongst all parties so they are lost as members and have to turn to their electorates for support and guidance. What a radical idea.

For TG. I know why your mainfesto wasn't acceptable. It should have said no mobiles at all, or at least no mobiles in public. Otherwise you had it. Good try though.

And I have seen the disinterest grow both at work and socially in unions. To society's detriment, but there is a limit to what you pay dues for. It's not meant to be a political donation but is treated as such in the main. I guess it is difficult to be a union official today that actually is there just for the members as they would be under pressure from all.Government, Opposition, ex members like me and existing members who want political statements. I don't envy them their task.

No probs re: the browser item. I too have my own preferences and strained at the bit when I was trying to learn about web site building. Took me a while as I had to adapt to the lowest common denominator and became used to it.

Best to all and note the progress mentioned in Hamish's post. Good stuff.

Now is the time

Pegasus, the title: "Now is the time to come to the party" is the bastardisation of the old typing drill line of "Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of the party".

It was used to teach mainly men to type because in today's context it is sexist.

Men typists were mainly journalists, but you will find that many journalists still type with the "peck and hunt' as women are more dexterious with their fingers.

The typing line was taught when journalists were real unionists, the real pinkos. They were political, but that was 50 years ago. Those were the days of the real unionist. Today, journalists are white collar and aligned with management.

I have heard that the sentence has been changed especially in the United States and reads "Now is the time all good men come to the aid of their country." Instead of being used for the left it is used by the right to recruit men into the US army.

Re: LaborFirst

Pegasus, I was more referring to an historical shift in attitude within certain elements of the Labor party than any specific faction.

I don't know anything about LaborFirst.

My only comfort is that the Liberals have the same sort of factional problems.

Highlighted by the revolt of the "fab five" over mandatory detention laws.

SMEs and govt policy

Sharman Stone (Parl Sec to the Min for Finance & Administration) spoke on Public Sector Procurement Transforming Best Policy into Best Practice the other day. She said:

Let me share some facts and figures with you to set the scene.

  • It is estimated that there were 1,233,200 private sector small businesses in Australia during 2000-01.
  • This represents around 97% of all private sector businesses.
  • These small businesses employed almost 3.6 million people, 49% of all private sector employment.
  • These are just the tiny businesses – those employing less that 20 people.
  • SMEs, collectively, make up over 99% of all Australian businesses.

I don't know how that factors into IR reform, but I can guess how the Tories do their arithmetic. And I cannot see how Labor can risk being too radical.